Yes on Prop 71

[Guest guest]

Virginia, I think you're swell, but the below logic doesn't make sense.

Christopher Reeves arguing that stem cell experiments have already been

effective with animals doesn't mean that Prop 71 is about funding more

animal experiments. I think it's pretty evident that what Reeves was

aiming for and what Prop 71 is trying to do is fund _human_ stem cell

research, which is what all the controversy is about. There's no problem

getting funding for animal research--anyone can do that and grants are

handed out like candy if you want to torture animals. Let's get this

human stem cell research going so that animal experiments can become a

thing of the past.

-- Bryan

At 06:03 PM 10/28/2004, you wrote:

Paw PAC

didn't take a position on Prop 71 because it wasn't clear if it would

entail more animal research or not, but I agree with Bob that it probably

will, because after we'd sent out our endorsements I saw an ad by

Christopher Reeves in support of the Prop saying it had already been

effective on animals. Perhaps ultimately it can replace some animals. I

expect it will pass.

Virginia Handley

Paw PAC

www.pawpac.org

 

- Vigil for

Animals Bay Area Animal Rights

Network ; SF Bay Area

Veg*n Wednesday, October 27, 2004 8:35 PM

[baarn] State Proposition 71 - Likelihood of Testing on

Animals...Pawpac Recommendations

Dear Voters for Animals:

 

Since at the last Vigil meeting the subject of Stem Cell Research

came up - and its funding under Proposition 71, I decided to quote some

of the proposed legislation itself from the California Voter Information

Guide. So for your information, here is a small but significant

part (there is a total of 8 pages of amendments) of the proposition.

 

" This initiative measure expressly amends the California

Constitution by adding an article thereto....

Article XXXV. Medical Research

SECTION 1. There is hereby established

the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine.

SEC. 2. The institute shall have the

following purposes:

(a) To make grants and loans for stem

cell research, for research facilities, and for other vital research

opportunities to realize therapies, protocols, and/or medical procedures

that will result in, as speedily as possible, the cure for, and/or

substantial mitigation of, major diseases, injuries, and orphan

diseases.

(b) To support all stages of the

process of developing cures, from laboratory research through successful

clinical trials. "

 

I think the key term in the above quote is " laboratory

research " ; that term is practically synonymous with experiments on

mice and rats, and occasionally other animals. Knowing that, and

the great amount of money involved - up to $3 billion - and the great

profits that will be made by companies associated with biotech industry,

I am currently strongly inclined to vote no on this proposition.

 

Also, in case you did not know, here are Pawpac's* recommendations on

several of the state propositions:

YES on Prop. 59

NO on Prop. 64

NO on Prop. 68

 

 

* Pawpac is a state political action committee advocating for

animals.

 

Bob O'Brien