The University of Michigan’s second human embryonic stem cell line has just been placed on the U.S. National Institutes of Health’s registry

I copy this article from CBS News Detroit, April 25, 2012:
This is a prefect example of the tremendous research being conducted at U-M as a result of Michigan voters approval of Prop. 2 in November 2008, and the tremendous benefits , both physical and economic, that are already being realized. It also clearly demonstrates several things:

1. Total validation of Governor Rick Snyder's recent (as posted on this blog 4/23) support of U-M, ESC research, and the will of the MAJORITY OF MICHIGAN'S CITIZENS as expressed through Prop. 2, and his refusal to aline with extreme social conservatives in his own party who would undermine this valuable research.

2. Further proof that the social conservative wing of the MI State Legislature's attempt to further regulate ESC is unnecessary, because of the already strict over site and regulation from the NIH. This simply revels that these regulatory requirements sought by the the legislature are just another way for them to prevent or impede this important research.

3. We, residents of MI, are blessed to have U-M as a state of the art, cutting edge research center here in our own back yard......"UM is one of only four institutions — including two other universities and one private company — to have disease-specific stem cell lines listed in the national registry" Wow, the implications are astounding, not only from an ultimate reduction of suffering standpoint but also from a state economic one. Imagine the possible economic impact of the Life Science industry..It's not like the MI economy is exactly bustling at the moment.

4. Finally, this is further evidence that Public (U-M and NIH) and private (Taubman Institute and JDRF) partnerships WORK. This is the best way to bring basic ideas to life and through the basic R&D pipe line necessary to get this stuff to the people who need it. If this partnership can get ideas to the "proof of concept" stage then private industry will take over and our free enterprise system can do it's thing, but we need to get to that stage.

Ok, In summery......this is an awesome development, and we can be proud to be a part of it....at least if we voted YES on proposal 2 and support ESC and the incredible promise it holds for our future.

Happy reading......Geno Miller

ANN ARBOR — The University of Michigan’s second human embryonic stem cell line has just been placed on the U.S. National Institutes of Health’s registry, making the cells available for federally funded research. It is the second of the stem cell lines derived at UM to be placed on the registry.
The line, known as UM11-1PGD, was derived from a cluster of about 30 cells removed from a donated five-day-old embryo roughly the size of the period at the end of this sentence. That embryo was created for reproductive purposes, tested and found to be affected with a genetic disorder, deemed not suitable for implantation, and would therefore have otherwise been discarded when it was donated in 2011.

It carries the gene defect responsible for Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease, a hereditary neurological disorder characterized by a slowly progressive degeneration of the muscles in the foot, lower leg and hand. CMT, as it is known, is one of the most common inherited neurological disorders, affecting one in 2,500 people in the United States. People with CMT usually begin to experience symptoms in adolescence or early adulthood.

The embryo used to create the cell line was never frozen, but rather was transported from another IVF laboratory in the state of Michigan to the UM in a special container. This may mean that these stem cells will have unique characteristics and utilities in understanding CMT disease progression or screening therapies in comparison to other human embryonic stem cells.
“We are proud to provide this cell line to the scientific community, in hopes that it may aid the search for new treatments and even a cure for CMT,” says Gary Smith, Ph.D., who derived the line and also is co-director of the UM Consortium for Stem Cell Therapies, part of the A. Alfred Taubman Medical Research Institute. “Once again, the acceptance of these cells to the registry demonstrates our attention to details of proper oversight, consenting, and following of NIH guidelines.”

UM is one of only four institutions — including two other universities and one private company — to have disease-specific stem cell lines listed in the national registry. UM has several other disease-specific hESC lines submitted to NIH and awaiting approval, says Smith, who is a professor in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the University of Michigan Medical School. The first line, a genetically normal one, was accepted to the registry in February.
“Stem cell lines that carry genetic traits linked to specific diseases are a model system to investigate what causes these diseases and come up with treatments,” says Sue O’Shea, professor of cell and developmental biology at the UM Medical School, and co-director of the Consortium for Stem Cell Therapies.

Each line is the culmination of years of preparation and cooperation between UM and Genesis Genetics, a Michigan-based genetic diagnostic company. This work was made possible by Michigan voters’ November 2008 approval of a state constitutional amendment permitting scientists to derive embryonic stem cell lines using surplus embryos from fertility clinics or embryos with genetic abnormalities and not suitable for implantation.

