Is It A Cluster Yet? CJD

flounder

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2006
Messages
1,097
City & State/Province
TEXAS
June 22, 2007 at 10:11:29

Is It A Cluster Yet? Public Health Officials Have Few Answers About CJD
Cases

by Martha Rosenberg Page 1 of 2 page(s)

http://www.opednews.com


Public health officials in Indiana are busy doing what Idaho public health
officials did two years ago: claiming a cluster of Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease
(CJD) victims is a mere coincidence.

If the four who died of CJD since January in Allen County in northeast
Indiana--five if you count a death in Lynnville in 2005--had the sporadic
version of CJD which strikes one in a million and has no clear cause then
it's bad luck, a tragedy and Something We Need To Study Further.


But if the Indiana patients had variant CJD (vCJD) caused by something in
their environment or lifestyle like the four letter word everyone is
avoiding?

Let's just say this is why "food disparagement laws" were slapped on the
books after Oprah Winfrey "disparaged" hamburgers on her TV show in 1998. To
protect ranches, packers, big food processors and agribusiness interests
from economic collapse if their products are found to sicken and kill.

Ever wonder why the Texas and Alabama ranches that produced mad cows in 2004
and 2006 were allowed to remain anonymous? And keep doing business? The
grocery stores and restaurants in California that SERVED meat from the first
US mad cow from Washington state in 2003? Thank your state law makers.

Still trying to spin the CJD deaths--"'Mad-cow' variant not now a risk; Only
3 vCJD cases in the US were confirmed; all had links to UK beef" says an
article in Fort Wayne's Journal Gazette in June; what are they trying to
say?--is often accomplished at the price of good science.

Because only an autopsy can determine whether CJD was sporadic or variant
and two of the Indiana patients-- three of Idaho's nine--received direct
burials with no autopsy after coroners or morticians declined the bodies.

And even after autopsy, questions can remain as in the 2004 case of
49-year-old California CJD patient Patrick Hicks whose doctor was assured by
the National Prion Disease Pathology Surveillance Center (NPDPSC) in
Cleveland that his patient didn't have variant CJD without conducting the
tests specified on its own protocol.

NPDPSC spokespeople said they didn't have frozen brain tissue to conduct the
gold standard Western blot test but they knew their autopsy
contractor--1-800-AUTOPSY (sic)--lacked the ability to provide frozen tissue
when they ordered the work says the UPI.

And even if post mortem tests can find the accumulation of protease
resistant prion proteins (PrPSc) thought to signify vCJD in the
brain--converted into the infectious particles from normal prions (PrPC) in
a morbid game of tag and without a whiff of DNA say scientists--some CJD
experts question whether the diseases are even different.

So public health officials are forced to fall back on begging the question
and assuming that which they are trying to prove. The deceased patients were
too old to have vCJD, they're saying, because vCJD doesn't occur in people
that old.

Feel better?

This is the same kind of reached-the-party-to-which-we-are-speaking science
behind a Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report from the Centers for Disease
Control in 2002 about chronic wasting disease--a kind of mad deer
disease--called, "Fatal Degenerative Neurologic Illness in Men Who
Participated in Wild Game Feasts."

In the report, a patient who died of CJD was said to not have the variant
kind because the wild game he ate "did not originate from known CWD-endemic
areas." Anyone hear of the word "yet"?

But Ronele Hicks, Patrick Hicks' widow says he WASN'T too old for vCJD and
had not traveled to the UK or undergone surgical risks either.

"If it's from beef, am I next?" she asks pointing out that she and Patrick
ate the same meals for 22 years.


Martha Rosenberg is staff cartoonist for the Evanston Roundtable.


http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera ... yet_3f.htm


COMMENT TO :

Is It A Cluster Yet? Public Health Officials Have Few Answers About CJD
Cases


ATYPICAL CREUTZFELDT JAKOB DISEASE's AND ATYPICAL BSE's - sporadic,
spontaneous, or sourced ?

Date: July 22, 2007


By Terry S. Singeltary Sr.

PART 1

http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera ... yet_3f.htm

PART 2

http://www.opednews.com/articles/2/gene ... yet_3f.htm


Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 16:22:22 -0500
Reply-To: Sustainable Agriculture Network Discussion Group
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
Subject: Re: Colorado Surveillance Program for Chronic Wasting Disease
Transmission to Humans (TWO SUSPECT CASES)


http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.ex ... T=0&P=1165



TSS
 
Sounds like the chickens are coming home to roost. I just want to see how R-CALF spins this and blames Canada. How many US consumers will want US beef after finding out about this. Oh i forgot this is somehow Canadas fault. :roll: :roll:
 
skcatlman":2wkdhi1q said:
Sounds like the chickens are coming home to roost. I just want to see how R-CALF spins this and blames Canada. How many US consumers will want US beef after finding out about this. Oh i forgot this is somehow Canadas fault. :roll: :roll:

R-CALF won't have to spin nothing if vCJD happens-- the US consumer already knows from reading the newspaper reports of the bimonthly positive cows that Canada has BSE-- and the US government has told them that the US has virtually none... :???:

-----------------------------------------------

flounder-- there is just no way in the world that you can get that many local, state, and federal officials to all co-conspire to have a mass coverup like you are insinuating...

I know- I spent 30 years as a coroner and deputy coroner- working with coroners, ME Investigators, medical doctors and medical examiners from all over the country...And there are just too many of them that are like me- that don't follow the beat of any drummer- to have massive coverups thruout the country ....

Conspiracy NO WAY-- missed because of other reasons- possible...As I've stated before in most jurisdictions there is way too little money alloted to posts and death investigation- If the ME or Coroner could get a doctor to sign off on the death without having to do a Post, they many times did-- to save their budget for all the times they needed it to solve or prosecute the criminal cases... Sadly it was happening that the rising costs of the criminal work was taking up all the funding and erroding the disease prevention side of the profession...

Also- when I retired almost 10 years ago- very little was being taught or brought up in training or lectures about CJD or vCJD...Not really sure if that has changed or not..
 
Oldtimer":uwrokhj0 said:
skcatlman":uwrokhj0 said:
Sounds like the chickens are coming home to roost. I just want to see how R-CALF spins this and blames Canada. How many US consumers will want US beef after finding out about this. Oh i forgot this is somehow Canadas fault. :roll: :roll:

R-CALF won't have to spin nothing if vCJD happens-- the US consumer already knows from reading the newspaper reports of the bimonthly positive cows that Canada has BSE-- and the US government has told them that the US has virtually none... :???:


-----------------------------------------------


flounder-- there is just no way in the world that you can get that many local, state, and federal officials to all co-conspire to have a mass coverup like you are insinuating...

SNIP..



i am reminded of a few things deep throat (high ranking official at usda) told me years ago;


==========================================


The most frightening thing I have read all day is the
report of Gambetti's finding of a new strain of
sporadic cjd in young people.........Dear God, what in
the name of all that is holy is that!!!
If the US has different strains of
scrapie.....why????than the UK...then would the same
mechanisms that make different strains of scrapie here
make different strains of BSE...if the patterns are
different in sheep and mice for scrapie.....could not
the BSE be different in the cattle, in the mink, in
the humans.......I really think the slides or tissues
and everything from these young people with the new
strain of sporadic cjd should be put up to be analyzed
by many, many experts in cjd........bse.....scrapie
Scrape the damn slide and put it into
mice.....wait.....chop up the mouse brain and and
spinal cord........put into some more mice.....dammit
amplify the thing and start the damned
research.....This is NOT rocket science...we need to
use what we know and get off our butts and move....the
whining about how long everything takes.....well it
takes a whole lot longer if you whine for a year and
then start the research!!!
Not sure where I read this but it was a recent press
release or something like that:
I thought I would fall out of my chair when I read
about how there was no worry about infectivity from a
histopath slide or tissues because they are preserved
in formic acid, or formalin or formaldehyde.....for
God's sake........ Ask any pathologist in the UK what
the brain tissues in the formalin looks like after a
year.......it is a big fat sponge...the agent
continues to eat the brain ......you can't make slides
anymore because the agent has never stopped........and
the old slides that are stained with Hemolysin and
Eosin......they get holier and holier and degenerate
and continue...what you looked at 6 months ago is not
there........Gambetti better be photographing every
damned thing he is looking at.....

