On November first former UW-Chancellor, John Wiley, will assume his new duties as interim director of the public side of the Wisconsin Institutes of Discovery. Dr. Wiley has already said that he initially intends to attend to the “pre-operational” details associated with construction and staffing of this research facility set to be completed on the UW campus in 2010.
I hope Wiley will also begin the process of developing a comprehensive strategic plan to guide this stellar research ship through the storms of this next decade. What is critically needed at this juncture is a “Wisconsin Way” like strategic plan that is broadly conceived and community-based to include all the stakeholders in this journey.
All budgets, regardless of how important the mission, have fiscal and other resource constraints. For Wisconsin scientists to succeed they will need the support and input from every quarter including patient and consumer organizations, capital and material donor groups, and the aging and special needs communities to mention just a few.
Without measurable milestones to gauge our progress and identify our priorities Wisconsin’s premier stem cell research program will surely flounder. Taxpayers should encourage broad stakeholder discussions to identify alternative models of public funding, including revenue sharing, intellectual property, and licensing. All with the aim of ensuring that all Wisconsin citizens have access to affordable cell-based diagnostics and therapies.
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Friday, October 17, 2008
Wisconsin campaign questionnaire results
Three watchdog organizations – the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, the League of Women Voters and Common Cause – have again come together this pre-election season to survey all our legislative candidates about where they stand with respect to Wisconsin clean government reform.
It seems to me that after this state’s caucus scandals and more recently the buying off of our State Supreme Court candidates via sham issue ads any respectable candidate running for public office in Wisconsin would want to put their best foot forward and if not actually support clean government, then at the very least, complete and return a non-partisan survey form.
But not in Wisconsin! Would you believe that nearly two-thirds of our state legislative candidates declined even to take a public stand on clean government reform issues. In fact to date only seven of the 25 senate candidates (28%) have even returned the questionnaire. Of the 243 candidates for state assembly, only 95 or 39% replied to the survey.
Do Wisconsin voters need any stronger evidence about what to expect when our new legislature reconvenes this January? As a former program evaluator, I am struck by the 33 percent return rate and how closely this figure compares with Wisconsin’s voter satisfaction index. Based on the above survey return rate is it any surprise that nearly 8 out of 10 Wisconsin citizens indicate that they are dissatisfied with their legislators and do not believe that they any longer represent their best interests.
Having worked with state legislators on campaign finance reform in recent years my best guess is that at least 75 percent of our legislators’ first allegiance is with the special interests that fund their election campaigns. I think this helps explain the low return rate and is a strong harbinger of what the citizens of Wisconsin can expect again during the next legislative session --- more deadlock and little if any clean government reform.
If you wish to find out how much your legislative candidate is invested in clean government reform in Wisconsin check the League of Women Voters’ web site.
It seems to me that after this state’s caucus scandals and more recently the buying off of our State Supreme Court candidates via sham issue ads any respectable candidate running for public office in Wisconsin would want to put their best foot forward and if not actually support clean government, then at the very least, complete and return a non-partisan survey form.
But not in Wisconsin! Would you believe that nearly two-thirds of our state legislative candidates declined even to take a public stand on clean government reform issues. In fact to date only seven of the 25 senate candidates (28%) have even returned the questionnaire. Of the 243 candidates for state assembly, only 95 or 39% replied to the survey.
Do Wisconsin voters need any stronger evidence about what to expect when our new legislature reconvenes this January? As a former program evaluator, I am struck by the 33 percent return rate and how closely this figure compares with Wisconsin’s voter satisfaction index. Based on the above survey return rate is it any surprise that nearly 8 out of 10 Wisconsin citizens indicate that they are dissatisfied with their legislators and do not believe that they any longer represent their best interests.
Having worked with state legislators on campaign finance reform in recent years my best guess is that at least 75 percent of our legislators’ first allegiance is with the special interests that fund their election campaigns. I think this helps explain the low return rate and is a strong harbinger of what the citizens of Wisconsin can expect again during the next legislative session --- more deadlock and little if any clean government reform.
If you wish to find out how much your legislative candidate is invested in clean government reform in Wisconsin check the League of Women Voters’ web site.
