Rocky, this time you are way off base and making false accusations instead of your usual well informed facts. I'm disappoihted that you have totally mischaracterized and misinterpreted my comments. I'm not talking to just 1000 peoole on the street as you (mis)stated who know nothing anyhow - I'm taling about people I've conbtcated who are directly discussing, voting, writing, televising, reporting about ESCs ... . Last week the OK state legislture voted against ESCs, three weeks ago the Texas state legislature discussed and may have already voted against ESC research, the media I talked to had published or televised news articles against ESCs,the US Congressmen I talked to knew zippo regarding ESCs intact, etc. Shoot, Pfizer even redcently announced its into ESCs - using UK but nnoit ACTC ???? and UK is also working with undamaged ESCs bot no mentin of ACTC ??? and some promnent universities are making ESC announcements and agreements - without ACTC ?? All much later than ACTC. Further, my concern with NIH providing only $198K for ACTC in 2008 is based on it being a miniscule amount of the NIH ESC exexpenditures, much less their overall budget. ACTC should had received a ton from NIH last year alone, not to mention private and institutional funding and even Fed funding based on embryo intact. My concern ism that ACTC's great achievemnents are NOT well known, and now other entities are making similar advanvces and claims.