Okay, you need to know. You don't need to pass it on
as nothing will come of it and there is not a damned
thing anyone can do about it. Don't even hint at it
as it will be denied and laughed at..........
USDA is gonna do as little as possible until there is
actually a human case in the USA of the
nvcjd........if you want to move this thing along and
shake the earth....then we gotta get the victims
families to make sure whoever is doing the autopsy is
credible, trustworthy, and a saint with the courage of
Joan of Arc........I am not kidding!!!!
so, unless we get a human death from EXACTLY the same
form with EXACTLY the same histopath lesions as seen
in the UK nvcjd........forget any action........it is
ALL gonna be sporadic!!!

And, if there is a case.......there is gonna be every
effort to link it to international travel,
international food, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. They
will go so far as to find out if a sex partner had
ever traveled to the UK/europe, etc. etc. ....
It is gonna be a long, lonely, dangerous twisted
journey to the truth. They have all the cards, all
the money, and are willing to threaten and carry out
those threats....and this may be their biggest
downfall...

Thanks as always for your help.
(Recently had a very startling revelation from a rather senior person in
government here..........knocked me out of my chair........you must keep
pushing. If I was a power person....I would be demanding that there be a
least a million bovine tested as soon as possible and agressively
seeking this disease. The big players are coming out of the woodwork as
there is money to be made!!!
In short: "FIRE AT WILL"!!! for the very dumb....who's "will"! "Will
be the burden to bare if there is any coverup!"

again it was said years ago and it should
be taken seriously....BSE will NEVER be found in the
US!
As for the BSE conference call...I think you did a
great service to freedom of information and making
some people feign integrity...I find it scary to see
that most of the "experts" are employed by the federal
government or are supported on the "teat" of federal
funds. A scary picture!
I hope there is a confidential panel organized by the
new government to really investigate this thing.

You need to watch your back........but keep picking at
them.......like a buzzard to the bone...you just may
get to the truth!!! (You probably have more support than
you know. Too many people are afraid to show you or let
anyone else know. I have heard a few things myself...
you ask the questions that everyone else is too afraid to ask.)


==========================================


http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.ex ... =0&P=10326

http://brain.hastypastry.net/forums/arc ... -5581.html


see full text ;


http://disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?d ... on%20Group


TSS
 
Oldtimer":274bdntw said:
...And there are just too many of them that are like me- that don't follow the beat of any drummer- to have massive coverups thruout the country ....

Conspiracy NO WAY-- missed because of other reasons- possible...all the funding and erroding the disease prevention side of the profession...

Also- when I retired almost 10 years ago- very little was being taught or brought up in training or lectures about CJD or vCJD...Not really sure if that has changed or not..

I've read too much of your R-Cult propoganda to believe you have not been used as a simple mouthpiece. Your drummer plays in the R-CALF band.

No conspiracy? Watergate - JFK - BSE has more potential to cripple the US economy than either of those 2 conspiracies.

"I did not have sexual relations with that woman" - US policy seems to be "go for the lie, if you don't get caught - you win"!

And as far as claimong ignorance, " Oh, we were'nt trained for that " , those are the statements that cover a conspiracy.

Too bad we didn't all have our acts together as cattlemen on both sides of the border rather than let politicians and packers run us.

If the "doomsday" event occurrs ( CJD linked to beef ) the ONLY stance that will save us is a calm UNITED front. Telling the truth. Beef is the safest food you can buy for your family. ALL BEEF.

ALX
 
Oldtimer":276i4d1u said:
skcatlman":276i4d1u said:
Sounds like the chickens are coming home to roost. I just want to see how R-CALF spins this and blames Canada. How many US consumers will want US beef after finding out about this. Oh i forgot this is somehow Canadas fault. :roll: :roll:

R-CALF won't have to spin nothing if vCJD happens-- the US consumer already knows from reading the newspaper reports of the bimonthly positive cows that Canada has BSE-- and the US government has told them that the US has virtually none... :???:

-----------------------------------------------

flounder-- there is just no way in the world that you can get that many local, state, and federal officials to all co-conspire to have a mass coverup like you are insinuating...

I know- I spent 30 years as a coroner and deputy coroner- working with coroners, ME Investigators, medical doctors and medical examiners from all over the country...And there are just too many of them that are like me- that don't follow the beat of any drummer- to have massive coverups thruout the country ....

Conspiracy NO WAY-- missed because of other reasons- possible...As I've stated before in most jurisdictions there is way too little money alloted to posts and death investigation- If the ME or Coroner could get a doctor to sign off on the death without having to do a Post, they many times did-- to save their budget for all the times they needed it to solve or prosecute the criminal cases... Sadly it was happening that the rising costs of the criminal work was taking up all the funding and erroding the disease prevention side of the profession...

Also- when I retired almost 10 years ago- very little was being taught or brought up in training or lectures about CJD or vCJD...Not really sure if that has changed or not..




OT, sometimes i really think you believe all the BSe you put out :lol2:


but sadly, the facts speak for themselves ;


SUPPRESSING, ALTERING OR MANIPULATING EMPERICAL DATA UNDERMINING THEIR IDEOLOGICAL POSITIONS: More than 4,000 scientists – including 48 Nobel Prize winners and 127 members of the National Academy of Sciences – have accused the Bush administration of distorting and suppressing science to suit its political goals. (Shogren – Los Angeles Times 07.09.04)

A report by the Union of Concerned Scientists found that this administration has:


a well-established pattern of suppression and distortion of scientific finding by high-ranking Bush administration political appointees across numerous federal agencies. These actions have consequences for human health, public safety and community well being. Incidents involve air pollutants, heat-trapping emissions, reproductive health, drug resistant bacteria, endangered species, forest health, and military intelligence


The report also found that:


there is significant evidence that the scope and scale of the manipulation, suppression, and misrepresentation of science by the Bush administration is unprecedented.



A report by the House Committee on Government Reform – Minority Staff reaches the same conclusion, revealing examples such as the administration:



Changing education performance measures to make “abstinence-only” programs appear effect; deleting information on the efficacy and use of condoms from the Center for Disease Control web site; withholding findings on global warming and other negative impacts on wetlands and preventing any analyses on alterative environmental proposals;




using misleading data to suggest that a functioning missile defense system could be deployed quickly;




including information on the National Cancer Institute’s web site suggesting conflicting evidence on whether abortion leads to breast cancer when the scientific community has determined no such link exists; and




preventing research on agricultural practices having a “negative health [or] environmental consequences.

READ THE REPORT! http://www.house.gov/reform/min/politic ... ce_rep.pdf



Published on Friday, July 9, 2004 by the Los Angeles Times
Researchers Accuse Bush of Manipulating Science
by Elizabeth Shogren

WASHINGTON — More than 4,000 scientists, including 48 Nobel Prize winners and 127 members of the National Academy of Sciences, accused the Bush administration Thursday of distorting and suppressing science to suit its political goals.

"Across a broad range of policy areas, the administration has undermined the quality and independence of the scientific advisory system and the morale of the government's outstanding scientific personnel," the scientists said in a letter.



This administration distorts scientific knowledge on stem cell research, which makes it increasingly difficult to have an honest debate in a field that holds promise for treatment of many serious diseases like Parkinson's and juvenile diabetes.

Janet Rowley, a member of the President's Council on Bioethics
The administration has frequently been accused of misusing and ignoring science to further its policy aims. The list of signatures collected by the Union of Concerned Scientists suggests that the issue has become worrisome throughout the scientific community.

Administration officials rejected the criticism Thursday, as they did when the same letter was released in February bearing the names of 62 prominent scientists.

John Marburger, director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, said the letter and a report released simultaneously by the Union of Concerned Scientists "reach conclusions that are wrong and misleading."

