Posts Tagged ‘ruling’


In STEM CELLS IN THE NEWS on April 13, 2012 at 4:10 am

Today (Friday) there is a very significant legislation ruling in Texas (prompted by Gov Perry and his use of stem cells during spinal fusion surgery) which if passed will allow the use of stem cell therapy in Texas under a few conditions. How will this effect the patients and the stem cell industry?

Back story:
MEDICAL BOARD Gives Early OK to Adult Stem Cell Rules – Part 1 April 9, 2012
MEDICAL BOARD’s proposed stem-cell policy under fire – Part 2 April 9, 2012
DRIVING THE FDA DUNE BUGGY INTO THE STEM CELL OCEAN https://repairstemcell.wordpress.com/2012/04/04/driving-the-fda-dune-buggy-into-the-stem-cell-ocean/

This is by no means a political message and I neither endorse nor denounce Gov Perry but I do appreciate the incredible attention he has been able to focus on the benefits of adult stem cell therapies and if this legislature goes through, thousands of patients with no hope can be help with them.

Court won’t reconsider bone marrow payments ruling

In BUSINESS OF STEM CELLS on March 31, 2012 at 3:38 am

Previously, you could not compensate someone for a bone marrow donation“donating bone marrow was classified the same as donating a kidney or any other organ, and payments were forbidden, punished by jail time.”

Now, bone marrow donation is so simple, it no longer resembles organ donation“the process of donating bone marrow [is] nearly identical to giving blood plasma and doesn’t amount to an organ transplant.”

So, you can get paid for a bone marrow donation“bone marrow donors [can] be paid for their donations like blood donors.”

Many believe this is a very positive move and will encourage more donations.

bone marrow is FULL of stem cells 🙂


Court won’t reconsider bone marrow payments ruling

Posted: 6:48pm on Mar 27, 2012; Modified: 9:27pm on Mar 27, 2012

A federal appeals court on Tuesday declined to reconsider a ruling that allows bone marrow donors to be paid for their donations like blood donors.

In December, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals shook up the organ transplant community when it overturned the criminality of paying bone marrow donors. Previously, donating bone marrow was classified the same as donating a kidney or any other organ, and payments were forbidden, punished by jail time.

But the court said a technological breakthrough makes the process of donating bone marrow nearly identical to giving blood plasma and doesn’t amount to an organ transplant.

On Tuesday, the 9th Circuit declined the Obama administration’s request to reconsider the ruling. Several organizations and activisits in the organ-donation community have urged the administration to fight the ruling.

The administration now has 90 days to petition the U.S. Supreme Court.

Department of Justice spokesman Charles Miller said the administration is reviewing its options.

The nonprofit patient advocacy group Institute for Justice called the original ruling a “major national shift in bone marrow donation policy” and said payments will encourage more donations.

SAN FRANCISCO: Court won’t reconsider bone marrow payments ruling | Health | Macon.com.



Cambridge Academics Will Bypass European Embryonic Stem Cells Ruling

In STEM CELLS IN THE NEWS on January 16, 2012 at 7:39 am

I am amazed that Cambridge seems unaware of the benefits of adult stem cells, their record of safety and efficacy, over 2000 clinical trials and many thousands more studies, 20,000 patients treated successfully to date, their bio-availability and no need for immunosuppressive drugs/no rejection issues and their pluripotency. Yes, I said pluripotency.  There ARE adult stem cells that ARE pluripotent. Didn’t you know? Hmmm… I wonder why not? – David

Ellee Seymour: Cambridge Academics Will Bypass European Stem Cells Ruling.

Cambridge Academics Will Bypass European Embryonic Stem Cells Ruling

Posted: 12/1/12 18:51 GMT

The Vice-Chancellor of Cambridge University, Professor Sir Leszek Borysiewicz, has vowed to bypass a European Court of Justice ruling that bans patents on embryonic stem cells by turning to the United States or India instead.

There are 26 laboratories in Cambridge using stem cells; it has the largest aggregate of stem cell scientists in Europe. However, their future research, which is hoped will lead to vital medical discoveries, remains uncertain if they comply with the court ruling announced last October.

Sir Leszek, a former lecturer in medicine and Chief Executive of the UK’s Medical Research Council, told a Cambridge Network gathering of hi-tech business leaders, that the ruling may be “politically incorrect”, and that the government was “trying to play this down”.

He said: “I believe embryonic stem cells have to be the way forward. We do have a problem in the European area, but I’ve been very clear, both to ministers and others about how Cambridge is going to tackle that. We will continue to do a lot of research here, we will engage with whatever development we can locally and further forward, but the university itself will look at ways of ensuring that patenting can actually occur, and, if necessary, be run through the US, and, if necessary, the Indian sub-continent.”

He added: “There is no way we can actually block the development of potential therapeutics which will have a major impact.”

Sir Leszek, who earlier in the week had been speaking to David Cameron and his “prime ministerial team” about innovation, along with Intel and Hermann Hauser, feels passionately about the potential revolutionary treatments which embryonic stem cell research could provide for those suffering from blindness, spinal cord injury and stroke, as well as Alzheimer’s disease and Parkinson’s.

“There is a fundamental issue that Europe has got involved, and frankly, I don’t think we should stand back and prevent major opportunities from actually reaching completion as quickly as possible.”

When the European Court of Justice announced the ban on patents, David Willetts, the Science Minister, told The Times that the government remained committed to stem cell research, despite the court’s decision:

“It does look disappointing because we want to see the effective development of cell therapies that could alleviate and tackle serious medical conditions. It could inhibit this research and development.

“If Europe wants to remain as productive and creative in scientific discovery as it historically has been, it can’t regulate innovation out of existence.”

Back in Cambridge, Sir Leszek was in no doubt about the major contribution this fine academic city could provide:

“Here we have the brains and the means and the ideas to change to world; frankly, we should have the ambition too. Cambridge is a unique environment with the best ideas and the best implementation. If the answers to pressing questions facing humanity don’t come from here, where will they come from?”

%d bloggers like this: