Stem Cell Research Rocks!

[cattygurl]

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=16914&nfid=rssfeeds

Fucking amazing!

We need to do more research on stem cells, including embryonic stem cells.

FUCK THE SHRUB! :evil: :twisted:

[Dialectic]

That's amazing. Imagine walking after 19 years of paralysis. Damn.

[ric]

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=16914&nfid=rssfeeds

Fucking amazing!

We need to do more research on stem cells, including embryonic stem cells.

FUCK THE SHRUB! :evil: :twisted:

YEA but you do realize biggest CHUNK of ALL stem cell research and development as well as potential SALES will come from CA. Which means this will only benefit the RICH. How can medical insurance cover this ?

[KeJia Sista]

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=16914&nfid=rssfeeds

Fucking amazing!

We need to do more research on stem cells, including embryonic stem cells.

FUCK THE SHRUB! :evil: :twisted:

YEA but you do realize biggest CHUNK of ALL stem cell research and development as well as potential SALES will come from CA. Which means this will only benefit the RICH. How can medical insurance cover this ?

I wasnt able to access the story. And, does this mean we have to envision a society that produces the embryos for this?

I read that SUV rollovers cause the majority of paralysis these days. And I'm sure the soldiers stepping on mines in Iraq will add more. Maybe we can work on prevention?

Ke Jia

[Dialectic]

YEA but you do realize biggest CHUNK of ALL stem cell research and development as well as potential SALES will come from CA. Which means this will only benefit the RICH. How can medical insurance cover this ?

Everything benefits the rich first. This is no counterargument.

[ric]

YEA but you do realize biggest CHUNK of ALL stem cell research and development as well as potential SALES will come from CA. Which means this will only benefit the RICH. How can medical insurance cover this ?

Everything benefits the rich first. This is no counterargument.

Whats even more bullshit is that the this so called STEM cell consortium panel ( in CA)....half of them are academic professors !

Talk about conflict of interest. Then again schools like Stanford, CAL tech , UCSD, and even UCI are just a dumping ground/CHEAP R&D SLAVE labor for industry.

[ric]

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=16914&nfid=rssfeeds

Fucking amazing!

We need to do more research on stem cells, including embryonic stem cells.

FUCK THE SHRUB! :evil: :twisted:

YEA but you do realize biggest CHUNK of ALL stem cell research and development as well as potential SALES will come from CA. Which means this will only benefit the RICH. How can medical insurance cover this ?

I wasnt able to access the story. And, does this mean we have to envision a society that produces the embryos for this?

I read that SUV rollovers cause the majority of paralysis these days. And I'm sure the soldiers stepping on mines in Iraq will add more. Maybe we can work on prevention?

Ke Jia


YES. Regardless of how super zealous religion crazed America is...the potential of this is WAY beyond personal values.

YES, the slippery slope of science has fallen back again

[KeJia Sista]

Do we envision a future where embryos are continually produced for research and stem cell use?

Why is there so much focus on high-tech medicine that benefits a relatively small segment of the population, rather than chronic disease that affects the majority??

Why doesnt the press give as much hype to the effects of polluted air, polluted water, toxic drugs, chemical additives, and other known carcinogens that if eliminated from our lives could prevent illness for millions of people? There are male frogs being born with female genitalia and other birth defects because they live downstream from polluted rivers. Soldiers with Gulf War syndrome are having deformed kids.

Large numbers of paralyzations are coming from SUV rollovers, gun shots among young men and now from injuries to men and women in the military.

US medicine is like the cop who beats you, then says "watch your head" as he puts you in the police car..

Ke Jia

[ric]

Do we envision a future where embryos are continually produced for research and stem cell use?

Why is there so much focus on high-tech medicine that benefits a relatively small segment of the population, rather than chronic disease that affects the majority??

Why doesnt the press give as much hype to the effects of polluted air, polluted water, toxic drugs, chemical additives, and other known carcinogens that if eliminated from our lives could prevent illness for millions of people? There are male frogs being born with female genitalia and other birth defects because they live downstream from polluted rivers. Soldiers with Gulf War syndrome are having deformed kids.

Large numbers of paralyzations are coming from SUV rollovers, gun shots among young men and now from injuries to men and women in the military.

US medicine is like the cop who beats you, then says "watch your head" as he puts you in the police car..

Ke Jia







Well with stem cells you wouldn't so much DEAD fetus. It will eventually be all in a cell culture setup..easy to grow but hella $$ to buy.

With Stem cells you can pretty much just save whatever organ, muscle, nerve, etc so there is no worries about the effects of environment

[KeJia Sista]

Do we envision a future where embryos are continually produced for research and stem cell use?

Why is there so much focus on high-tech medicine that benefits a relatively small segment of the population, rather than chronic disease that affects the majority??

Why doesnt the press give as much hype to the effects of polluted air, polluted water, toxic drugs, chemical additives, and other known carcinogens that if eliminated from our lives could prevent illness for millions of people? There are male frogs being born with female genitalia and other birth defects because they live downstream from polluted rivers. Soldiers with Gulf War syndrome are having deformed kids.

Large numbers of paralyzations are coming from SUV rollovers, gun shots among young men and now from injuries to men and women in the military.

US medicine is like the cop who beats you, then says "watch your head" as he puts you in the police car..

Ke Jia



Well with stem cells you wouldn't so much DEAD fetus. It will eventually be all in a cell culture setup..easy to grow but hella $$ to buy.

With Stem cells you can pretty much just save whatever organ, muscle, nerve, etc so there is no worries about the effects of environment

I also heard that they can use stem cells from adult volunteers. Is this true?

Ke Jia

[Infectious]

Whats even more bullshit is that the this so called STEM cell consortium panel ( in CA)....half of them are academic professors !

Talk about conflict of interest. Then again schools like Stanford, CAL tech , UCSD, and even UCI are just a dumping ground/CHEAP R&D SLAVE labor for industry.

Fine then, you pay for the research.

Research ain't cheap.

[KeJia Sista]

Whats even more bullshit is that the this so called STEM cell consortium panel ( in CA)....half of them are academic professors !

Talk about conflict of interest. Then again schools like Stanford, CAL tech , UCSD, and even UCI are just a dumping ground/CHEAP R&D SLAVE labor for industry.

Fine then, you pay for the research.

Research ain't cheap.

Schools in the past used to be able to do research without funding from pharmaceuticals. Now they live off of it. As long as there is conflict of interest its hard to take these studies seriously.

Did you see the FDA decided to let Celebrex and the other chemical killers stay on the market??

Ke Jia

[Infectious]

Schools in the past used to be able to do research without funding from pharmaceuticals. Now they live off of it. As long as there is conflict of interest its hard to take these studies seriously.

Did you see the FDA decided to let Celebrex and the other chemical killers stay on the market??

Ke Jia


Kejia, what does the FDA have to do with school researchers? They are two different things!

Also, people don't want to pay for school anymore. That means less money going into already short funded schools.

[ric]

Whats even more bullshit is that the this so called STEM cell consortium panel ( in CA)....half of them are academic professors !

Talk about conflict of interest. Then again schools like Stanford, CAL tech , UCSD, and even UCI are just a dumping ground/CHEAP R&D SLAVE labor for industry.

Fine then, you pay for the research.

Research ain't cheap.

Well actually I am paying for research since CA gov has shelled out 3billion in state funds, NOT including other forms of seed money like NIH.

Not to mention all of these old rich/famous farts from the baby boom gen are going to help this area of research to save their ass

[vsoy]

There was a print article from American Association for the Advancement of Science(AAAS) which publishes the weekly journal Science last week or the week before about Asia and its potential to dominate stem cell research. I have to figure out a way to post it electronically, I think you all may find it very interesting.

Since the governments in Asia do not have large religious groups that oppose the concept of stem cell research, they have no problems funding this kind of research. Researchers in the Western hemisphere, frustrated by the lack of support and limited reagents (cell lines and other biological materials), especially those with Asian backgrounds, are coming back to their native countries to set up research labs. These labs may not have the infrastructure or as nice lab equipment as western labs, but they have much more freedom and material to do the tough experiments. South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, China were some of the countries with centers or labs specializing in stem cell research.