The amendment also made possible an unusual collaboration that has blossomed between the University of Michigan and molecular research scientists at Genesis Genetics, a company that has grown in only eight years to become the leading global provider of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) testing. PGD is a testing method used to identify days-old embryos carrying the genetic mutations responsible for serious inherited diseases. During a PGD test, a single cell is removed from an eight-celled embryo. The other seven cells continue to multiply and on the fifth day form a cluster of roughly 100 cells known as a blastocyst.

 

Genesis Genetics performs nearly 7,500 PGD tests annually. Under the arrangement between the company and UM, patients with embryos that test positive for a genetic disease now have the option of donating those embryos to UM if they have decided not to use them for reproductive purposes and the embryos would otherwise be discarded.
The agreement was worked out between UM’s Smith and Mark Hughes, M.D., founder and president of Genesis Genetics and a pioneer in the field of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis.
“These are very precious cells, and it would be unconscionable not to take advantage of such an opportunity for medical science and the cure of disease,” Hughes said.
“This is another major step forward for medical science in Michigan. It opens up another avenue for researchers to really begin exploring the causes and progression of those diseases, with the ultimate goal of finding new therapies for patients,” says Eva Feldman, M.D., director of the A. Alfred Taubman Medical Research Institute and the Russell N. DeJong professor of neurology at the UM Medical School. Feldman sees patients with CMT as part of her clinical practice.

Contributors to the A. Alfred Taubman Medical Research Institute’s Consortium for Stem Cell Therapies include the Taubman Institute; the Office of the Executive Vice President for Medical Affairs; the Office of the Medical School Dean; the Comprehensive Cancer Center; the Department of Pediatrics and Communicable Diseases; the Office of the Vice President for Research; the School of Dentistry; the Department of Pathology; the Department of Cell and Developmental Biology; the College of Engineering; the Life Sciences Institute; the Department of Neurology; and UM’s Michigan Institute for Clinical and Health Research.

A. Alfred Taubman, founder and chair of UM’s Taubman Institute, called the second registry placement a tremendous step for stem cell research.
“I consider stem cells to be a modern medical miracle – the most exciting advance in medicine since antibiotics. The progress we have made throughout the state in stem cell research has been nothing short of remarkable,” he said. “This new milestone means much to the University and the state of Michigan, but also to the world. It offers another route for researchers to move ahead in studying these horrible diseases. We hope it is the first of many lines that we can contribute to the global efforts to improve human health.”

To see the stem cell line entry in the NIH registry, visit http://grants.nih.gov/stem_cells/registry/current.htm?id=497
For more information about the A. Alfred Taubman Medical Research Institute at the University of Michigan Medical School, visit www.taubmaninstitute.org .
For more information about stem cell research at UM, visit www.umich.edu/stemcell.
Couples who might be interested in donating embryos for UM research, and their physicians, may learn more at www.stemcellresearch.umich.edu/donation/index.html.

Michigan Governor Rick Snyder shows impressive bipartisan Integrity.

Michigan Governor Rick Snyder shows impressive bipartisan Integrity.

I had to pass along this Detroit Free Press article from today 4/23/12 which I find extremely positive and refreshing. I commend and respect our Governor for standing firm in his commitment to the promise of Embryonic Stem Cell (ESC) research, and upholding the state constitutional amendment brought about by Proposal 2. Mr. Snyder has proven his personal integrity by separating from the Social Conservative Republican party line, and proving that it is in fact possible to hold and administer a policy of fiscal conservatism and budget reduction, while rejecting the social conservative movement that would outlaw critical life saving research.

As some of you may be aware, parts of the Michigan Legislature have maintained a constant, somewhat quiet, somewhat clandestine effort to ether overturn or seriously impede the exceptional ESC research currently underway at The University of Michigan as a result of Prop 2. Starting in January of 2010, the Health Policy Committee, chaired by Republican State Sen. Tom George, proposed a six bill package SB 647-652 which would have rendered ESC unsustainable in Michigan under draconian restrictions. This failed to pass the House, and Governor Snyder threatened a veto. In April of 2011, the Higher Education Subcommittee, with social conservative majority, attached onerous ESC reporting language in the Higher Education budget bill in complete disregard to Gov. Snyder's budget recommendations. This boilerplate language eventually passed through the legislature, and Gov. Snyder could not affect a veto without rejecting the entire budget (no line item veto).

