The $3 billion California stem cell
agency hit it big in San Diego today, finally scoring an editorial
that said “arguably” the agency's largess has made the state “the
world leader in medical research.”
circulation newspaper in the area, said the big headline about the
eight-year-old agency is “the potential for transformative medical
breakthroughs.”
long been criticized in connection with conflicts of interest. About
90 percent of the $1.8 billion the agency has awarded has gone to
institutions linked to current and past members of its board of
directors.
criticism seriously,” the newspaper said. It cited proposals that
would, if approved later this month, have 13 members of the agency's
governing board voluntarily abstain from voting on any grants that come before
the board. Twenty-nine persons sit on the board. The thirteen are
connected to recipient institutions. Two other board members are
linked to recipient institutions.
matter in San Diego, which is one of California's hotbeds of biotech
and stem cell research. The stem cell agency has awarded about $338
million to San Diego area institutions and businesses. Four
executives from San Diego area institutions sit on the CIRM board.
“There
remains a residue of cynicism about CIRM. Critics say the agency
board did the minimum necessary to avoid an intervention by the
Legislature – and also acted to buff the agency’s image should it
seek more bond funding from California voters before its present
funding runs out in 2017, as is now projected.
“These views
may have some merit. But on balance, we think the California
Institute for Regenerative Medicine has – at long last –
responded properly to the fair criticism it faced. Instead of being
exasperated by CIRM, more people should be excited about the great
work it is doing.”
involving the editorial board of the newspaper, CIRM Chairman
Jonathan Thomas and Larry Godlstein, director of the UC San Diego stem
cell program. The meeting was part of a CIRM campaign to generate
newspaper support for the agency's response to sweeping recommendations from a blue-ribbon study by the Institute of Medicine. The San Diego editorial is the most effusive so far.
Bradley Fikes, sat in on the meeting and Saturday posted video excerpts from the discussion, including a brief written summary of the content of each clip.
Source:Recommendation and review posted by G. Smith