"This administration values and supports science, both as a vital necessity for national security and economic strength and as an indispensable source of guidance for national policy," Marburger said.

The scientists cited examples of colleagues denied seats on advisory panels, allegedly because of their political beliefs.

Dr. Gerald T. Keusch, who left his post as associate director for international research and director of the John E. Fogarty International Center at the National Institutes of Health, said the Department of Health and Human Services had rejected 19 of his 26 candidates for the center's board over three years. Among the 19 was a Nobel laureate who, Keusch said he was told, was turned down because his name had appeared in newspaper ads accusing the administration of manipulating science.

His nominations for the board — which advises on which research should receive federal grants — were accepted during the Clinton administration. But once President Bush took office, Keusch said, they "were rejected one after another."

"There are increasing bits of evidence at attempts at control over the business of science," said Keusch, now the assistant provost for global health at Boston University Medical Center.

He said he was motivated to speak out not by "political malice," but a desire to protect the "integrity of science" at the NIH.

Among the Keusch nominees rejected by the HHS was Jane Menken, a population expert at the University of Colorado at Boulder who had served on scientific advisory boards under President Reagan and the first President Bush. "I was being renominated and I was turned down," she said. "No official ever gave me any reason."

Contrary to the Bush administration, Menken supports the availability of legal abortions. She said that given her qualifications and those of two colleagues rejected with her, one a Nobel laureate, "it's very hard not to reach a conclusion that it was based on something different from scientific qualifications."

Department spokesman Bill Pierce said the appointments to many National Institutes of Health panels were made by Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy G. Thompson, not NIH directors such as Keusch.

"I completely reject the notion" that the administration is manipulating government science to bolster its policy aims, he said. "There's no evidence."

But Janet Rowley, a member of the President's Council on Bioethics, said she had seen the misuse of science firsthand.

"This administration distorts scientific knowledge on stem cell research, which makes it increasingly difficult to have an honest debate in a field that holds promise for treatment of many serious diseases like Parkinson's and juvenile diabetes," Rowley said. She added that the administration, which opposes research with most embryonic stem cells, had exaggerated the usefulness of adult stem cells.

Richard Myers, director of the Stanford Human Genome Center, said he was rejected for a seat on the National Advisory Council for Human Genome Research after he told an administration official that it was inappropriate to ask him his opinion of Bush, according to the report compiled by the Union of Concerned Scientists. He later received the post after an NIH director interceded on his behalf.

© Copyright 2004 Los Angeles Times

###


http://www.latimes.com/news/printeditio ... -a_section


http://www.library.ca.gov/crb/SITN/2004/0449.htm#S3492


evidence of political interference

The A to Z Guide to Political Interference in Science (SEE CHART...TSS)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In recent years, scientists who work for and advise the federal government have seen their work manipulated, suppressed, distorted, while agencies have systematically limited public and policy maker access to critical scientific information. To document this abuse, the Union of Concerned Scientists has created the A to Z Guide to Political Interference in Science.


From air pollution to Ground Zero, the A to Z Guide showcases dozens of examples of the misuse of science on issues like childhood lead poisoning, toxic mercury contamination, and endangered species.

View alphabetical list
View by issue area
View timeline
View by agency/department
10,000 Scientists Speak Out
As the list of examples of political interference in science has grown, so has concern from diverse groups of Americans, from ordinary citizens to members of Congress to the nation’s leading newspapers. Particular concern comes from the scientific community, as scientists know first hand that a healthy respect for independent science has been the foundation of American prosperity and contributed greatly to our quality of life.

In 2004, 62 renowned scientists and science advisors signed a scientist statement on scientific integrity, denouncing political interference in science and calling for reform. On December 9, 2006, UCS released the names of more than 10,000 scientists of all backgrounds from all 50 states—including 52 Nobel Laureates—who have since joined their colleagues on this statement.

If you are a scientist, you can add your voice to the statement right now. And all citizens can take action on a critical scientific integrity challenging us today: the EPA’s decision to hastily close its unique network of scientific libraries. Call today and tell the EPA to stop destroying documents, selling off library equipment, and limiting access to its critical scientific collection.

The United States government bears great responsibility for keeping our environment clean and Americans healthy and safe. And while science is rarely the only factor in public policy decisions, this input should be objective and impartial.

http://www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integr ... tical.html



statement
Restoring Scientific Integrity in Policymaking

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

————
On February 18, 2004, over 60 leading scientists–Nobel laureates, leading medical experts, former federal agency directors, and university chairs and presidents–signed the statement below, voicing their concern over the misuse of science by the Bush administration. UCS is seeking the signatures of thousands of additional U.S. scientists in support of this effort.
————


Science, like any field of endeavor, relies on freedom of inquiry; and one of the hallmarks of that freedom is objectivity. Now, more than ever, on issues ranging from climate change to AIDS research to genetic engineering to food additives, government relies on the impartial perspective of science for guidance.

President George H.W. Bush, April 23, 1990



Attention Scientists


We need you to support this statement calling for an end to scientific abuse—now more than ever.

Creating meaningful reform will require the persistent and energetic engagement of the scientific community—in universities, laboratories, government agencies, and companies across the United States.

We need engineers and ecologists, physicists and physicians, psychologists and public health professionals—scientists of all disciplines.

Sign the statement today—click here.

For a sampling of prominent signatories, click here.

To search for your colleagues who are among the 12,000 plus current signers, click here.

Successful application of science has played a large part in the policies that have made the United States of America the world’s most powerful nation and its citizens increasingly prosperous and healthy. Although scientific input to the government is rarely the only factor in public policy decisions, this input should always be weighed from an objective and impartial perspective to avoid perilous consequences. Indeed, this principle has long been adhered to by presidents and administrations of both parties in forming and implementing policies. The administration of George W. Bush has, however, disregarded this principle.

When scientific knowledge has been found to be in conflict with its political goals, the administration has often manipulated the process through which science enters into its decisions. This has been done by placing people who are professionally unqualified or who have clear conflicts of interest in official posts and on scientific advisory committees; by disbanding existing advisory committees; by censoring and suppressing reports by the government’s own scientists; and by simply not seeking independent scientific advice. Other administrations have, on occasion, engaged in such practices, but not so systematically nor on so wide a front. Furthermore, in advocating policies that are not scientifically sound, the administration has sometimes misrepresented scientific knowledge and misled the public about the implications of its policies.
For example, in support of the president’s decision to avoid regulating emissions that cause climate change, the administration has consistently misrepresented the findings of the National Academy of Sciences, government scientists, and the expert community at large. Thus in June 2003, the White House demanded extensive changes in the treatment of climate change in a major report by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). To avoid issuing a scientifically indefensible report, EPA officials eviscerated the discussion of climate change and its consequences.

The administration also suppressed a study by the EPA that found that a bipartisan Senate clean air proposal would yield greater health benefits than the administration’s proposed Clear Skies Act, which the administration is portraying as an improvement of the existing Clean Air Act. "Clear Skies" would, however, be less effective in cleaning up the nation’s air and reducing mercury contamination of fish than proper enforcement of the existing Clean Air Act.

Misrepresenting and suppressing scientific knowledge for political purposes can have serious consequences. Had Richard Nixon also based his decisions on such calculations he would not have supported the Clean Air Act of 1970, which in the following 20 years prevented more than 200,000 premature deaths and millions of cases of respiratory and cardiovascular disease. Similarly, George H.W. Bush would not have supported the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 and additional benefits of comparable proportions would have been lost.

The behavior of the White House on these issues is part of a pattern that has led Russell Train, the EPA administrator under Presidents Nixon and Ford, to observe, "How radically we have moved away from regulation based on independent findings and professional analysis of scientific, health and economic data by the responsible agency to regulation controlled by the White House and driven primarily by political considerations."

