May 31, 2005
Those Cloning Koreans
The South Koreans have not only leapt ahead of U.S. scientists in stem cell technology, they're pioneering in how to make that technology affordable.
New York Times reporter James Brooke chased down Dr. Woo Suk Hwang, the South Korean researcher who last week announced a major advance in mass producing stem cells for medical research. While the jury is still out on whether using stem cell colonies to regenerate exhausted or damaged tissues like brain cells or spinal cords will work, Dr. Hwang's advance will expedite experimentation.
Though the right-to-life crowd has limited federal involvement in this promising technology, states are beginning to invest big bucks. California's $3 billion has garnered the most publicity, but New Jersey also recently passed a stem cell initiative; the Massachusetts legislature will probably override its Republican governor's veto; New York is contemplating a major program as are a number of other states who don't want to be left off the next big biotech bonanza.
Using taxpayer money to fund medical research is nothing new, even at the state level. Before the creation of the National Cancer Institute in 1937 (the first National Institute of Health with many more to follow after World War II), state public health departments were major founts of medical innovation.
Now that states are getting back into the game big time, they should read today's story on the South Korean advance to its end. When asked about his financial interest in the breakthrough announced last week, Dr. Hwang called his work "holy, pure and genuine in trying to develop therapeutic technology to cure hard to treat diseases." He said patents on the invention would go to the South Korean government. "I want to be remembered in history as a pure scientist," he said. "I want this technology applied to the whole of mankind."
Had he been in the U.S., he would have patented it, started a biotechnology firm, sold the rights to the technology at the highest possible price, and demanded property rights to any subsequent inventions made with the use of his technology -- so-called "reach through" patents.
As they move to set up the rules for their programs, the states could learn a few things about protecting taxpayers (who finance all this research) from this wise South Korean scientist.
Posted by gooznews at May 31, 2005 09:15 AMMy personal interest is in finding a cure for Type 1 Juvenile Diabetes. My
now 15 year old daughter was diagnosed almost 5 years ago. So far, she has
pricked her fingers approximately 11,000 times, and has taken about 7,500
insulin injections. If she had cancer, she could hope to be cured – or at
least to go into remission so she wouldn't need 4 or 5 or 6 insulin shots
every day just to stay alive. Right now, all we can hope for is that she
doesn't have a heart attack or a stroke, that she doesn't go blind, that
her kidneys keep working and that her feet and legs don't have to be amputated.
Now, let me tell you about the economics of diabetes. Diabetics test their
blood sugar levels at least four times a day – children with type 1
juvenile diabetes test more like 6 to 8 times a day. These little test
strips that are used to measure blood glucose levels cost, conservatively
and on average, 70 cents per strip. Diabetics who test their blood glucose
level just 4 times per day (breakfast, lunch, dinner, bedtime) are spending
Two Dollars and Eighty Cents per day, or a little over a thousand dollars a
year, minimum, on these strips. That's over a billion dollars per year for
every 1 million diabetics, and there are an estimated 17 million people
suffering from diabetes in the US alone.
Next, I am going to review the financial's from the 2003 and 2004 Annual
Reports of Eli Lilly & Company, one of the major producers of insulin.
Before I do, I want to remind you that insulin will never cure diabetes. It
is what my 15-year-old refers to as her 'lifeline'. It keeps a diabetic
alive, but does not prevent the catastrophic side effects. And it will
never cure anyone!
2003: "Our worldwide sales…increased 14%, to 12.58 billion dollars."
Sources of revenue: "Diabetes care products, composed primarily of
Humulin…Humalog…and Actos…had aggregate worldwide revenues of 2.57
billion dollars." Ladies and gentlemen, 20% of the worldwide sales were
from 3 products, 2 of which (Humulin and Humalog) are for 'maintenance' of
type 1 diabetics. In 2003, Humulin sales in the US were 507.5 million
dollars, and were 658.6 million dollars for Humalog.
The 2004 numbers are equally staggering. The same three products had
aggregate worldwide revenues of 2.61 billion dollars. Humulin sales in the
US were only 422.7 million, but Humalog sales in the US were up to 685.4
million dollars. An explanation offered by Eli Lilly is (and this is a
direct quote!) "Humalog sales in the US increased 3 percent as increased
prices offset slight volume declines."
That's 5.18 billion dollars in a two-year period – to treat patients who
will not get better. That's a whole loot of insurance and medicare dollars
going to two drugs to maintain a condition for which there actually might
be a cure.
Breakthroughs using stem cell therapies have been announced all over the
world, and involving many conditions, such as reversing the side effects of
diabetes, curing type 1 juvenile diabetes, restoration of immune systems in
cancer patients, improvement of a Parkinson's patient's motor skills by
83%, reversal of heart tissue damage in a heart attack victim, the list
goes on and on. Stem cells work, and more research is needed.
This is not a religious issue. This is a health issue. This is a "where are
my Medicare dollars going?" issue is a quality of life issue Even though
the dollars are huge, let's not forget that the main benefits from stem
cell research and therapies are to improve the health and to save the lives
of millions who suffer, or who may in the future suffer from diseases that
could be treated or cured with new stem cell therapies. We are talking
about improvement of the quality of a human life!
B. Cole
ATTENTION STEM CELL RESEARCH SUPPORTERS
Have you ever noticed how many Republicans, starting with President Bush, claim to be against Stem Cell Research because of the moral and ethical considerations? Have you noticed how they are fixed on 'embryonic' stem cell rather than admitting the successes of adult stem cells?
Let me shed some light on why they have taken this position. In addition to Eli Lilly telling me that it would never support anything that would ever cure diabetes, and admitting that 20% of its 12 billion dollars in revenue in 2003 came from the sale of insulin (diabetes has been reversed in other countries), look at all of the campaign contributions made by the pharmaceuticals to our elected officials:
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing:
Top 20 Recipients
Election cycle: 20042002200019981996199419921990
List Top 20: All RecipientsPresidential CandidatesSenatorsMembers of the HouseSenate CandidatesHouse CandidatesAll Members of Congress
Rank
Candidate
Office
Amount
1
Bush, George W (R)
Pres
$499,549
2
Kerry, John (D)
Pres
$275,888
3
Burr, Richard (R-NC)
Senate
$196,148
4
Ferguson, Mike (R-NJ)
House
$180,899
5
Specter, Arlen (R-PA)
Senate
$120,700
6
Hastert, Dennis (R-IL)
House
$116,500
7
Gregg, Judd (R-NH)
Senate
$106,000
8
Dodd, Chris (D-CT)
Senate
$100,525
9
Bond, Christopher S 'Kit' (R-MO)
Senate
$83,503
10
Barton, Joe (R-TX)
House
$79,750
11
Bennett, Robert F (R-UT)
Senate
$78,000
12
DeLay, Tom (R-TX)
House
$76,999
13
John, Chris (D-LA)
Senate
$74,468
14
Lieberman, Joe (D-CT)
Senate
$73,000
15
Bayh, Evan (D-IN)
Senate
$72,022
16
Johnson, Nancy L (R-CT)
House
$71,250
17
Martinez, Mel (R-FL)
Senate
$69,050
18
Simmons, Rob (R-CT)
House
$67,436
19
Isakson, Johnny (R-GA)
Senate
$66,099
20
Frelinghuysen, Rodney (R-NJ)
House
$64,602
Notice how many Republicans are listed above?
Send to Democratic Party!