The policies different countries had on the type of research that could be done varied, most banned human cloning for reproduction but some allowed the use of cells from aborted fetuses. Yuck. There was a picture of one research lab in Singapore with people posing, doing science type things but the puzzling aspect was the lack of Asian researchers in the pic, but there were pics of Asian principle investigators who went back to Asia to set up new research labs.

[KeJia Sista]

Schools in the past used to be able to do research without funding from pharmaceuticals. Now they live off of it. As long as there is conflict of interest its hard to take these studies seriously.

Did you see the FDA decided to let Celebrex and the other chemical killers stay on the market??

Ke Jia


Kejia, what does the FDA have to do with school researchers? They are two different things!

Also, people don't want to pay for school anymore. That means less money going into already short funded schools.

The money still should not come from sources that will taint the result of the studies.

Ke Jia

[ric]

New Method Makes 'Safer' Stem Cells, Study Finds


By Maggie Fox, Health and Science Correspondent

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Researchers looking for ways to make safer stem cells for use in medical therapies said on Monday they had grown human cells without the use of contaminating animal cells.





They said their work, done outside U.S. federal restraints, could bypass problems with existing stem cell batches, which scientists complain are contaminated by animal products and thus of no use in treating people.

"The science now exists to produce new lines that will be safe," said Dr. Robert Lanza of Massachusetts-based Advanced Cell Technology, whose company conducted the study along with a team at Harvard Medical School (news - web sites) and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.

The finding, published in the Lancet medical journal, follows similar research done by a team at the University of Wisconsin that is also working with human embryonic stem cells.

These cells, taken from human embryos, have the potential to become any type of cell or tissue in the body and are being studied as possible treatments for a range of diseases or injuries.

Opponents of their use, including the current U.S. administration, say it involves the destruction of a human embryo and is thus unethical. President Bush (news - web sites) has restricted federal funding of this research to a few batches, or lines, of cells that already existed as of August 2001.

But scientists complained these cell lines are contaminated by the mouse cells used to nurture them and therefore can never be used to treat a human patient.

In February a team at the University of Wisconsin reported in Nature Materials that they had weaned stem cells off some of the mouse feeder material.

Irina Klimanskaya and colleagues at ACT took this a step further, growing stem cells from the beginning on a cell- and serum-free mixture called extracellular matrix. They used embryos left over from in-vitro fertilization of IVF clinics.

"The importance of this work, of course, is that by eliminating contact with animal and human cells, you minimize the risk of contamination with pathogens that could be transmitted to patients and the population at large," Lanza said.

"Experience with organ transplantation has shown that AIDS (news - web sites), hepatitis, and dozens of other diseases can be transmitted from the donor cells to the recipient. Similarly, exposure of human embryos to live animal cells poses concern for infection with recognized as well as unknown pathogens."

Outi Hovatta of Sweden's Karolinska Institutet and Heli Skottman of the Institute for Regenerative Medicine at Finland's University of Tampere pointed out that the materials used by the researchers still contained some animal products that may trigger an immune response.

But, they wrote in a commentary, the risk of transmitting a virus or other pathogen had been eliminated. "Klimanskaya's derivation procedure is a real step forward," they wrote.

[ric]

http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/news/local/11332820.htm

[da Tao]

Ah Crap, and all I wanted was to go home...

YEA but you do realize biggest CHUNK of ALL stem cell research and development as well as potential SALES will come from CA. Which means this will only benefit the RICH. How can medical insurance cover this ?

There are many forces at work here... reduced cost as technology mature, pricing as a result of supply and demand, public pressure as effectiveness is proven, political horsetrading, etc. So eventually the benefit trickles down - not all technology does that of course... not too many of your neighbours are in the market for a tactical nuke for example.

Everything benefits the rich first. This is no counterargument.

Well, you have to make some exception to altenative economic / social systems. You never know when somethings are for cult members only!

I read that SUV rollovers cause the majority of paralysis these days. And I'm sure the soldiers stepping on mines in Iraq will add more. Maybe we can work on prevention?

For SUVs... not too many things will prevent determined people from doing dumb things and crashing their cars. The technology is surely there to prevent you from doing dumb things, but not many people like coddling cars. Unless you have that weird foam from Demolition Man or a deflector shield/emergency transporter system.

For landmines... paralysis is not a usual injury mechanism. Most are designed to maim... you will lose a limb or two and have some shrapnel wounds and will definitely feel it.

