It does seem that perhaps I underestimated the Germans. Giving the award to Wilmut appears to be a very clever way for German scientists to voice their oppostion to the government’s position on stem cell research. Apparently, a large number of researchers are less than pleased with the current laws which severely restrict human embryonic stem cell research, and by awarding Wilmut this prestigious honor, they are basically telling the government what they think of the law.

Bernhard Fleckenstein, a member of the Scientific Council of the Paul Ehrlich Foundation, which oversees the prize, defended the council’s decision to award the prize to Wilmut and said that rather than be upset by the criticism, “on the contrary, it gives us a good opportunity to speak about this issue.”

He also said that he was highly disturbed by what he sees as a very unfriendly environment in Germany for life sciences research. “I think we have more problems in our country than other countries. How can it be that we have more political movements against modern research and development here than in another countries?”

So perhaps, rather than being an act of sheer stupidity, it was an ingenous way for the scientists to open a real dialogue about human embryonic stem cell research.

Were not the only ones with some rather skewed health policies. It seems, that at least in this instance, the Germans have us beat.

Amid heavy protest, Ian Wilmut, the British scientist responsible for cloning Dolly the sheep a few years ago, was awarded the Paul Ehrlich and Ludwig Darmstaedter Prize for 2005, which is associated with Frankfurt University, carries a cash award of 100,000 euros, and is Germany’s top medical honor. The choice of Wilmut was not well received in Germany, and there was intense criticism from politicians, church groups, a major medical organization and even, indirectly, Germany’s leading research funding organization, the German Research Foundation (DFG).

What is most peculiar about Wilmut winning this award is that cloning is illegal in Germany! Their law bans domestic production of stem cells and allows import only of embryonic stem cells created before 2002 for research of “overwhelming significance.” Sort of similar to the Bush policy. The UK, on the other hand, permits therapeutic cloning and production of human stem cells for research.

So the Germans awarded Wilmut 100,000 Euros, half of which comes from the federal government (ie, taxpayer) for research that is illegal in Germany. Are they even more daft than we are? Was there not a German scientist, or someone else in Europe conducting research more in line with Germany’s policies and restrictions? Hard to believe that Wilmut was the only name that they could pull out of a hat.

The physician’s organization Marburger Bund issued a statement saying it is “more than strange when a British scientist whose cloning experiments would be punished here in Germany is rewarded with German tax money.”

Read the whole story on the Scientist.

Or if you can read German: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung

I do not know Anoopa Sharma, and in fact, never heard of her until just a few days ago. She isn’t a celebrity, she’s not the next new rising sitcom star or “supermodel” to be. In the grand scheme of things, Anoopa is just a speck among billions on this earth. But her story, to me, is far more significant and breathtaking than the junk that generally makes news…do you think Jen and Brad will get back together? Is JLo pregnant? First pictures of Julia Roberts twins…

The mindless stories that make people salivate is so foreign to me, while the real life tales of people who make a difference, or who have the potential to make a mark on the world, go unnoticed.

Anoopa is one such person. She was 24 years old, graduated from Duke University with a dual degree in computer science and biology, and was now pursuing a PhD at Emory University. When not busy with her studies, she pursued interests in yoga, African Dance, outdoor adventuring through Project Wild, and much more.

She had dreams of making a difference in the world. Anoopa spent one year working at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine in 2002-03 before beginning her PhD studies, and has traveled to India, Bangladesh, Nepal, Thailand, Ghana, Gambia, Swaziland, South Africa, Honduras, Kenya, Columbia, and England.

However, her vibrant life screeched to a halt about a week ago when she was involved in a head-on collision in Birmingham, Alabama. Two of her friends set up a website to monitor her progress, and to keep friends and family all over the world posted. For a short time, it seemed as though she was improving, but then she took an abrupt turn for the worse. Yesterday, a farewell to Anoopa was posted. I hope that her friends don’t mind if I post what they wrote:

Anoopa was declared clinically brain dead yesterday evening after a neurological exam was done by two different doctors showing an absence of all brainstem reflexes. Also, a scan was done showing a lack of blood flow to her brain. Her organs will be removed in the next few hours and be in the bodies of their respective recipients within 36 hours. Happily, a member of the organ transplant team told us that Anoopa’s organs could potentially help improve the lives of 108 patients. All in one day! Pretty amazing. Her blood type is O- (the universal donor) which makes the pool of people to which her organs can be donated larger. Anoopa will be cremated here in Birmingham tomorrow around 10am and a religious ceremony will be done by a local Hindu priest at the same time. Her ashes will most likely be scattered here somewhere in nature, probably a river.