Now the State Legislature is attempting to further restrict ESC through denial of Performance funding to U-M which would equal 270 million dollars......no small potatoes! Truthfully, I simply cannot make sense of denying one of the top rated University Medical Research Centers in the world, state appropriated funding because a clear minority (as represented at the polls in 2008) of citizens hold it morally superior to discard an embryo into the dumpster rather than use it for lifesaving research. But then maybe I have not had my head inserted inside my rectum for the last decade, which is the only rational I can perceive for such a perverse attitude.

Fan of the Governor or not, one must admit that it is a bit refreshing for a politician to cut the extreme partisan BS and make decisions based on practical, pragmatic, thought and not extreme ideology. I believe I will email and call the Governor's office and thank him for his position, courage and integrity. I would invite anyone who shares my opinion to do the same.

Thanks,

Gene Miller

By David Jesse April 23, 2012
Detroit Free Press Staff Write

Republican Michigan legislators who are trying to force the University of Michigan to provide details on embryonic stem-cell research have a big hurdle to overcome: Gov. Rick Snyder.

Snyder, also a Republican, remains convinced that the Legislature cannot force U-M or other universities to answer questions about stem cells included in budget bills, his spokeswoman told the Free Press.

"We remain consistent with the language on the stem-cell issue that we used last year where we took the position that the boilerplate language that was included in the current year's budget is unenforceable and unconstitutional if sought to be enforced," Snyder spokeswoman Geralyn Lasher said in a Friday e-mail. "Our legal counsel wrote a letter to legislative leadership to that effect, and it remains our view at this time as well."

U-M is glad to have Snyder's support, spokesman Rick Fitzgerald said Friday.

"It's encouraging that the governor is being consistent," Fitzgerald said. "We continue to work with the legislators in the appropriations process. We have a lot of time to address this and other issues."

Snyder's reluctance is likely to be a major weapon for U-M as it fights the Republicans on the issue.

http://www.freep.com/article/20120423/NEWS06/204230337/1001/rss01

Observations on “The Buffett Rule” and the REAL amount of Income tax paid on investment return OR: How President Obama failed to take the high road on tax reform

Observations on “The Buffett Rule” and the REAL amount of Income tax paid on investment return OR: How President Obama failed to take the high road on tax reform

I admit that for a blog that aspires to achieve an independent political stance that I seem to spend more time bashing conservatives than liberals. I guess this is because even though I tend to agree with a lot of “traditional fiscal conservative" ideology and policy, I just can't seem to overlook, accept, or forgive the self-righteous, arrogant social conservative attitude that goes with it. Besides that, beating up on the few ignoble former republican presidential primary candidates, was just too easy....like shootin fish in a barrel....as we say here in da Nord country.  It is basically emotion over logic, the social stuff just simply rubs me the wrong way so I react accordingly and attempt to use wit,  wisdom, and sarcasm in pointing out the ludicrously and hypocrisy of their position. Even as I explain this and try to justify, I find myself throwing a dig at the social conservative movement (SCM) so let me try again………………………………

This prevailing attitude that the “rich guy” doesn’t contribute his fair share to the Federal coffers which was propagated, nurtured and supported by the White House, does not seen exactly fair, accurate or productive in my humble opinion. So, here I go trying to defend the rich guy. Please read with an open mind if you are part of the “Pummel the Rich Guy Movement” or (PRGM) to coin an acronym.