Across a broad range of policy areas, the administration has undermined the quality and independence of the scientific advisory system and the morale of the government’s outstanding scientific personnel:

Highly qualified scientists have been dropped from advisory committees dealing with childhood lead poisoning, environmental and reproductive health, and drug abuse, while individuals associated with or working for industries subject to regulation have been appointed to these bodies.
Censorship and political oversight of government scientists is not restricted to the EPA, but has also occurred at the Departments of Health and Human Services, Agriculture, and Interior, when scientific findings are in conflict with the administration's policies or with the views of its political supporters.
The administration is supporting revisions to the Endangered Species Act that would greatly constrain scientific input into the process of identifying endangered species and critical habitats for their protection.
Existing scientific advisory committees to the Department of Energy on nuclear weapons, and to the State Department on arms control, have been disbanded.
In making the invalid claim that Iraq had sought to acquire aluminum tubes for uranium enrichment centrifuges, the administration disregarded the contrary assessment by experts at Livermore, Los Alamos and Oak Ridge National Laboratories.
The distortion of scientific knowledge for partisan political ends must cease if the public is to be properly informed about issues central to its well being, and the nation is to benefit fully from its heavy investment in scientific research and education. To elevate the ethic that governs the relationship between science and government, Congress and the Executive should establish legislation and regulations that would:


Forbid censorship of scientific studies unless there is a reasonable national security concern;
Require all scientists on scientific advisory panels to meet high professional standards; and
Ensure public access to government studies and the findings of scientific advisory panels.
To maintain public trust in the credibility of the scientific, engineering and medical professions, and to restore scientific integrity in the formation and implementation of public policy, we call on our colleagues to:

Bring the current situation to public attention;
Request that the government return to the ethic and code of conduct which once fostered independent and objective scientific input into policy formation; and
Advocate legislative, regulatory and administrative reforms that would ensure the acquisition and dissemination of independent and objective scientific analysis and advice.

http://www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integr ... ement.html


See a list of prominent signatories


statement
RSI Signatories
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Signers of the scientists' statement on scientific integrity include 52 Nobel laureates, 63 National Medal of Science recipients, and 195 members of the National Academies. See the entire list of signers, here.

Note: Italicized names are those of the original signers of the statement
National Medal of Science *
Nobel Laureate †
Crafoord Prize #
The National Academies ^

Andreas Acrivos * ^
City College of the City University of New York

Edward Adelberg ^
Yale University

Eric Adelberger ^
University of Washington

Peter Agre † ^
Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine

Richard M. Amasino ^
University of Wisconsin, Madison

Don L. Anderson * # ^
California Institute of Technology

Philip W. Anderson * † ^
Princeton University

Nancy C. Andreasen * ^
University of Iowa College of Medicine

John Avise ^
University of California, Irvine

Francisco J. Ayala * ^
University of California, Irvine

David Baltimore * † ^
California Institute of Technology

Guy Octo Barnett ^
Harvard University

John C. Beck ^
University of California, Los Angeles School of Medicine

Michael V.L. Bennett ^
Albert Einstein College of Medicine

Paul Berg * † ^
Stanford University School of Medicine

Robert Bergman ^
University of California, Berkeley

R. Stephen Berry ^
University of Chicago

Rosina Bierbaum
University of Michigan

Pamela Bjorkman ^
California Institute of Technology

Nicolaas Bloembergen * † ^
University of Arizona

Felix Boehm ^
California Institute of Technology

Paul D. Boyer † ^
University of California, Los Angeles

Lewis M. Branscomb ^
Harvard University

Ronald Breslow * ^
Columbia University

Robert H. Burris * ^
University of Wisconsin, Madison

Joost A. Businger ^

John Cairns, Jr. ^
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

Hampton Carson ^

David M. Ceperley ^
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign

Eric Chivian †
Harvard Medical School

Joel E. Cohen ^
The Rockefeller University

Hael D. Collins ^
Carnegie Mellon University

Eugene Commins ^
University of California, Berkeley

Eric Conn ^
University of California, Davis

Robert W. Corell
American Meteorological Society

F. Albert Cotton * ^
Texas A&M University

Ernest Courant ^
Brookhaven National Laboratory

James Cronin * † ^
University of Chicago

James Crow ^
University of Wisconsin

James E. Darnell, Jr. * ^
The Rockefeller University

Margaret Davis ^
University of Minnesota

Mark Davis ^
University of California, Berkeley

Johann Deisenhofer † ^
University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center

Robert C. DeVries ^
General Electric (Retired)

Theodor O. Diener * ^
University of Maryland

Carl Djerassi * ^
Stanford University

Paul M. Doty ^
Harvard University

Renato Dulbecco † ^
Salk Institute

Paul Ehrlich # ^
Stanford University

Herman Eisen ^
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Thomas Eisner * ^
Cornell University

S. Walter Englander ^
University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine

William K. Estes * ^
Indiana University

John B. Fenn † ^
Virginia Commonwealth University

Christopher Field ^
Carnegie Institution of Washington

Gerald D. Fischbach ^
Columbia University Medical School

Edmond Fischer † ^
University of Washington

Val L. Fitch * † ^
Princeton University

Jerry Franklin
University of Washington

Gerhart Friedlander ^
Brookhaven National Laboratory

Jerome Friedman † ^
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Mary Gaillard ^
University of California, Berkeley

Richard L. Garwin * ^
International Business Machines Corporation

Murray Gell-Mann † ^
Santa Fe Institute

George Georgiou ^
University of Texas

John H. Gibbons ^
Former Science Advisor to the President

Walter Gilbert † ^
Harvard University

Donald A. Glaser † ^
University of California, Berkeley

Sheldon L. Glashow † ^
Boston University

Peter H. Gleick ^
Pacific Institute for Studies in Development, Environment, and Security

Marvin L. Goldberger ^
California Institute of Technology

Lynn R. Goldman
John Hopkins School of Public Health

Peter Goldreich * ^
Institute for Advanced Study

Roy Gordon ^
Harvard University

Kurt Gottfried
Cornell University

William Greenough ^
University of Illinois

David Grimes
University of North Carolina School of Medicine

Charles Gross ^
Princeton University

William Gross ^
University of New Mexico Engineering School

Keith Gubbins ^
North Carolina State University

Roger Guillemin * † ^
Salk Institute

Robert Hall ^
General Electric (Retired)



Henry C. Harpending ^
University of Utah

Richard Havel ^
University of California, San Francisco

Hans Herren ^
Millenium Institute

Dudley Herschbach * † ^
Harvard University

Joseph Hoffman ^
Yale Medical School, Yale University

Paul F. Hoffman ^
Harvard University

Roald Hoffmann * † ^
Cornell University

John P. Holdren ^
Harvard University

Norman Horowitz ^
California Institute of Technology

H. Robert Horvitz † ^
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

David H. Hubel † ^
Harvard University

John Huchra ^
Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics

J. David Jackson ^
University of California, Berkeley

Daniel H. Janzen # ^
University of Pennsylvania

Leo P. Kadanoff * ^
University of Chicago

Eric R. Kandel * † ^
Columbia University

Anne Kapuscinski
University of Minnesota

Jack Keller ^
Keller Bliesner Eng. LLC and Utah State Univ.

