Does Bush know 1 in 3 people in the western world develop
cancer at some
time in their lives?
Jacqueline
richard bensinger writes:
>
>
>
> From: richard bensinger <lenben_at_YAHOO.COM>
Date: Fri Mar 31 2006 -
> 11:53:22 EST
>
>
>
>
> More money for Iraq and Halliburton - yes? Cancer
funding faces $40
> million cut By Jonathan D. Rockoff Sun reporter
Originally
> published March 30, 2006 WASHINGTON // Facing the
deepest cut in
> federal research funding in a generation, cancer
scientists and their
> supporters are mounting a last-minute lobbying push in
Congress to
> reverse President Bush's proposed $40 million
reduction. The effort
> recently won a significant victory in the Senate, which
passed two
> measures calling for more health spending. One bill,
co-sponsored by
> Democratic Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski of Maryland, would
increase
> federal funding of cancer research by $245 million.
But
> the push, which has involved cancer groups quietly
buttonholing White
> House and congressional leaders and mobilizing tens of
thousands of
> supporters across the country, faces uncertain
prospects in a tight
> fiscal climate. The House Budget Committee, which
traditionally hews
> closely to the president's plan, began deliberating
yesterday. "I
> can't recall a time when more frustration and
depression has set in
> among cancer researchers, oncologists and drug
researchers than right
> now," said Dr. William N. Hait, president-elect
of the American
> Association for Cancer Research and director of the
Cancer Institute
> of New Jersey. Bush has proposed cutting the budget of
the National
> Cancer Institute, the federal agency that funds much of
the cancer
> research in the United States, to $4.75 billion from
$4.79 billion.
> The reduction, the agency says, would be the first in
consecutive
> years since the early 1980s, the last time the cancer
institute's
> budget was cut. Bush administration officials, noting
that there is
> no cancer in the Bush family, call the proposed cuts
difficult but
> necessary, given competing priorities such as preparing
for a possible
> bird flu pandemic and guarding against bioterrorism.
Overall, they
> emphasized, funding for the National Institutes of
Health would remain
> level. "We had to make hard choices - hard
choices about very well-
> intentioned programs," Health and Human Services
Secretary Michael O.
> Leavitt said. The cuts would be strongly felt at Johns
Hopkins
> University and other leading research institutions.
Spending on
> research grants would be trimmed by more than 2
percent, budget
> projections indicate. Hopkins received $85 million in
funding, the fifth-
> highest in the country, in fiscal year 2005, according
to the most
> recent figures available. The University of California
system won the
> most federal money, $185 million. Multidisciplinary
teams established
> in Baltimore with federal money over the past few
years to
> investigate a range of cancers would be endangered,
said Dr. William
> Nelson, AACR's legislative affairs chairman and a
Hopkins prostate
> cancer researcher. "Just as we were beginning to
make progress, we are
> beginning to back off," he said. Even before the
cuts were announced,
> cancer scientists and activists began a campaign of
op-ed articles,
> e-mail alerts and public events. Cancer groups launched
lobbying of
> the House with a rally Tuesday, and they are planning
to deluge
> representatives with calls and e-mail as a vote nears,
said Wendy
> Selig, vice president for legislative affairs at the
American Cancer
> Society. They have crafted a message to make the point
that cancer
> patients will be hurt just as emerging discoveries of
therapies that
> target a patient's cells or spur the body's immune
system portend
> improved treatments. "We're not just saying we
need more" money, said
> Ellen V. Sigal, founder and chairwoman of Friends of
Cancer Research
> in Washington. "We're talking more tangibly
about what's been
> accomplished and what's at stake." Beyond the
loss of research grants,
> scientists fear a longer-term effect: the shift of
talented young
> researchers to different work, because that's where
the money is. One
> scientist who made such a move is Dr. Stuart Lutzker,
who went to
> Genentech in San Francisco from the Robert Wood Johnson
Medical School
> in Piscataway,
> N.J. Lutzker said his primary motivation was to work on
drug
> development, rather than basic science, but that
money for
> research was a factor. The intense competition for
academic
> research grants, he said, was difficult.
"One thing that makes
> industry attractive is there are more resources
that can be
> brought to bear," he said.
jonathan.rockoff baltsun.com
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Blab-away for as little as 1¢/min. Make PC-to-Phone
Calls using Yahoo!
> Messenger with Voice.
>
>
************************************************************
***-
> ********
> To learn more about the BREAST-CANCER List on the WWW
(and even
> subscribe, unsubscribe, go digest, etc. by pointing and
clicking) see:
>
> http://www.bclist.org/
>
>
************************************************************
***-
> ********
> Received on Fri Mar 31 11:57:01 2006
--
Sent from the mailing list archive site at
http://bclist.petebevin.
com/
************************************************************
***********
To learn more about the BREAST-CANCER List on the WWW (and
even subscribe,
unsubscribe, go digest, etc. by pointing and clicking) see:
http://www.bclist.org/
************************************************************
***********
|