Well, surprising as it may seem, I have a bone to pick with Mr. Obama at the moment. It’s this “Buffett rule" thing, which is a populous strategy to increase federal income tax on certain presumably affluent citizens but really neglects to point out several facts that actually render it quite unfair. For this writing I would like to focus in on dividend, capital gains, and death taxes, and explore whether or not they are fair and equitable for all in their present carnation. Don't get me wrong, I feel strongly in the necessity for comprehensive tax reform. It is just that the “Buffett rule" and the PRGM  is nether the fair or the effective way to do it if your goal is to actually reduce Federal deficit as opposed to espousing popular rhetoric in the interest of political gain and reelection. Of course this is a popular direction for the President to steer since picking on the top one or even ten percent leaves the remaining 90 percent cheering and casting their votes, love, and kisses your way. Even if it is not effective, and in fact could reduce the Federal net intake due to the negative impact historical tax increases have had, people still don't mind beating up on the rich guy. By the time we get around to feeling the negative impact, most voters will have forgotten that it was their own instinct to beat up on the rich guy, and jump on the "redistribution of wealth” band wagon that brought down the house. If I were an adviser to the President I would tell him to go for it (even thought I'd know perfectly well it was a flawed plan) because it would be popular and raise his poll standings. That, after all, is the game of politics…..Kind of like the “Game of Thrones” on HBO, only 6 or 7 centuries later.

So the thing about dividends that's not being brought up in this discussion is that they are AFTER TAX net distributions. In other words, they are distributions to share holders of company profits after already having been taxed at the corporate level.....so, essentially a double tax. The current IRS tax rate for dividend distributions is 15%, so Mr. Buffet's personal tax return might reflect something close to that since he derives a large portion of his revenue in that fashion. What this doesn't reflect is that dividends are paid out of the net profit of the company (which he might well own most of) and that profit has already been taxed at the corporate rate of up to 38%. Therefore, Mr. Buffett is actually paying 38 plus 15 so 53% on his income on investment as opposed to his secretary who is probably paying an effective rate of around 20-25%. Same with Mr. Obama, same with Mr. Romney. Get it? Would it be fair to raise the dividend rate to say 30%. I don't know......maybe so. I do know that it would make it possible for a return on capital investment via dividend to be taxed and put into Government coffers at up to 68%. That creates a lot less incentive to invest and as such results in slower economic growth, which results in lower GDP which ultimately results in lower living standards for all.

The other under- discussed thing about dividends is that, investment income, and dividend distribution are not the exclusive domain of the rich guy. Most every middle class, middle income, family who pays federal income tax (46% do not you know) have some sort of savings and retirement plan. Whether a 401k, IRA, pension fund, union or company retirement program….really, anything but money stuffed in a mattress or buried in the back yard…is invested in “the market” and usually contains a large portion of Large Cap, dividend paying stocks. So, basically if you are a public school teacher, or a receptionist at an office, or a garbage collector, you probably have skin in the game and are thus affected by how investment income is taxed.

Long term Capital gains are taxed today at 10%...... fine.....I'm just fine with that. Capital gains are just the money you make from buying something and selling it for more. Your house, your car, collectables, stocks, baseball cards ...whatever. So this is basically a tax on trade. Long term, means you have held the item for over a year. Short term rates (under a year) are taxed at your ordinary income rate, of which the highest rate is 35 %. I'm ok with that too. What is not ok is to tax Cap gain at a level at which it starts to impede free trade. The buying, selling, improving, and trading of goods are the primary, basic underlying essences of an economy……..Really, the trading of goods, consumption and manufacture, is by definition an ECONIMY. If it is a stock (that pays a dividend) that you sell and make a capital gain on, then you have already paid some tax on the earnings as described above. If it is a house, then presumably you have paid property tax during you ownership.

Now, this basically describes almost every retail business in the world. They buy something and sell it for more and make a profit……Right, and they are taxed as business. If a small business (LLC or S corp) then the tax just passes through to you personally. If a big business (c corp or publicly traded) then it gets taxed at the corporate level. So the Capital gains tax is not when it is "your business", but when you just happen to be smart or lucky enough to buy something for less and sell it for more. I guess it’s fair to throw a tax on that, and 10% doesn’t seem out of line, but there is a line at which the tax burden becomes a determent to economic growth, and that’s a line it is better for all not to cross. Many will argue where the line is and quite frankly that’s way above my pay grade, but Markets like stability not uncertainly so status quo is usually a good thing…….in other words, DON'T MESS WITH IT!!!!!