Friday, October 3, 2008
Consider fairness in stem-cell push
Wisconsin State Journal/Guest Column
Each person attending the World Stem Cell Summit held in Madison this past week left this conference with a great sense of urgency and personal responsibility to help speed up stem cell research. As a patient advocate who strongly supports state funding of stem cell research I wish to share with you my most important concerns.
Because Wisconsin’s stem cell research program has such extraordinary potential for advancing scientific knowledge that may result in therapies and cures for a wide range of chronic diseases and injuries it becomes an extremely important social justice and fairness issue.
It raises a host of moral, stewardship and health care issues along with critical questions of priority.
Should we prohibit or refuse to fund certain types of stem cell research? Which therapeutic stem cell applications should we choose for development? Will we invest in medical cures for the many or for elitist medical enhancements and longevity for the few? Will the novel therapies be fairly distributed and affordable? And most important, who is to decide?
For more than 100 million afflicted Americans and their families, stem cell research is much more than a health, economic and political issue. It is their No. 1 concern. It’s a matter of whether they have enough hope and energy to suffer through another day and whether real help will ever come.
It is heartbreaking when one discovers that clinical trials to bring this research into the clinic are happening all over the world while the work here lags far behind.
Resident and patient organizations will remain disengaged as long as our governor continues to counsel Wisconsin citizens to simply continue to sit back and leave these life-and-death decisions in the hands of the scientists.
A consensus on social justice and fairness issues should be attained through vigorous public engagement at every stage of the stem cell research process--- from the business and research design to product development and distribution.
All research operates in the context of a particular human being, institution, state and budget. It would be an injustice if all stem cell research objectives were framed only for their potential applicability and profitability.
A host of other issues should be brought to the table as well, such as the severity of the illness to be targeted, present gaps in existing therapies, public health needs and the needs of our most vulnerable citizens?
In publicly supported educational and research centers like our own UW-Madison, citizen groups must determine the best balance between direct potential clinical applications versus the longer term search for knowledge itself.
Too much emphasis on direct application alone will act to undercut the otherwise serendipitous nature of discovery and impose an authoritarian structure that is alien to the scientific culture.
When public funding dollars are involved, a social justice focus helps mediate an otherwise often greedy market-centered research enterprise.
Public engagement and consideration of these potentially contentious social justice issues can help mitigate further delay in the development of these cell-based therapies.
If Wisconsin’s stem cell research initiative is to succeed Wisconsin taxpayers must begin now to wrestle with these issues in a thoughtful and prudent manner.
Each person attending the World Stem Cell Summit held in Madison this past week left this conference with a great sense of urgency and personal responsibility to help speed up stem cell research. As a patient advocate who strongly supports state funding of stem cell research I wish to share with you my most important concerns.
Because Wisconsin’s stem cell research program has such extraordinary potential for advancing scientific knowledge that may result in therapies and cures for a wide range of chronic diseases and injuries it becomes an extremely important social justice and fairness issue.
It raises a host of moral, stewardship and health care issues along with critical questions of priority.
Should we prohibit or refuse to fund certain types of stem cell research? Which therapeutic stem cell applications should we choose for development? Will we invest in medical cures for the many or for elitist medical enhancements and longevity for the few? Will the novel therapies be fairly distributed and affordable? And most important, who is to decide?
For more than 100 million afflicted Americans and their families, stem cell research is much more than a health, economic and political issue. It is their No. 1 concern. It’s a matter of whether they have enough hope and energy to suffer through another day and whether real help will ever come.
It is heartbreaking when one discovers that clinical trials to bring this research into the clinic are happening all over the world while the work here lags far behind.
Resident and patient organizations will remain disengaged as long as our governor continues to counsel Wisconsin citizens to simply continue to sit back and leave these life-and-death decisions in the hands of the scientists.
A consensus on social justice and fairness issues should be attained through vigorous public engagement at every stage of the stem cell research process--- from the business and research design to product development and distribution.
All research operates in the context of a particular human being, institution, state and budget. It would be an injustice if all stem cell research objectives were framed only for their potential applicability and profitability.
A host of other issues should be brought to the table as well, such as the severity of the illness to be targeted, present gaps in existing therapies, public health needs and the needs of our most vulnerable citizens?