Whats even more bullshit is that the this so called STEM cell consortium panel ( in CA)....half of them are academic professors !

Talk about conflict of interest. Then again schools like Stanford, CAL tech , UCSD, and even UCI are just a dumping ground/CHEAP R&D SLAVE labor for industry.

I dunno man, the profs are the one generating most of the knowledge at this point, so they will be extremely involved. I mean, are there any companies that has a business plan centred around on stem cells in the current environment?

And the other thing is that only the BIGGEST firms in the industry can afford basic research. Schools are not dumping grounds, they are the unavoidable infrastructure.

End of Part I.

[da Tao]

Hey KeJia, from your other post I see that you could be characterized as someone from the holistic, natural camp in many issues. I am more from the "traditional hard science" camp but I think I can relate to your views.

In any case, I think we will have no problem having a cogent discourse and will learn quite a few things from each other.

Do we envision a future where embryos are continually produced for research and stem cell use?

Short answer: it is a possibility - but one people in the field are keen to avoid. MOST if not all of those who are developing stem cell therapeutics understand two things - if your method are less controversial, you will be able to help more people AND that you are less likely to be targeted by advocacy groups.

A QUICK TECHNICAL ASIDES (QTA): the sperm and egg joins into a single cell... out of this cell comes the placenta, umbilical cord and the embryo itself.

Hence there are intense efforts to locate sources of pluripotent (cells that can be anything) from places like placenta, and umbilical cord blood. And then there are adult stem cells... those are a possibility - but so far researcher finds them less flexible and harder to find / grow.

QTA: Each cells in an individual have essentially the same set of instructions... think of it as a owner's manual to operate everything in your house... but since each servant is only responsible for one job, the head butler made things easier by glueing the "useless" pages together and putting post it notes on the "useful" ones. the instructions are still technically there, but they are not carried out. The science of these tagging and glueing is known as epigenetics.

Why is there so much focus on high-tech medicine that benefits a relatively small segment of the population, rather than chronic disease that affects the majority??

Depends what are you thinking about... Vaccinations programs are for the majority. Better water and sanitation addressed a range of issues for the majority. Then there is a portion of the "majority" diseases has to do with lifestyle - smoking and lung diseases, obesity and heart condition - that the state power are not yet keen to intervene completely. But I do know what you are trying to say and so I will respond below...

So most TREATMENTS for majority health issues are actually outside the realm of high-tech medicine... until you have preventative biotechnology or medical nanotechology. However, in terms of DETECTION, high-tech medicine aims to cover the whole field but adding lots of separate components.

Why doesnt the press give as much hype to the effects of polluted air, polluted water, toxic drugs, chemical additives, and other known carcinogens that if eliminated from our lives could prevent illness for millions of people? There are male frogs being born with female genitalia and other birth defects because they live downstream from polluted rivers. Soldiers with Gulf War syndrome are having deformed kids.

In terms of environmental pollutants, there are a spectrum of response... things like asbestos (proven to be bad all the time and have a replacement tech) are easily taken care off. Then there are things that are probably quite bad, but can be contained. (Like I work with this chemical that can cause mutation almost everyday, but if I wear gloves and throw the waste in the correct area - it's all good.) Then there are other things we can't do too much about and not too sure about.

To make things worse, a substance of undetectable amount could just be the bastard that gets ya. Many factors makes it difficult to eliminate known carcinogens - think about cigarettes, and that is not even the byproduct any industral process.

Large numbers of paralyzations are coming from SUV rollovers, gun shots among young men and now from injuries to men and women in the military.

US medicine is like the cop who beats you, then says "watch your head" as he puts you in the police car..

There isn't much high-tech medicine can do about preventing crashes and clashes unfortunately. And I am not so sure it can be attributed as a US thing...

[da Tao]

I forgot... part of the moral that I think we can all agree with is that a) we need to do away with more stuff that we don't need. (A big problem because the current economic system means that someone will be willing to make something as long as someone is willing to pay for it.) b) we need to find better methods and materials to avoid use of hazardous substances. (This is easier and is being researched all the time.)

[xian]

I know you qualified it, Da Tao, but I wanted to point out that current advancements in health are NOT trickling down.