Kenneth H. Keller ^
University of Minnesota

Wolfgang Ketterle ^
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Gerald T. Keusch ^
Boston University

Daniel Kleppner ^
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Walter Kohn * † ^
University of California, Santa Barbara

Arthur Kornberg * † ^
Stanford University School of Medicine

Lawrence Krauss
Case Western Reserve University

Herbert Kroemer † ^
University of California, Santa Barbara

Neal F. Lane
Former Science Advisor to the President

Robert B. Laughlin † ^
Stanford University

Alexander Leaf ^
Harvard Medical School

Leon M. Lederman * † ^
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory

David M. Lee † ^
Cornell University

Anthony Leggett † ^
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign

Sidney Leibovich ^
Cornell University

Simon Levin ^
Princeton University

Gene Likens * ^
Institute of Ecosystem Studies

William Lipscomb † ^
Harvard University

Barbara Liskov ^
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

George Lorimer ^
University of Maryland


Jane Lubchenco ^
Oregon State University

Michael C. MacCracken
International Association of Meteorology and Atmospheric Sciences

Thomas F. Malone ^
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Geoffrey W. Marcy ^
University of California, Berkeley


Lynn Margulis * ^
University of Massachusetts

Paul A. Marks * ^
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

Douglas S. Massey ^
Princeton University

James J. McCarthy
Harvard University

Harden M. McConnell * ^
Stanford University

Jerry M. Melillo
Woods Hole Research Center

N. David Mermin ^
Cornell University

Matthew S. Meselson ^
Harvard University

David Michaels
George Washington University

Charles D. Michener ^
University of Kansas

Mario Molina † ^
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

James Morgan ^
California Institute of Technology

Walter H. Munk * ^
University of California, San Diego

Joseph E. Murray † ^
Harvard Medical School

Herbert L. Needleman ^
University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine

Louis Nirenberg * # ^
New York University

Marshall Nirenberg * † ^
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute

Michael Oppenheimer
Princeton University

Gordon Orians ^
University of Washington

Douglas D. Osheroff † ^
Stanford University

Jeremiah P. Ostriker * ^
Princeton University

George E. Palade * † ^
University of California, San Diego

W.K.H. Panofsky * ^
Stanford University

Eugene N. Parker * ^
University of Chicago

Fabian W. Pease ^
Stanford University

David Perkins ^
Stanford University

Martin L. Perl † ^
Stanford University

Thomas D. Petes ^
Duke University

Gregory Petsko ^
Brandeis University

Norman Phillips ^
National Weather Service

Stuart Pimm
Duke University

David Politzer †
California Institute of Technology

Robert V. Pound * ^
Harvard University

Ron Pulliam
University of Georgia

Norman F. Ramsey * † ^
Harvard University

Stuart A. Rice * ^
University of Chicago

Anthony Robbins
Tufts University School of Medicine

John D. Roberts * ^
California Institute of Technology

Wendell L. Roelofs * ^
Cornell University

Allan Rosenfield
Columbia University School of Public Health

John Ross * ^
Stanford University

F. Sherwood Rowland † ^
University of California, Irvine

Janet D. Rowley * ^
University of Chicago Medical Center

Gordon Roy ^
Harvard University

Vera Rubin * ^
Carnegie Institution of Washington

Eli Ruckenstein * ^
State University of New York at Buffalo

Liane Russell ^
Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Jerome L. Sackman ^
University of California at Berkeley

Edwin E. Salpeter # ^
Cornell University

Allan Sandage * #
The Observatories of the Carnegie Institution of Washington

William Schlesinger ^
Duke University

William F. Schreiber ^
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

J. Robert Schrieffer * † ^
National High Magnetic Field Laboratory

Richard Schrock † ^
Massachusetts Institute of Technology


Dr. Steven A. Schroeder ^
University of California, San Francisco

Albert Schultz ^
University of Michigan

Seymour I. Schwartz ^
University of California

Dana S. Scott ^
Carnegie Mellon University

Andrew Sessler ^
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

Roger N. Shepard * ^
Stanford University

Robert Silbey ^
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Richard Smalley † ^
Rice University

Franklin Stahl ^
University of Oregon

Jack Steinberger * † ^
European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN)

Joan A. Steitz * ^
Yale University School of Medicine

Felicia Stewart
University of California, San Francisco

Albert James Stunkard ^
University of Pennlsylvania

Henry Taube * † ^
Stanford University

Saul Teukolsky ^
Cornell University

E. Donnall Thomas * † ^
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center

William Thurston ^
Cornell University

George Tilton ^
University of California, Santa Barbara

Kevin Trenberth
National Center for Atmospheric Research

Myron Tribus ^
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

George Trilling ^
University of California, Berkeley

Daniel Tsui † ^
Princeton University

Harold E. Varmus * † ^
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

Gerald J. Wasserburg # ^
California Institute of Technology

Robert A. Weinberg * ^
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Steven Weinberg * † ^
University of Texas, Austin

Zena Werb ^
University of California

Frank H. Westheimer * ^
Harvard University

Gilbert F. White * ^
University of Colorado

Jennifer Widom ^
Stanford University

Eric Wieschaus † ^
Princeton University

Frank Wilczek † ^
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

E.O. Wilson * # ^
Harvard University

Elizabeth Wing ^
Florida Museum of Natural History

Edward Witten * ^
Institute for Advanced Study

Lincoln Wolfenstein ^
Carnegie Mellon University

George M. Woodwell ^
Woods Hole Research Center

Donald Wuebbles
University of Illinois

Keith Yamamoto ^
University of California, San Francisco

Charles Yanofsky ^*
Stanford University

Herbert F. York
University of California, San Diego

Bruno Zumino ^
University of California, Berkeley


http://www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integr ... ories.html


On December 9, 2006, UCS released the names of more than 10,000 scientists of all backgrounds from all 50 states—including 52 Nobel Laureates—who have since joined their colleagues on this statement.


http://go.ucsusa.org/RSI_list/


Terry S. Singeltary Sr.

Agencies slow in responding to FOIA requests
From: Terry S. Singeltary Sr.
Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 10:03:09 -0500

http://lists.ifas.ufl.edu/cgi-bin/wa.ex ... T=0&P=2679
 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change.
Questions linger in U.S. CJD cases

Published: Oct. 19, 2005 at 8:37 PM E-mail Story | Print Preview | License

By STEVE MITCHELL

Senior Medical Correspondent

WASHINGTON, Oct. 19 (UPI) -- French researchers have ruled out the human form of mad cow disease in a deceased California man, even though they did not conduct the critical test widely regarded as the only way to determine precisely the nature of his disease, United Press International has learned.

The case of Patrick Hicks, who died last November from his condition, has remained murky from the beginning. Dr. Ron Bailey, of Riverside, Calif., the man's neurologist, had suspected the 49-year-old Hicks of having contracted variant Creutzfeldt Jakob disease -- a fatal, brain-wasting illness humans can contract from eating beef products contaminated with the mad cow pathogen -- and both he and the family wanted an autopsy conducted to determine if Hicks had succumbed to the disorder.

Bailey became concerned that Hicks might have contracted vCJD because he initially had exhibited psychiatric symptoms, his illness appears to have lasted for more than one year and he showed normal brain-wave patterns via EEGs until the late stages -- all consistent with the disease. In addition, Hicks's relatively young age raised concerns, because nearly all of the more than 150 cases of vCJD detected worldwide have occurred in people under age 55.

The first hint of oddness began when, according to both Hicks's brother and mother, a team of six doctors, who they suspect were with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, visited Patrick last October while he was still alive and under care at Loma Linda University Medical Center in Loma Linda, Calif.

They said they were asked to leave when the doctors arrived to examine Patrick.

CDC officials would not confirm to UPI whether they had investigated the case, but the agency's policy does require examining all suspected cases of vCJD in anyone under 55.

The family also said Loma Linda refused to released Hicks's medical records to them.

The oddities continued after Hicks's death. Bailey found it almost impossible to get an autopsy conducted on Hicks, the only way to determine conclusively whether he had variant or sporadic CJD -- a version of the disease not related to mad cow. One county coroner's office referred him to another and both refused to conduct the procedure, he said.

Then, the National Prion Disease Pathology Surveillance Center in Cleveland, Ohio -- which was established by the CDC to investigate potential vCJD cases in the United States -- dispatched a mobile autopsy company called 1-800-Autopsy, but the company failed to follow the center's protocol and did not collect frozen sections of brain, which are required for tests to determine whether the disease is vCJD or sCJD. Instead, the autopsy company fixed the entire brain in formalin.

The NPDPSC, however, considers the collection of frozen brain tissue essential to distinguishing vCJD from other forms of CJD.

"Only frozen brain tissue examination definitely confirms or excludes the diagnosis of prion disease and provides the information to identify the type of prion disease," the center's Web site says. Prions are abnormal proteins thought to play a role in causing vCJD and sCJD.

The problem raised enough concern that both Bailey and Hicks's family sought a second opinion.