In publicly supported educational and research centers like our own UW-Madison, citizen groups must determine the best balance between direct potential clinical applications versus the longer term search for knowledge itself.
Too much emphasis on direct application alone will act to undercut the otherwise serendipitous nature of discovery and impose an authoritarian structure that is alien to the scientific culture.
When public funding dollars are involved, a social justice focus helps mediate an otherwise often greedy market-centered research enterprise.
Public engagement and consideration of these potentially contentious social justice issues can help mitigate further delay in the development of these cell-based therapies.
If Wisconsin’s stem cell research initiative is to succeed Wisconsin taxpayers must begin now to wrestle with these issues in a thoughtful and prudent manner.
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
World Stem Cell Summit - Time is running out for many Americans
Each person attending the World Stem Cell Summit held in Madison this past week left this conference with a great sense of urgency and personal responsibility to help speed up stem cell research. As a patient advocate who strongly supports state funding of stem cell research I wish to share with you my most important concerns.
Because Wisconsin’s stem cell research program has such extraordinary potential for advancing scientific knowledge that may result in therapies and cures for a wide range of chronic diseases and injuries it becomes an extremely important social justice and fairness issue.
It raises a host of moral, stewardship and health care issues along with critical questions of priority. Should we prohibit or refuse to fund certain types of stem cell research? Which therapeutic stem cell applications should we choose for development? Will we invest in medical cures for the many or elitist medical enhancements and longevity for the few? Will the novel therapies be fairly distributed and affordable? And most important, who is to decide?
It is often forgotten that the question of stem cell research is much more than a major health, economic and political issue. For over one hundred million afflicted Americans and their families it is their number one personal concern above all others and one that affects all their lives daily. For them it has to do with whether they have sufficient hope and energy to suffer through another day and whether real help will ever come.
Most of all, for these afflicted Americans it is the most urgent health and social concern of all. It is even more heart breaking when one discovers that clinical trials to bring this research into the clinic are happening all over the world while the work here lags far behind.
As long as our governor continues to counsel Wisconsin citizens to simply continue to sit back and leave these life and death decisions in the hands of the scientists, citizens and patient organizations remain disengaged. Rather than taking this advice, such social justice and fairness issues should be consensually derived through vigorous public engagement at every stage of the stem cell research process, from the business and research design to product development and distribution. This is so because all research operates in the context of a particular human being, institution, state and budget. It would clearly be an injustice if all stem cell research objectives were framed only for their potential applicability and profitability.
Rather than focusing only upon profit versus general welfare and quality of life considerations a host of other issues should be brought to the table as well, i.e., severity of the illness to be targeted; present gaps in existing therapies; does it meet a public health need, and the needs of our most vulnerable citizens?
Both for the sake of equity and for the welfare of our planet earth social justice and fairness also calls for wherever possible to share new research discoveries in an open and transparent manner and as broadly as possible.
Furthermore, in publicly supported educational and research centers like our own UW, citizen groups must determine the best balance between direct potential clinical applications versus the longer term search for knowledge itself. Too much emphasis on direct application alone will act to undercut the otherwise serendipitous nature of discovery and impose an authoritarian structure that is alien to the scientific culture.
When public funding dollars are involved, a social justice focus helps mediate an otherwise often greedy market-centered research enterprise. Hopefully, the grantee or entrepreneur will then be obligated to select areas of research that will yield the greatest increased welfare of its citizens.
Public engagement and consideration of the above potentially contentious social justice issues can help mitigate further delay in the development of these cell-based therapies. If Wisconsin’s stem cell research initiative is to succeed, Wisconsin taxpayers must begin now to wrestle with these issues in a thoughtful and prudent manner.
It would be fool hardy indeed to rely exclusively upon university faculty research oversight committees or intellectual property officials to make such complex life and death value decisions as well as decisions about the state’s future general welfare and economy. To counter such a possibility taxpayers and patient representatives should sit on university oversight and review committees; frequent, open and transparent stakeholder meetings should be encouraged; and alternative public benefit and intellectual property models welcomed.