As long as we don't view health care as a human or working right, the health care for working class people will continue to deteriorate even as we make scientific health advancements.

I don't want people to be able to walk again while others are dying of easily diagnosed, treatable diseases. I don't want bad, selfish people to be able to replace their failing organs.

As long as our research is not publically funded, and we don't pay taxes for funding of human and working rights, all the science in the world won't stop the deterioration of the vast majority of people's standard of life.

[da Tao]

I know you qualified it, Da Tao, but I wanted to point out that current advancements in health are NOT trickling down.

As long as we don't view health care as a human or working right, the health care for working class people will continue to deteriorate even as we make scientific health advancements.

I don't want people to be able to walk again while others are dying of easily diagnosed, treatable diseases. I don't want bad, selfish people to be able to replace their failing organs.

As long as our research is not publically funded, and we don't pay taxes for funding of human and working rights, all the science in the world won't stop the deterioration of the vast majority of people's standard of life.

I got a feeling that we are actually agreeing... but we are having distinction issues... between the field as a whole and individual technologies.

Individually, medical advances are trickling down by becoming more available (easier to use, cheaper, faster) take mammograms and hip replacements for example. Now, they don't always reach the ones that need it most - so the trickling is not complete - but it is happening.

The important distinction though, is that this process is heavily reliant on actually having the technology in the first place.

We now turn to the field as a whole. When you say current advances in health is NOT trickling down, you (and KeJia) are saying that the necessary resources are not focused on diseases that affect the most but are neglected. I would agree with this assessment, but I would like to draw your attention to the multiple dimensions to this resource distribution... money, people and knowledge.

First, of course is money - money are mainly found in effluent societies which have the basics under control and moved on to other problems like cancer and heart diseases and some much less noble undertakings. With this money, you can attract people and have better tools to expand the knowledge.

Second, is people... and this is where the system becomes less deterministic. People are attracted by money, and access to better equipment, etc.... but a significant portion are intellectually curious about a variety of subjects... so even if 90% of the money went to how to make people lose weight, there will be more than 10% of the people looking at other problems. It could be the mix of the pioneer spirit and altruism. And as these people advocate and come up with results, they start to pull money towards them.

Finally - knowledge. This is an odd resource because it can be shared without diminishing value... in fact it tends to increase in value when shared. The great collective body of biomedical knowledge, however, cannot be directly harnessed toward any one goal... Despite the interconnectedness of all things biological, knowledge in one field does not lend itself to trickling down and BECOMING another field. The other field have to develop past a certain point before it can make use of the synergy. And that is why I said trickling down depends on having the thing in the first place. (And the reader would be tempted to say - "but if you have more money, you can make the breakthroughs!" Well... it helps, but not everything.

Now your point (which I have been skirting all around) is social / political / economic... I am from Canada, so universial healthcare is valued higher than in the States.

Healthcare is a human right, Article 25 from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html) says:

(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

What is going on then, is a lack of political will, and people placing one right above another.

Finally, to revisit your crucial point:

As long as our research is not publically funded, and we don't pay taxes for funding of human and working rights, all the science in the world won't stop the deterioration of the vast majority of people's standard of life.

Yeah, science is never the be all and end all. (Although I am playing with an idea that I will post as a separate thread - Omega Point Tech.)

But even if research is publicly funded, there are problems of allocation. Would you tax a flat rate or a sliding scale? Should the group that contributed the most have the biggest say? or should it be Health experts? How would you convince people that they should continue to pay when that money is not going toward their immediate health concerns? I am not coming from the "Everyone is selfish" angle, but eventually well-intentioned people will disagree and believe that they deserve more.

I toyed around with the idea of "activist doctors" like channeling part of a liposuction / cosmetic surgery bill toward other areas. But realistically, you can only do this secretly or coersively.

[ric]

Battle Threatens Calif. Stem Cell Agency


SAN FRANCISCO - California's effort to become a world leader in human embryonic stem cell research has long been supported by a coterie of well-heeled patient advocates who found their champion in an obscure state senator from Sacramento.
ADVERTISEMENT

Now, however, a battle for control of the $3 billion in research money voters approved last year has unraveled the alliance and threatens to hinder the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine even before it awards its first grant, agency officials say.