Experts had told them that animal-injection studies could be done with formalin-fixed tissue, so the family arranged to have a sample of Patrick's brain sent to Dr. Jean Jacques Hauw at the Laboratoire De Neuropathologie at the Groupe Hospitalier Pitie-Salpetriere in Paris, who they thought had agreed to do the studies.

The NPDPSC, however, delayed sending the sample to France for two months after the family's request last March. During the delay, Pierluigi Gambetti, the NPDPSC's director, sent a letter to Hicks's wife.

"We can definitely rule out the diagnosis of variant CJD," the letter stated.

Gambetti's strong conclusion sounded strange to Bailey, because the NPDPSC had not conducted further tests since January, when they had said vCJD was unlikely but that they were unable to rule it out entirely.

After examining the brain tissue, Hauw's team told the family the disease was consistent with sCJD, but to date they have not explained why they did not conduct the animal-injection studies -- the family's reason for sending samples of his brain to France.

Asked the reasons for not following the family's wishes and conducting the animal studies, Hauw told UPI, "I cannot answer your question," citing French regulations that prohibited him from providing information about a specific patient.

He did say, however, that "animal injection is not needed for the routine diagnosis of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease and its various variants, at least in France and in the United Kingdom."

That may be true, but it remains unclear why he accepted the case in the first place, knowing that is what the family wanted.

Moreover, this was not a "routine diagnosis." If Hicks suffered from vCJD, he potentially would have been the first person in the United States to have acquired the disease domestically, a development with significant domestic and international ramifications.

In addition, other experts, such as Dr. Laura Manuelidis, section chief of surgery in the neuropathology department at Yale University, have said the only way to know conclusively whether the disease is due to sCJD or vCJD is through animal-injection studies.

"From what I gather, the result was merely rubber stamped," Bailey told UPI. "I guess we will never really know for sure."

The handling of the case is noteworthy, because the NPDPSC currently is investigating nine potential sCJD cases in Idaho. Experts suspect some of those cases could be vCJD.

Bailey and some patient advocates said they are now skeptical of the NPDPSC's behavior.

"How could my experience with the Hicks case ... and the interaction with NPDPSC not lessen my confidence?" Bailey asked. "I anticipate that all of the Idaho cluster of CJD patients will turn out to have sCJD. I cannot for a minute see their results indicating anything but this. After all, if any patient were to have vCJD, it would have been Patrick Hicks. The results of NPDPSC are not definitive in excluding Hicks as not having vCJD. There certainly will always be that question in my mind."

Terry Singletary, a patient advocate whose mother died of a form of the disease called Heidenhain variant, told UPI he likewise had lost confidence in the NPDPSC.

"I do not trust them," Singletary said. "It's all going to be sporadic. This is the way they want it. They do not want to find out all the routes and sources of this agent."

Both vCJD and mad cow disease are politically sensitive issues because they can impact international trade. Dozens of nations closed their borders to American beef after a lone U.S. cow tested positive for the disease in 2003, resulting in more than $4.7 billion in losses for the industry, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture delayed doing confirmatory tests for seven months on what turned out to be a second case of mad cow.

The NPDPSC did not respond to UPI's phone call requesting comment about the Idaho cases. The CDC referred UPI to Idaho officials.

Of the nine Idaho cases, three people have tested positive for a CJD-like illness, but officials are conducting further tests to determine whether the disease is sCJD. Two others tested negative and four were buried without autopsies.

The cases could just be a statistical fluke, but the state averages about 1.2 sCJD cases per year and has never had more than three in a single year. The disease is rare and generally is thought to occur at the rate of one case per million people.

Several CJD clusters in other states have far exceeded that rate, however. These included:


--southern New Jersey (2000-2003),

--Lehigh, Pa. (1986-90),

--Allentown, Pa. (1989-92),

--Tampa, Fla. (1996-97),

--Oregon (2001-02), and

--Nassau County, N.Y. (1999-2000).


Some of the clusters involved as many as 18 deaths, and ranged from a rate of four to eight cases per million people.

A group of J.P. Morgan analysts issued an advisory last year on the impact the clusters could have on the beef industry, and said that some of the cases could be due to vCJD.

"The existence of clusters raises the question of 'contamination' or 'infection,' and also raises the hypothesis that rather than cases of sCJD, these might have been cases of vCJD," the advisory said. "Given that sCJD occurs randomly in one out of 1 million cases, it is a statistical rarity to find an sCJD cluster -- let alone six."

If that assessment is accurate, another cluster in Idaho would be even more unlikely.

Another possibility is some of the Idaho cases could be due to chronic wasting disease, which is similar to mad cow disease and currently is epidemic among deer and elk in several states, including Idaho's neighbors Wyoming and Utah.

No human cases of CWD have ever been confirmed, but the disease has been shown to infect human cells in a lab dish. Also, a team of researchers led by Jason Bartz of Creighton University in Omaha, Neb., report in the November issue of the Journal of Virology they had experimentally transmitted CWD to squirrel monkeys --the first reported transmission of CWD to primates.

If CWD is capable of infecting humans, it is unknown whether the resulting disease would resemble sCJD, vCJD or a novel disorder. If the disease looks like sCJD, cases could be going undetected or misdiagnosed.




E-mail: [email protected]





http://www.upi.com/HealthBusiness/view. ... 0103-6576r




NIH may destroy human brain collection


By Steve Mitchell
Medical Correspondent

Washington, DC, Mar. 24 (UPI) -- The National Institutes of Health may discard part or all of a rare collection that includes hundreds of human brain samples from patients that suffered from a disorder similar to mad cow disease -- unless another researcher or institution takes them on, United Press International has learned.

Several scientists said the collection, which is held by the NIH's National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke in Bethesda, Md. -- and includes brains and other tissue samples from people afflicted with the brain-wasting illness Creutzfeldt Jakob disease -- is irreplaceable and could even provide insight into treatments for the fatal disorder. Currently, there is no cure for CJD and patients typically die within a year after symptoms begin.

However, NIH officials in control of the collection's fate told UPI the remaining samples are of little scientific value and may be disposed of if researchers outside the agency do not claim it. That position stands in sharp contrast with CJD experts who thought the collection should be preserved.

"It's invaluable," said Dr. Paul Brown, former medical director of the NIH's Laboratory for Central Nervous System Studies, whose expertise is in CJD and mad cow disease (also known as bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or BSE).

The collection is badly in need of organization and no one is certain how many brains or other tissue samples it contains, said Brown, who worked with the collection since its inception in the 1960's until his retirement last year. There could be brains, blood, spinal fluid and various other tissues from 1,000 people or more, he said. Some of the specimens would be of scientific use today, he said.

"This collection has the unique value of stretching back to the beginning of when these diseases were discovered," Brown told UPI, noting that the first samples were obtained in 1963. "It would be as though you had in your hands the possibility of finding out when AIDS started."

Bruce Johnson, a former technician at the CNSS lab who worked extensively with the collection before he retired in 2003, told UPI he was told "in two years they (NIH officials)are going to destroy it, if nobody wants it."

Eugene Major, acting director of the basic neuroscience program at the NIH, said no specific timeframe had been established.

"We have not set a firm deadline date," Major told UPI. "We are working very hard with investigators that we know in order to be able to make sure that whatever we deem is valuable is potentially kept here." Some samples already have been determined not to have any research value and have been "removed and disposed of," he said.

Others samples have been given out to Dr. David Asher at the Food and Drug Administration and Pierluigi Gambetti at the National Prion Disease Pathology Surveillance Center in Cleveland, Ohio.

Major maintained the remaining collection was not particularly valuable for research. "Whatever had been collected here that has not already been distributed to responsible investigators who could use them really has very little remaining value," he said.

Neither Asher nor Gambetti returned phone calls from UPI, but Brown said he thought Asher had received only a dozen or two samples at most and Gambetti had not received much at all.

Neil Cashman, a brain-disease researcher at the University of Toronto's Center for Research in Neurodegenerative Diseases -- who has tried to obtain the collection from the NIH -- said it was priceless.