This state will not likely confront any greater single issue in the twenty-first century involving its quality of life and economic future. Conservative market forecasts range from a fairly modest $100 million to as much as $10 billion by 2010. By 2030 stem sell research and development is projected to reach over 500 billion dollars. This figure does not include the potential trillions more saved by the elimination or amelioration of the most costly and debilitating diseases for more than one hundred million citizens.
Respectfully,
William R. Benedict
Because Wisconsin’s stem cell research program has such extraordinary potential for advancing scientific knowledge that may result in therapies and cures for a wide range of chronic diseases and injuries it becomes an extremely important social justice and fairness issue.
It raises a host of moral, stewardship and health care issues along with critical questions of priority. Should we prohibit or refuse to fund certain types of stem cell research? Which therapeutic stem cell applications should we choose for development? Will we invest in medical cures for the many or elitist medical enhancements and longevity for the few? Will the novel therapies be fairly distributed and affordable? And most important, who is to decide?
It is often forgotten that the question of stem cell research is much more than a major health, economic and political issue. For over one hundred million afflicted Americans and their families it is their number one personal concern above all others and one that affects all their lives daily. For them it has to do with whether they have sufficient hope and energy to suffer through another day and whether real help will ever come.
Most of all, for these afflicted Americans it is the most urgent health and social concern of all. It is even more heart breaking when one discovers that clinical trials to bring this research into the clinic are happening all over the world while the work here lags far behind.
As long as our governor continues to counsel Wisconsin citizens to simply continue to sit back and leave these life and death decisions in the hands of the scientists, citizens and patient organizations remain disengaged. Rather than taking this advice, such social justice and fairness issues should be consensually derived through vigorous public engagement at every stage of the stem cell research process, from the business and research design to product development and distribution. This is so because all research operates in the context of a particular human being, institution, state and budget. It would clearly be an injustice if all stem cell research objectives were framed only for their potential applicability and profitability.
Rather than focusing only upon profit versus general welfare and quality of life considerations a host of other issues should be brought to the table as well, i.e., severity of the illness to be targeted; present gaps in existing therapies; does it meet a public health need, and the needs of our most vulnerable citizens?
Both for the sake of equity and for the welfare of our planet earth social justice and fairness also calls for wherever possible to share new research discoveries in an open and transparent manner and as broadly as possible.
Furthermore, in publicly supported educational and research centers like our own UW, citizen groups must determine the best balance between direct potential clinical applications versus the longer term search for knowledge itself. Too much emphasis on direct application alone will act to undercut the otherwise serendipitous nature of discovery and impose an authoritarian structure that is alien to the scientific culture.
When public funding dollars are involved, a social justice focus helps mediate an otherwise often greedy market-centered research enterprise. Hopefully, the grantee or entrepreneur will then be obligated to select areas of research that will yield the greatest increased welfare of its citizens.
Public engagement and consideration of the above potentially contentious social justice issues can help mitigate further delay in the development of these cell-based therapies. If Wisconsin’s stem cell research initiative is to succeed, Wisconsin taxpayers must begin now to wrestle with these issues in a thoughtful and prudent manner.
It would be fool hardy indeed to rely exclusively upon university faculty research oversight committees or intellectual property officials to make such complex life and death value decisions as well as decisions about the state’s future general welfare and economy. To counter such a possibility taxpayers and patient representatives should sit on university oversight and review committees; frequent, open and transparent stakeholder meetings should be encouraged; and alternative public benefit and intellectual property models welcomed.
This state will not likely confront any greater single issue in the twenty-first century involving its quality of life and economic future. Conservative market forecasts range from a fairly modest $100 million to as much as $10 billion by 2010. By 2030 stem sell research and development is projected to reach over 500 billion dollars. This figure does not include the potential trillions more saved by the elimination or amelioration of the most costly and debilitating diseases for more than one hundred million citizens.
Respectfully,
William R. Benedict
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
GAB acts to ban sham issue ads
I was privileged to attend the recent Government Accountability Board (GAB) meeting and was so proud and pleased to see that all six of these non-partisan board members seemed to me determined to put an end to sham issue ads.