And now we get to one of my favorite pet peeves the Death Tax. The name alone says it all; you actually have to pay a tax to Die. Got to love that one don’t you….a tax to die…wait just a darn minute here….can’t I just live a bit longer, I really don’t have the money set aside to die yet!!!! Ok, Ok, exactly How many times does the Federal Government want to tax the dollars of a poor dead guy or rich dead guy as the case may be……let’s see. If he lived in Michigan then the Feds took 35 % when he earned it, the State took 4.5%. The state took another 6 % every time he spent a penny. Whatever he invested in savings, the Fed took 35% of interest earnings, 15% of dividend earnings, and 10 % of any Capital gains. Then when he dies and wants to pass his money on to his kids, the feds take 55% of everything over a million bucks. My point is that the inheritance tax is not really fair because it is a double (and sometimes triple) tax. If one uses the argument that a person does not deserve to inherit the fruits of their ancestor’s labors, I would argue that the federal government is not any more deserving.

Beyond the moral argument, there is one of efficiency. I do not have data on what the impact of what eliminating the death tax would be. I can however speculate on possible negative impact to small businesses, which have been described by most economists as the primary growth driver in our economy, and farms.  Older individuals owning farms or small businesses, when weighing ongoing investment risks and marginal rates of return in light of tax factors, may see less value in maintaining these taxable enterprises. They may instead decide to reduce risk and preserve capital, by shifting resources, liquidating assets, and using tax avoidance techniques such as insurance policies, gift transfers, trusts, and tax free investments.

The estate tax burdens farmers because agriculture involves the use of many capital assets, such as land and equipment, to generate the same amount of income that other types of businesses generate with fewer assets. Individuals, partnerships, and family corporations own 98 percent of the nation’s 2.2 million farms and ranches. The estate tax may force surviving family members to sell land, buildings, or equipment to keep their operation going.

This obviously implies significant negative impact to the U.S. economy in general and certainly sheds light to the idea that this is not just a problem for billionaires.

One last point in this discussion of the PRGM, is that the rich guy we love to pummel already pays most of the taxes. The top 1% in earnings currently pay 38% of all income tax. The top 10% pay 70% of all income tax. The remaining 90% pick up the remaining 30% and 46% of citizens in the U.S. pay nothing at all. I personally feel like I have paid my fair share and tried to be a productive contributor to our economy. I would and will pay MORE if that’s what is required to bring our country to economic health as long as it is FAIR and has at least some chance of working. I’m not up there in the top of these statistics, however I’m am certainly blessed to enjoy financial security, so if I am in a position to contribute a bit more to the national kitty for the benefit of all, I am willing to do so. That being said, I realize that if we continue to tap the top earners for more and more of our revenue then they will slowly deteriorate, as do all resources until we have tapped them out……then what??? 

To bring a summery to my ramblings, I will point out the obvious; which is that United States Federal Tax policy and just now and now much we pay for the services our government provides will be a debate and point of contention for years to come. In fact I suspect it will go on for as long as we exist. What I see as the most unfortunate situation in this debate today, is that nether political party seems able to propose any sort of practical, realistic, fair plan to deal with our current dismal economy and ever growing federal government deficit. My disappointment today lies in the fact that rather than rising above the fray with practical solutions, our President (who I support) has stooped to the same political gamesmanship that he ridicules in his opponents.

When my President makes a plea to the American people for fairness and honesty and is not completely open and honest in presenting all the details, I cannot help but be disappointed. Once again, I know this is the way the game is played and I am not naïve ……but…come on B….take the high road dude!!!!

All of this points once again to the need for a valid, viable, and independent third political party. One steeped in common sense, compromise and progress, not extreme ideology and gridlock. My favorite quote this season came from my friend Charlee (who is defiantly a democrat) who said “the democrats are disappointing, and the republicans are embarrassing” touché!

I suspect I will catch some shit from some liberal friends, and possibly some dissention on the other side as well, but that’s ok with me since my position and opinion is subject to new information and can certainly change in light of intelligent argument which may serve to enlighten me. I am capable of changing my opinion, which in the political arena is called flip-flopping and regarded as an evil thing. I think it’s kind of stupid not to change your mind in light of new information or a personal reassessment of the facts in front of you, but that’s a whole other pet peeve better suited to a future post.

If you got this far, thanks for reading this and feel free to comment, here or on my FB page.

Geno Miller

4/16/2012….. Remember….taxes are due tomorrow, I guess I have some work to do tonight.