"It would be like destroying an art museum," Cashman told UPI. "There's all this information and insight that's locked up in these tissues and if it's destroyed it will be lost forever."

The Memorial Institute for Neurodegenerative Diseases Inc., a non-profit organization consisting of more than 40 university and institute researchers from the United States, Canada, United Kingdom and France, also thinks the brain collection is invaluable.

"It is the opinion of the Board of Directors ... of The MIND Inc., that the ... brain bank should not be broken up nor destroyed," said Harry E. Peery, MIND's executive director, in a letter to UPI. "We believe that this collection is of inestimable research value and should be kept intact."

The institute, at the University of Saskatchewan in Saskatoon, applied for possession of the collection in early 2004, but received a letter from the NINDS indicating the fate of the collection had not yet been determined.

"We have heard nothing further since that time" and continue to be interested in acquiring the complete collection, Peery said.

CJD belongs to a group of rare, brain-wasting disorders that are little understood, incurable and fatal. This includes mad cow disease in cows, chronic wasting disease in deer and elk. The most infamous of these illnesses in humans is variant CJD, which people can contract from eating beef products infected with the mad-cow pathogen.

Although vCJD has infected more than 154 people worldwide, only one case has ever been detected in the United States -- in a Florida woman who is thought to have contracted the disease while living in the United Kingdom. However, the NIH brain samples have never been screened for vCJD -- something Johnson thinks is critically important.

"No one has ever looked to see if any American (in the collection) in the past had variant CJD," Johnson said. "You think it would be required that they do that. You think it would be a Congressional mandate that they test these brains: 'Let's see if we've got this disease in our country.'"

Johnson noted at least one brain in the collection he personally had examined -- from a French woman collected in 1971 -- showed evidence of possible vCJD infection, but the sample needed further study to be sure.

Other samples in the collection include the brains of patients who were only 16 years old when they were diagnosed with CJD. This would be unusual for sporadic CJD, because generally it strikes those over age 60. Variant CJD, on the other hand, typically occurs in patients in their 20s or younger.

"I thought it was absolutely vital (to test these brains)," Johnson said. "Maybe there's a dozen cases in there of variant CJD."

Major disagreed. "There's really no reason to do that," he said. "The effort it would take to screen those samples ... would not give us any new insights into variant CJD beyond what it is we already know."

Johnson said he was frustrated with the NIH administration's lack of interest in preserving the collection or testing for vCJD. "They don't understand," he said, "they honest-to-god don't understand what it's all about."

Patient advocates also objected to the possible destruction of the brains.

Terry Singeltary, whose mother died of a type of CJD called Heidenhain variant in 1997, said he is outraged and families of other CJD victims probably will be, too.

"A lot of these families went through a lot of heartache and a lot of trouble to get these brain samples to the NIH," Singeltary told UPI. "Now they're just going to discard them because they're not of scientific use? That's just asinine. That stuff is valuable information."

Graham Steel, vice-chair of the Human BSE Foundation in the United Kingdom, told UPI, "The potential loss of such important tissue samples would be a massive blow for TSE (the group of diseases that includes CJD and BSE) research in the United States. This should not be allowed to happen."

Singeltary noted there currently is no cure for these diseases. "If you don't have any answers yet, why would you throw these specimens away?" he asked.

He added that more sensitive tests are just becoming available and could help determine the origin of some of the CJD cases. "We've all been sitting around waiting for more sensitive tests to get validated because we want answers," he said.

"You know, it must be an embarrassment," Johnson said. "Some Senator is going to eventually say 'What is NIH doing about mad cow disease?' And people are going to scratch their heads and say 'not much'." He added, "What's going to happen (is) one of these senators or their wife is going to develop spontaneous CJD one day and ... there's going to be hell raised and they're going to ask, 'Why isn't NIH working on this?'"

--


E-mail [email protected]



http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breaking/2 ... -8481r.htm




NIH sends mixed signals on CJD brains


By Steve Mitchell
Medical Correspondent


Washington, DC, Apr. 7 (UPI) -- A National Institutes of Health official who told United Press International the agency might destroy its collection of brains from human patients afflicted with a condition similar to mad cow disease reportedly has told the head of a patient-advocate group the collection would be preserved.


The official, Eugene Major, acting director of the basic neuroscience program at the NIH, has not responded to e-mail or a phone call from UPI seeking clarification of his remarks, and the official status of the collection remains unknown.

As reported by UPI on March 24, the collection is stored in freezers by the NIH's National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke in Bethesda, Md. It contains brains and other tissue samples from hundreds of people who died from the brain-wasting illness Creutzfeldt Jakob disease, as well as tissues from an untold number of experimental animals.

The consensus of scientists in this field is the collection, which dates back to 1963, is invaluable for research and could even provide insight into treatments for the fatal disorder. Currently, there is no cure for CJD and patients typically die within a year after symptoms begin.

Florence Kranitz, president of the non-profit advocacy group CJD Foundation, told UPI she had "a very long conversation" with Major, in which he told her the remaining tissues in the collection would not be destroyed.

"He reassured me in no uncertain terms," Kranitz said, noting constituents of the foundation and other CJD advocacy groups had been expressing concerns to her the tissues would be destroyed.

Kranitz, who has personal reasons for wanting the collection preserved -- her husband died of CJD in 2000 -- said she plans to meet with Major at the end of April to discuss the issue further.

CJD belongs to a group of diseases collectively known as transmissible spongiform encephalopathies, or TSEs, that includes mad cow disease in cows, chronic wasting disease in deer and elk, and scrapie in sheep. All TSEs are incurable and fatal.

Major previously told UPI some samples already have been destroyed and others have been given to researchers at the Food and Drug Administration and the National Prion Disease Pathology Surveillance Center in Cleveland.

Major said the remaining collection "has very little remaining value" and could be destroyed if another entity does not claim them.

Bruce Johnson, a former NIH scientist who retired at the end of 2003, said he had been told the collection would be destroyed in two years if no one took the samples from the NIH.

In response to hearing that Major had failed to confirm to UPI the brain collection would not be destroyed, Patricia Ewanitz, who lives in Port Jefferson Station, N.Y., and is founder of the advocacy group CJD Voice, said, "The brain tissue might not be indispensable to the National Institutes of Health but it is absolutely necessary to the families who thought enough of science to donate the brains, brain tissue and blood in hopes of someday finding an answer to why their loved one died."

Ewanitz, whose husband died of CJD in 1997, added, "It now seems like such a joke."

Terry Singeltary, whose mother passed away from a type of CJD in 1997, said the NIH should use the samples for scientific research, not just store them in freezers.

Both Singeltary and Ewanitz said they would feel more reassured if Major verified in writing the collection will not be destroyed.

"I would go further and ask Major what he plans to do with them," Singeltary said. "If the samples are just going to sit up there and go bad, then they should give them out to researchers looking for cause and cure."

The revelation the NIH might destroy part or all of the collection sparked an outcry from patient advocates, consumer groups and scientists.

Advocates have been contacting their members of Congress, urging them to investigate and prevent the NIH from destroying the brains. Consumer groups also have gotten involved and scientists have taken steps to obtain the collection or have urged Major not to destroy the samples.

Felicia Nestor, who serves as a consultant to Public Citizen, told UPI she had contacted certain legislators and at least one was considering looking into the situation. Nestor asked the legislator's name be withheld.

Kranitz said Major also told her he plans "to advertise in professional neurological journals and by whatever means necessary to make it known" to researchers in the field the tissues are available.

Major previously said, however, that efforts to inform researchers of the availability of the collection were already underway and included informing NIH grantees. He added he had personally notified researchers at scientific meetings, but no TSE researcher contacted by UPI was aware of this.

"I was never informed," said Laura Manuelidis, an expert on these diseases and section chief of surgery in the neuropathology department at Yale University. She said the first she had heard of the situation was in UPI's March 24 report.

Manuelidis also said she contacted Major, expressing interest in the specimens, but so far has not received a response.