In a nut shell this process refers to the misuse of so called “issue ads” by the super-rich and powerful to anonymously attack and defeat a political candidate through a barrage of insanely costly negative TV ads especially in the last few days before Election Day.
The Wisconsin Democracy Campaign estimates that nearly eight million dollars was spend on such spurious ads during the last two Supreme Court elections. It is clear to this citizen that the Board has both the authority and the means to bring an end these corrupt practices. After all, this watchdog group has the statutory authority to fight corruption and/or the appearance of corruption, and to ensure the integrity of our election process.
How many of us really believe that our constitutional fathers ever intended for us to equate our so-called “free speech” rights with exorbitant corporate spending rights while the people’s right to peacefully assemble and speak out at political events erodes more and more each day. We can be sure that the Wisconsin Lobbyist Association and mistaken free speech advocates will continue to fight for the right to spend, spend, and spend and thus squander away and make more impotent each day the legitimate and true voice of the people.
Let all Americans who love our sacred liberties, follow the lead of these six courageous clean government watchdog officials and more recently John Wiley and the Epic Corporation, and stand up with them to the corporate lobbyists and the Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce. Call the Board’s office at 608-266-8005 and commend them for their industry and fine work since beginning in January 08 and assure them that they have your support.
Respectfully, William R. Benedict
In a nut shell this process refers to the misuse of so called “issue ads” by the super-rich and powerful to anonymously attack and defeat a political candidate through a barrage of insanely costly negative TV ads especially in the last few days before Election Day.
The Wisconsin Democracy Campaign estimates that nearly eight million dollars was spend on such spurious ads during the last two Supreme Court elections. It is clear to this citizen that the Board has both the authority and the means to bring an end these corrupt practices. After all, this watchdog group has the statutory authority to fight corruption and/or the appearance of corruption, and to ensure the integrity of our election process.
How many of us really believe that our constitutional fathers ever intended for us to equate our so-called “free speech” rights with exorbitant corporate spending rights while the people’s right to peacefully assemble and speak out at political events erodes more and more each day. We can be sure that the Wisconsin Lobbyist Association and mistaken free speech advocates will continue to fight for the right to spend, spend, and spend and thus squander away and make more impotent each day the legitimate and true voice of the people.
Let all Americans who love our sacred liberties, follow the lead of these six courageous clean government watchdog officials and more recently John Wiley and the Epic Corporation, and stand up with them to the corporate lobbyists and the Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce. Call the Board’s office at 608-266-8005 and commend them for their industry and fine work since beginning in January 08 and assure them that they have your support.
Respectfully, William R. Benedict
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
A public health care benefit for all Wisconsin citizens
Dialogue
Madison-area Urban Ministry
July-September 2008
By now we know that solving Wisconsin’s ever-growing home health care costs is a multifaceted problem and will not be solved by any single solution. And while there are many comprehensive solutions being proposed, none of them go directly to the core issue---monolithic and predatory health care pharmaceutical pricing practices.
In 2005 my partner and I were vacationing in San Diego California. While reading the San Diego Tribune I just happened to read about California’s 3 billion dollar stem cell research program and about the many health care stakeholder groups who all were fighting for something they were calling a “public benefit.”
I continued to read and soon learned what they meant by the words, “public benefit.” They wanted to make sure that medical breakthroughs and medicines developed through stem cell research, and funded by their tax dollars, would be available and affordable to every citizen in California.
When we weigh the billions and billions of dollars to be both made and saved through miracle cures of our worse most debilitating diseases and by such life enhancements as restored memory, increased mobility, regenerated body parts, and most of all, increased longevity, only then can we begin to appreciate the real scope and importance of the health care policy issue now before us.
Californians have learned their lessons well from our nation’s health care problems and have decided to go directly to the root of our health care pricing crisis. They are no longer going to pay twice for their health care: Once for the research and once again for the exorbitantly priced medications and therapies.
Wisconsin citizens should follow California’s lead and pass legislation now that supports federal and state funding of stem cell research in Wisconsin along with public health care benefit safeguards.
“Public health care benefit safeguards” can mean anything from requiring a successful grantee to return 25 percent of their profit back on their billion-dollar stem cell-based drug discovery to the state of Wisconsin to be put in a special patient health care fund.