The state Senate is expected to vote this week on a proposed constitutional amendment that would tighten perceived loopholes in how the agency is governed.

Among other provisions, the amendment would require institute officials to sell off, or place into a blind trust, any investments related to stem cell research. It also would require that any drugs developed with agency money be made available, at cost, to California's poor and that any drug profits be shared with the state.

Supporters of the institute say the changes would cripple their effort, driving away top talent and corporate involvement just when other states and nations are competing for stem cell research projects.

If the amendment is approved by at least 27 of the 40 senators, the Assembly will have until June 30 to find its own two-thirds majority to place it on an expected state ballot in November.

The proposed amendment was written by state Sen. Deborah Ortiz, a Sacramento Democrat who was an early backer of California's Proposition 71, which created the stem cell agency when 59 percent of state voters passed it in November.

The initiative was prompted by the federal funding restrictions
President Bush placed on stem cell work, which is opposed by many social conservatives because days-old embryos are destroyed during research. Other states have quickly moved to pass similar funding efforts, fearing the loss of gifted scientists and biotechnology businesses.

Ortiz said she remains a supporter of the agency and of human embryonic stem cell research. But she's become concerned that the language of Proposition 71 doesn't ensure California will share in potential profits or that poor residents will benefit from the taxpayer-supported research. She's also concerned that it allows key agency committees to conduct much of their work behind closed doors.

She says the dramatic step of going back to the voters is necessary because Proposition 71 prohibits the Legislature from amending the initiative for three years. The proposition vested all decision-making power with a 29-member board, appointed by Gov.
Arnold Schwarzenegger and other elected officials.

The new agency's first chairman, Bob Klein, said Ortiz's legislation is unnecessary and obstructionist. The agency already faces a legal challenge that prevents it from borrowing money to fund the research grants, and Klein worries that going back to the voters could open the institute to even more legal challenges.

"Sen. Ortiz may have many of the same goals that we do, but it is the language itself that is crippling or potentially crippling to the institute," Klein said during a May 23 meeting of the agency's oversight committee, which voted unanimously to oppose Ortiz's legislation.

It's not clear whether Ortiz has enough support from her fellow lawmakers, who are getting lobbied by patient advocacy groups. The University of California, Stanford University, the California Institute of Technology and the University of Southern California also have formally expressed concern.

"I have a very tough time ahead of me," Ortiz said. "I'm not convinced I can get two-thirds vote and the timelines are incredible."

Hollywood producers and directors Janet and Jerry Zucker are among the former allies disappointed with Ortiz. Proposition 71 was born at a dinner attended by Ortiz at the Zuckers' Brentwood home three years ago, and Ortiz campaigned heavily for Proposition 71's passage. The Zuckers helped raise the more than $30 million spent in support of the campaign.

"Jerry and I feel a great debt of gratitude for the support she has shown stem cell research in California," said Janet Zucker, who produced the 2001 comedy "Rat Race" and whose teenage daughter suffers from diabetes. "But we are perplexed and feel there is a better forum to work out these issues."

Dr. Francisco Prieto, who made small campaign contributions to Ortiz before his appointment to the 29-member committee that oversees the stem cell agency, said the fight has been needlessly antagonistic. He hopes a compromise can be reached between his committee and Ortiz before the proposed amendment goes any further.

"I think the approach we have taken as a board has been more confrontational than it needs to be," Prieto said. "Sen. Ortiz, in my opinion, has been and continues to be a strong supporter of stem cell research."

[minbo]

There is far less disagreement here than it seems.

The difference between the viewpoints is that da Tao is talking about using advances in medicine to fix medical issues and Xian is talking about a social problem where society is not devoting enough reasources to use existing medical knowledge to fix currently curable issues. KeJia Sister has an issue with ethics where money is being invested into areas of research that are profitable but will produce far less for the common good for the investment. I think that she also has issue with creation and destruction of "designer" embryos for theraputic use, though she was not entirely clearon that. As well, both she and Ric have issue that agencies that ought to be autonomous/impartial such as safety testing organizations, governmental funding organizations, etc. are being compromised ethically by forming vested intrests with the companies who's products they are testing and/or certifying or even developing.

Is that a fair assessment?

[ric]

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8061078/