So, now why am I posting this, a sad story about someone I don’t know. Afterall, wonderful people die in car accidents every day, die of dreadful diseases, commit suicide, and so on. Well, something about this story just seemed so sad, but I decided to post about it because of the organ donation.

Anoopa’s death may help up to 108 different people! Is that incredible or what? And for some, we are not just talking improving quality of life but saving their life. Her heart, liver, kidneys, lungs–can be transplanted into those dying of organ failure. As she leaves this world, she will help others remain a part of it. As for the other organs, I was amazed at how many “parts” can be used. Skin, corneas, blood, pancreas, intestines…

It is a tragic story intermingled with a joyful story. It is sad and happy all at the same time. Her family believed that this is what Anoopa would have wanted, as donating her organs coincided with the manner in which she had lived her life up until now. She is an unknown hero, an unsung hero, and I truly wish that these stories would become better known. Although I may be in a tiny minority, I would much rather read about Anoopa, how she lived and died and kept giving even after death, than find out whether or not Jen and Brad are going to get a divorce.

More health cost woes. Relentless, aren’t they. This time around, the newest complaint is the high cost of treating children with rare diseases. Not, those poor little children suffering with a dreadful, and perhaps painful and debilitating condition….but instead, damn those spoiled and ungreatful brats who have the audacity to get sick.

But sarcasm aside, I can see how certain illnesses can put a strain on healthcare finances, let alone the finances of a family. The Las Vegas Sun used the example of cystic fibrosis, where historically, children died during their teenage years or earlier, and available treatments were not expensive. But now, things are different. The average life span has jumped to about 33 years old, and the treatment which permits a child to live that long may cost as much as $2,000 per dose. With technology marching on, that expense will probably mushroom over the next decade.

State programs often helped pay for many of the associated costs, for uninsured or underinsured children, but now they are starting to tighten the belt. Ohio, Idaho, Virginia and Minnesota are among the states considering eliminating or reducing funding for such programs, and if the state will no longer pay, who will?

The answer is–no one.

Minnesota ended its financial aid for children’s uninsured expenses two years ago. Riley Schumacher, 7, of St. Cloud, Minn., has a condition that’s left him with a weak immune system. His treatment is covered 80 percent by insurance. But his family has cut back on doctor visits – relying on phone calls instead – and they have not bought many of the medicines recommended to keep him healthy.

“When my wife went to the pharmacy and they told her it would be a $50 co-pay, she said we don’t have it,” said his father, Duane. “We increased the risk and we lowered his quality of life.”

Even for a family with insurance, coverage may only be 80%. If their child’s healthcare costs average $100,000 a year, they have to pay $20,000 out of pocket. Year after year. That’s a lot of money if you’re not one of the Fortune 500.

Families may be left with two pitiful choices. They can keep working, maybe take on another job or two, but the end result will still be to rack up an enormous debt or file for bankruptcy. On the other hand, if they want to try to get some relief from Medicaid, they will have to quit their jobs or get divorced. Nice choice, huh. All for trying to save their child’s life.

Of course, then the parent who quits work to bring themselves down to the Medicaid level will be called “lazy” and criticized for not working and taking public handouts.

It is a peculiar irony, isn’t it. Our medical advances and technology are keeping children alive who should have long since been dead. I’ve seen babies run up hospital bills of one million or more, just in a few months in the NICU. And the baby hasn’t even come home yet. Many of these kids will need years of therapy, hospitalizations, will have infections, bouts of pneumonia, and so on. But what is the point of trying to help children with devastating illnesses if no one can afford the bill?

According to the Organic Consumers Association (OCA), advertising for the artificial sweetner Splenda is not so splendid. In fact, they say it is downright misleading and have filed a formal complaint with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The artificial sweetener carries the slogan “Made from sugar, so it tastes like sugar,” and as a result, nearly half of all consumers believe Splenda is natural, according to a survey done by the Center for Science in the Public Interest. In actuality, Splenda is made through a complex chemical process using chlorination and phosgene gas.

This is a copy of their letter to the FTC:

Division of Advertising Practices
Bureau of Consumer Protection
Federal Trade Commission
600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20580

OCA urges consumers to read labels carefully. Whether it’s genetically-engineered food or chemically processed additives, consumers shouldn’t be led to believe that the products they are buying are natural and come from the earth. Sadly, J&J’s campaign hinders consumers’ ability to ferret out the truth about Splenda.