Or a successful grantee would simply be required to submit a plan to ensure affordable prices for all Wisconsin citizens, especially the medium-and-low income and underserved populations.
The bottom line is that you and I as Wisconsin citizens can prove to ourselves and our grandchildren, and future generations, that we have learned our lesson from exorbitant health care pricing. We have learned not to give our money to people without first asking who they are, why they need it, and how they plan on using it. This new policy of asking the public-funded grantee to meet certain expectations and provide some return on our investment is better than writing a blank check and continuing with health care in Wisconsin as we now know it.
Now is the time for Wisconsin policy makers to decide whether the miracle cures promised will be made accessible and affordable to Wisconsin families with cell-based diseases.
The answer to this question must be reflected in the language of the state’s financial and tax research innovation incentives now being proposed.
Asking the grantees to do the right thing after giving away the farm is like asking the fox to cough up the chickens after giving him the key to the hen house.
Without grass roots action now by all Wisconsin citizens we should not expect that cell-based therapies and drugs derived from this research will eventually benefit all of us as health consumers and taxpayers.
Madison-area Urban Ministry
July-September 2008
By now we know that solving Wisconsin’s ever-growing home health care costs is a multifaceted problem and will not be solved by any single solution. And while there are many comprehensive solutions being proposed, none of them go directly to the core issue---monolithic and predatory health care pharmaceutical pricing practices.
In 2005 my partner and I were vacationing in San Diego California. While reading the San Diego Tribune I just happened to read about California’s 3 billion dollar stem cell research program and about the many health care stakeholder groups who all were fighting for something they were calling a “public benefit.”
I continued to read and soon learned what they meant by the words, “public benefit.” They wanted to make sure that medical breakthroughs and medicines developed through stem cell research, and funded by their tax dollars, would be available and affordable to every citizen in California.
When we weigh the billions and billions of dollars to be both made and saved through miracle cures of our worse most debilitating diseases and by such life enhancements as restored memory, increased mobility, regenerated body parts, and most of all, increased longevity, only then can we begin to appreciate the real scope and importance of the health care policy issue now before us.
Californians have learned their lessons well from our nation’s health care problems and have decided to go directly to the root of our health care pricing crisis. They are no longer going to pay twice for their health care: Once for the research and once again for the exorbitantly priced medications and therapies.
Wisconsin citizens should follow California’s lead and pass legislation now that supports federal and state funding of stem cell research in Wisconsin along with public health care benefit safeguards.
“Public health care benefit safeguards” can mean anything from requiring a successful grantee to return 25 percent of their profit back on their billion-dollar stem cell-based drug discovery to the state of Wisconsin to be put in a special patient health care fund.
Or a successful grantee would simply be required to submit a plan to ensure affordable prices for all Wisconsin citizens, especially the medium-and-low income and underserved populations.
The bottom line is that you and I as Wisconsin citizens can prove to ourselves and our grandchildren, and future generations, that we have learned our lesson from exorbitant health care pricing. We have learned not to give our money to people without first asking who they are, why they need it, and how they plan on using it. This new policy of asking the public-funded grantee to meet certain expectations and provide some return on our investment is better than writing a blank check and continuing with health care in Wisconsin as we now know it.
Now is the time for Wisconsin policy makers to decide whether the miracle cures promised will be made accessible and affordable to Wisconsin families with cell-based diseases.
The answer to this question must be reflected in the language of the state’s financial and tax research innovation incentives now being proposed.
Asking the grantees to do the right thing after giving away the farm is like asking the fox to cough up the chickens after giving him the key to the hen house.
Without grass roots action now by all Wisconsin citizens we should not expect that cell-based therapies and drugs derived from this research will eventually benefit all of us as health consumers and taxpayers.
Friday, August 15, 2008
Demand payback on biotech strategy
Wisconsin State Journal
Steven Clark’s recent guest column in the State Journal, “State needs biotech investment strategy” should make every taxpayer in Wisconsin --- and particularly families with chronic stem cell-based diseases --- sit up, take notice and act now. Clark found that Wisconsin’s biotech initiative has no clear overarching focus.