"I sent a letter to (Major) on (March 25) about our interest in these specimens, but he has not replied," she told UPI in an e-mail.

Neil Cashman, a TSE expert at the University of Toronto, who said he was not aware the samples might be destroyed, has lobbied colleagues at the University of British Columbia -- where Cashman is scheduled to move to this summer -- to help draft a letter requesting the collection.

The Memorial Institute for Neurodegenerative Diseases Inc., a non-profit organization consisting of more than 40 university and institute researchers from the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom and France, requested the collection in January, 2004. So far, the institute has not been informed of a decision by the NIH.

Asked if Major had told him whether the collection would be preserved, MIND Executive Director Harry Peery said, "We have heard nothing further from Eugene Major or anyone else at the NIH regarding the brain collection."

--

E-mail: [email protected]



http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking ... -2570r.htm




=====================



JOHN CORNYN
TEXAS
UNITED STATES SENATE
WASHINGTON, DC 20510-4305
April 26,2005
Mr. Terry Singeltary
P.O. Box 42
Bacliff, Texas 77518
Dear Mr. Singeltary:
In response to your recent request for my assistance, I have contacted the National Institutes ofHealth. I will write you again as soon as I receive a reply.
I appreciate having the opportunity to represent you in the United States Senate and to be of service in this matter.
Sincerely,

JOHN CORNYN
United States Senator
JC:djl


===============

JOHN CORNYN

TEXAS

UNITED STATES SENATE

WASHINGTON, DC 20510-4305

May 18,2005

Mr. Terry SingeltaryP.O. Box 42Bacliff, Texas 77518

Dear Mr. Singeltary:

Enclosed is the reply I received from the Department of Health and Human Services in
response to my earlier inquiry on your behalf. I hope this will be useful to you.
I appreciate having the opportunity to represent you in the United States Senate.

Thank you for taking time to contact me.

Sincerely,

JOHN CORNYN
United States Senate
JC:djl
Enclosure

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES
National Institutes of HealthNational Institute of NeurologicalDisorders and Stroke
NINDS
Building 31, Room 8A52
31 Center Dr., MSC 2540
Bethesda, Maryland 20892-2540
Phone: 301-496-9746
Fax: 301-496-0296
Email: [log in to unmask]


May 10, 2005


The Honorable John Cornyn
United States Senator
Occidental Tower5005 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1150
Dallas, Texas 75244-6199


Dear Senator Cornyn:


Your letter to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) forwarding correspondence from Mr. Terry S. Singeltary, Sr., has been forwarded to me for reply. Mr. Singeltary is concerned about thepreservation of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) brain samples that have been maintained by theNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) Intramural Research programfor many years.

I am sorry to learn that Mr. Singeltary's mother died of CJD and can certainly understand hisdesire that any tissues that could help investigators unravel the puzzle of this deadly disease arepreserved. I hope he will be pleased to learn that all the brains and other tissues with potential tohelp scientists learn about CJD are, and will continue to be, conserved. (The tissues that arediscarded are those that have either decayed to an extent that renders them no longer appropriatefor research or those for which we do not have sufficient identification.)

The purpose of gathering these brains and tissues is to help scientists learn about CJD. To that end, some of the NINDS-held samples are distributed to investigators who can demonstrate thatthey have a compelling research or public health need for such materials. For example, sampleshave been transferred to NIH grantee Dr. Pierluigi Gambetti, who heads the National PrionDiseases Pathology Surveillance Center at Case Western Reserve University in Ohio and workswith the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to monitor all cases of CJD in the UnitedStates. Dr. Gambetti studies the tissues to learn about the formation, physical and chemicalproperties, and pathogenic mechanisms of prion proteins, which are believed to be involved inthe cause of CJD. Samples have also been transferred to Dr. David Asher, at the U.S. Food andDrug Administration, for use in assessing a potential diagnostic test for CJD.


Page 2 - The Honorable John Cornyn


in closing, we know that donating organs and tissue from loved ones is a very difficult andpersonal choice that must often be made at the most stressful of times. We at the NINDS aregrateful to those stalwart family members who make this choice in the selfless hope that it willhelp others afflicted with CJD. We also know the invaluable contribution such donations maketo the advancement of medical science, and we are dedicated to the preservation of all of thetissue samples that can help in our efforts to overcome CJD.


I hope this information is helpful to you in responding to Mr. Singeltary.
Sincerely,

Story C. Landis, Ph.D.
Director, National Institute ofNeurological Disorders and Stroke



==================================



NIH says it will preserve CJD brains
By STEVE MITCHELL

WASHINGTON, May 31 (UPI) -- The National Institutes of Health apparently has reversed its position on the fate of an invaluable collection of brains from people afflicted with a condition similar to mad cow disease, saying in a letter to a U.S. senator it will not destroy the collection.

An NIH official had told United Press International previously that the brain collection, which consists of samples from hundreds of people who died from the brain-wasting illness called Creutzfeldt Jakob disease, could be discarded if another entity does not claim them.

That sparked an outcry from patient-advocacy groups, consumer watchdogs and scientists, and the agency now appears to have backed away from that course.

"All the brains and other tissues with potential to help scientists learn about CJD are, and will continue to be, conserved," Story Landis, director of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, which oversees the brain collection, wrote in a May 10 letter to Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas.

Cornyn had inquired about the status of the collection in April.

Last March, Eugene Major, acting director of the basic neuroscience program at the NIH, told UPI the useful portions of the collection had been doled out to scientists and the remaining samples had "very little remaining value" and could be destroyed.

Landis could not be reached for comment Tuesday. NINDS spokesman Paul Girolami told UPI he had been unable to locate her.

Scientists think the collection, which dates back to 1963, is invaluable for research on CJD and similar diseases and could even provide insight into treatments. There is no cure for CJD and patients typically die within a year after symptoms begin.

"Absolutely, the collection is worth keeping," Bruce Johnson, a former NIH scientist who said he had been told the collection would be destroyed in two years if no one took the samples from the agency, told UPI.

The Memorial Institute for Neurodegenerative Diseases Inc., a non-profit organization consisting of more than 40 researchers from several countries, offered to take the collection off of NIH's hands more than a year ago and so far has not heard anything from the agency, Harry Peery, MIND's executive director, told UPI.

CJD belongs to a group of incurable and fatal diseases collectively known as transmissible spongiform encephalopathies, or TSEs, that includes mad cow disease in cows, chronic wasting disease in deer and elk, and scrapie in sheep.

Variant CJD, or vCJD, is a relatively new TSE, which people can contract from consuming beef products infected with the mad cow pathogen.

Despite Landis' assurance the collection will be preserved, some family members of the patients who donated their brains to the NIH are still skeptical. This is because the wording Landis used in the letter leaves open the possibility that some brain samples are being destroyed.

"The tissues that are discarded are those that have either decayed to an extent that renders them no longer appropriate for research or those for which we do not have sufficient identification," Landis wrote.

"Which ones" are being destroyed? asked Terry Singeltary, who is involved with several CJD patient groups.

"With a system like this, they could destroy whatever and whenever they wanted, for whatever reason they wanted," Singeltary, whose mother died of CJD in 1997, told UPI.

"It's a perfect excuse to discard some suspicious tissue resembling vCJD or some atypical TSE related to animal TSEs in the USA," he added.

Although the collection includes samples from CJD patients as young as 16 that could make them candidates for possible vCJD, the brains have never been screened for evidence of the disease. The only confirmed vCJD case in the United States occurred in a Florida woman who is thought to have contracted the disease in England.

Johnson said he along with renowned CJD expert Paul Brown were in the process of sorting through the samples to match them up with patient identification documents until they both retired. Some of the samples may prove impossible to identify, he said, but he and Brown are the only ones familiar enough with the collection to organize it and neither has been asked back by the agency to aid in the identification process.

Steve Mitchell is UPI's Medical Correspondent. E-mail: [log in to unmask]

Copyright 2005 by United Press International. All Rights Reserved.


http://washingtontimes.com/


http://www.sciencedaily.com/
 

Latest posts

Back
Top