I was surprised to learn that Wisconsin has not placed its miraculous human embryonic stem cell (hESC) discoveries upper most in its strategic biotech initiative.
Wisconsin has already sold an inclusive license to one of the largest biotech companies in the world, which clearly cut taxpayers out of any special payback or affordable access to these products. Wisconsin families with stem cell-based diseases need to demand a full accounting of why this has happened now before any more of our intellectual property is compromised and squandered.
It also appears that the Madison biotech flagship needs to be expanded to include all the public and private biotech resources – both research and business - from throughout the state.
This is not the case. Wisconsin taxpayers and health care consumers ultimately will pay the price for our shortsightedness. As Clark notes, if research is not translated into businesses, it does nothing for the people or the economy.
Also, unlike in Wisconsin, the California taxpayers and stem-cell based consumers have been promised by state statute that they will receive a payback for any successful stem cell-derived commercial product.
That is, the state will receive a certain percentage of any revenue derived from the state-funded research, and low income and the uninsured residents will have equal access to the miracle health products that follow.
In Wisconsin, the home of embryonic stem cell research, there is little evidence thus far that any overall plan or policy exists to ensure that Wisconsin taxpayers will receive a similar payback and public access to affordable stem cell therapies when they appear in your local drugstore.
The bottom line: the Wisconsin biotech flagship is adrift without a rudder. Wisconsin lacks a clear mission and policy platform that would help guide it through what is projected as a $500 billion dollar industry in 2020 or sooner.
In a practical sense, this means that when your governor or the Wisconsin Department of Commerce awards a biotech company or scientist or entrepreneur a grant, you will not find any mission-driven clause or revenue- earned payback requirement in that contract.
I urge all taxpayers, especially those who are working for health care reform and families with stem cell-based diseases, to call your legislators and ask them what they are doing to make sure that Wisconsin’s investment in human embryonic stem cell research is protected from any further unraveling of this enormously lucrative “home-grown” resource.
Benedict lives in Madison.
Steven Clark’s recent guest column in the State Journal, “State needs biotech investment strategy” should make every taxpayer in Wisconsin --- and particularly families with chronic stem cell-based diseases --- sit up, take notice and act now. Clark found that Wisconsin’s biotech initiative has no clear overarching focus.
I was surprised to learn that Wisconsin has not placed its miraculous human embryonic stem cell (hESC) discoveries upper most in its strategic biotech initiative.
Wisconsin has already sold an inclusive license to one of the largest biotech companies in the world, which clearly cut taxpayers out of any special payback or affordable access to these products. Wisconsin families with stem cell-based diseases need to demand a full accounting of why this has happened now before any more of our intellectual property is compromised and squandered.
It also appears that the Madison biotech flagship needs to be expanded to include all the public and private biotech resources – both research and business - from throughout the state.
This is not the case. Wisconsin taxpayers and health care consumers ultimately will pay the price for our shortsightedness. As Clark notes, if research is not translated into businesses, it does nothing for the people or the economy.
Also, unlike in Wisconsin, the California taxpayers and stem-cell based consumers have been promised by state statute that they will receive a payback for any successful stem cell-derived commercial product.
That is, the state will receive a certain percentage of any revenue derived from the state-funded research, and low income and the uninsured residents will have equal access to the miracle health products that follow.
In Wisconsin, the home of embryonic stem cell research, there is little evidence thus far that any overall plan or policy exists to ensure that Wisconsin taxpayers will receive a similar payback and public access to affordable stem cell therapies when they appear in your local drugstore.
The bottom line: the Wisconsin biotech flagship is adrift without a rudder. Wisconsin lacks a clear mission and policy platform that would help guide it through what is projected as a $500 billion dollar industry in 2020 or sooner.
In a practical sense, this means that when your governor or the Wisconsin Department of Commerce awards a biotech company or scientist or entrepreneur a grant, you will not find any mission-driven clause or revenue- earned payback requirement in that contract.
I urge all taxpayers, especially those who are working for health care reform and families with stem cell-based diseases, to call your legislators and ask them what they are doing to make sure that Wisconsin’s investment in human embryonic stem cell research is protected from any further unraveling of this enormously lucrative “home-grown” resource.
Benedict lives in Madison.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)