News   Nov 01, 2024
 2.1K     14 
News   Nov 01, 2024
 2.5K     3 
News   Nov 01, 2024
 749     0 

Iran scientists have more freedom than N.american scientists

  • Thread starter prometheus the supremo
  • Start date
P

prometheus the supremo

Guest
1156225349_8233.jpg

Two laboratory assistants worked in the genetic research lab at Tehran’s Royan Institute, a jewel of Iran’s science program. (Zohreh Soleimani for the Boston Globe)


Iran looks to science as source of pride
Nuclear program stokes ambitions

By Anne Barnard, Globe Staff | August 22, 2006

TEHRAN -- The white-coated scientists at Tehran's Royan Institute labor beneath a framed portrait of the turbaned, bearded supreme leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the head of a state that enforces strict religious rules governing everything from how women dress to what kinds of parties people throw.

But in the cutting-edge field of human embryonic stem-cell research, the scientists work with a freedom that US researchers can only dream of: broad government approval, including government funding, to work on the potent cells from early-stage embryos that researchers believe hold the promise to cure many diseases.

In 2002, Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, gave his blessing to research on surplus embryos created for fertility treatments -- work sharply restricted in the United States under pressure from religious conservatives -- calling it a ``lofty" effort that fit his goal of making Iran the scientific leader of the Muslim world.

The scientific ambitions that led Iran to embrace one of the world's most open policies on stem-cell research also help to explain why many Iranians support the nuclear research program that has thrust their country into a dangerous international confrontation.

Iran's leaders have declared that the nuclear program will restore Iran's scientific glory, tapping into a deep-seated national pride in science and education that dates to the Persian Empire, a center of world learning in the Middle Ages.

Tehran insists the program aims to produce nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, while the United States, Europe, and the United Nations say it aims to build a nuclear arsenal that it might use to threaten Israel and the West.

Iranians' dedication to science presents both a challenge and an opportunity for the international community: Many Iranians believe the government's argument that nuclear research is central to technological development. But educated Iranians also yearn to be part of the broader academic and technological world and fear the government's confrontational approach could increase isolation.

Caught in the middle are Iranian scientists. With government backing, they have been able to launch health initiatives -- from family planning and drug-addiction therapy to prevention of heart disease -- that have won admiration from leading US researchers.

But they also face restrictions -- from the West and from their own government -- that make it hard for them to take part in international scientific exchange. Iranian scientists who travel abroad can face accusations of having too much contact with foreigners. And they are often denied visas to Western and Arab countries that mistrust Iran.

Science is at the center of Iranian nuclear rhetoric. In a speech on Jan. 3, days before Iran resumed uranium enrichment -- a key step in developing both nuclear energy and nuclear bombs -- Khamenei exhorted Iranian students to work hard to restore Iran's historical status as the ``mother of science."

Page 2 of 3 --

And when the international community objected to the renewed enrichment program, setting in motion the current crisis, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad accused the West of trying to impose ``scientific apartheid," denying to a Muslim state the right to nuclear energy that other countries enjoy.

Yesterday , Khamenei said Iran would continue ``with patience and power" to pursue ``the sweet fruits" of nuclear research, signaling that the government would reject an international deal to suspend the program in return for economic incentives and technical aid for peaceful nuclear energy. The UN Security Council has given Iran until Aug. 31 to stop the program or face possible sanctions.

When asked recently about the controversy, Iranians -- from day laborers painting a fence to young women at Friday prayers -- recited, ``Nuclear power is our indisputable right," often with a giggle because the government's mantra has become a cliché.

Still, many Iranians say nuclear power resonates as a symbol of prestige and development. But it's not clear how much of that support extends to developing nuclear weapons.

A poll conducted in January by the Iranian Students Polling Agency showed that 85 percent of Iranians support nuclear research. But that number dropped to 64 percent when respondents were told the program would lead to international economic sanctions, and 56 percent if it were to spark a military attack -- high numbers, but perhaps not as high as might be expected after months of exhortation from a government that brooks little dissent.

At the Royan Institute, affiliated with Tehran University, researchers spoke guardedly about the nuclear dispute. Dr. Reza Samani, the institute's spokesman, said that in the spirit of scientific openness, the government should allow inspection of its nuclear facilities -- and that the West should not apply harsher standards to Iran than to other countries.

``Science and politics should be separate," he said. ``We need to purify science."

Domestic and foreign constraints on Iranian scientists have helped fuel one of the world's highest rates of ``brain drain." In 1990, according to an International Monetary Fund study, 15 percent of Iranians with college or graduate education had emigrated to the United States.

In some areas, scientists have complained of official pressure to insert religious perspectives in their work, but in others, the Islamic Republic is remarkably pragmatic. With condoms and birth control information widely available, Iran's fertility rate dropped from 5.2 children per woman in 1986 to 1.9 in 2002.

Researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health, who hosted Iranian scientists at a weeklong exchange program in 2003, were impressed that in the previous 16 years, Iran had cut its infant mortality rate in half and raised life expectancy to 70 years from 60.

Iran cites the Royan Institute as the jewel in its scientific crown.

Page 3 of 3 --

Its fertility clinic, packed with couples one recent morning, claims a 40-percent success rate, with 20,000 patients a year.

In a hallway, politics intrudes: A sign echoes Iranian officials' call to ``wipe Israel off the map." But in the more private lab area, the only slogans are quotations from Khamenei exhorting researchers to scientific excellence.

Crammed in tiny laboratories, Royan's scientists earn salaries of about $500 a month.

Yet they are motivated by their country's science push, particularly on embryonic stem cells, whose ability to develop into any kind of adult cell has raised hopes they can be used to repair organs.

Samani, 38, the spokesman, proudly pulled from his files a letter from Khamenei, in which the supreme leader praised the researchers' ``lofty objectives" and predicted they would bring Iran ``huge humanitarian wealth."


``But," Khamenei admonished, ``be careful that producing identical parts of human beings does not lead to producing a human being" -- echoing a widespread scientific consensus against human cloning.

The green light for embryonic stem cells was possible because Shi'ite Muslim scholars have long ruled that a developing fetus is infused with a soul only at the age of 120 days. That allows stem-cell research in Iran to steer clear of the abortion debate that has made it controversial in the United States.

Six months before Khamenei approved the research, President Bush sharply restricted US government funding for such work because it requires destroying human embryos, a move spurred by religious conservatives who equate the research with murder.

Bush's decision means vital government funding is available only for work on embryonic stem-cell lines established before August 2001, a rule that scientists say sharply constricts research.

But Royan's scientists have developed several new lines. They reported on the protein structure of one line in the respected journal Proteomics in June, and posted the data on their website.

In one project with less-controversial adult stem cells, cells from a patient's bone marrow are developed into cornea cells to repair vision. The institute is also working to clone a sheep.

Royan has brought some top doctors to Iran. Dr. Sarah Berga, chair of obstetrics and gynecology at Emory University, spoke at a Royan conference in 2004.

She recalled her astonishment when -- wrapped in the unfamiliar headcovering and long jacket that Iranian law requires women to wear -- she heard a video presentation explain that embryonic stem-cell research was halal, permissible under Islam.

``The irony of it was just incredible," she said recently. ``This is what I wish our attitude to stem-cell research would be."
© Copyright 2006 Globe Newspaper Company.

http://www.boston.com/news/world/mi.../22/iran_looks_to_science_as_source_of_pride/
 
Re: Iran scientists have more freedom than N.american scient

TEHRAN - On Sunday, the Islamic Republic officially announced that Iranian scientists have developed a new technique for treating patients with spinal cord injuries.

In this method of Schwann cell transplantation, the Schwann cells are taken from the back of the patient’s leg (below the knee) and grown in the lab. They are then injected into the site of the injury.

Researchers from the Spinal Cord Injury Treatment Center of the Tehran University of Medical Sciences have scientifically proven the efficacy of the new method through 30 operations on humans.

“The degree of recovery is 85 percent in patients with partial paralysis, and 15 percent in patients with full paralysis,†the director of the spinal cord injury research group, Hushang Saberi, said at the ceremony held to announce the Iranian scientists’ achievement.

Such transplantations are being practiced in Ukraine, China, which uses fetal and adult stem cells, and Russia, which uses dipolar nerve cells, but these techniques are risky, he added.

Thirty patients were chosen to undergo the surgery, 40 percent of whom experienced at least partial recovery as far as sensation and physical movement, with 35 percent showing no change, and 25 percent still in the initial post-surgical stage, he explained.

President Mahmud Ahmadinejad also spoke at the ceremony, saying that his administration supports the country’s research projects 100 percent.

Ahmadinejad called on Health Minister Kamran Baqeri Lankarani to make the scientific achievements swiftly and widely available to the public.

The government will pay, either directly or through insurance, for the treatment of any patient with spinal cord injuries who can not afford it, he stated.

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

:eek if this is true, who would of thought iran would be at front of treating SCI's?

not to knock the iranian scientists, you'd think the political turmoil would take a toll on the ability to do such research.
 
Re: Iran scientists have more freedom than N.american scient

not to knock the iranian scientists, you'd think the political turmoil would take a toll on the ability to do such research.

What does one have to do with the other?
 
Re: Iran scientists have more freedom than N.american scient

What does one have to do with the other?

if there is a threat of invasion, i'd fear resources would be focused on military. sanctions and isolation could also cause an economic crisis which could take away money from such research.

i never knew that the leaders of that nation can have more humane views (on some levels) than our leaders. it's very confusing.

you have bush that respects life soo much that he veto'd (with dictarorship like powers) the stem cell bill but will spend hundrends of billions on war and death while ignoring his own population and than you have ahmednajad who wants to wipe isreal off the map but at the same time doesn't persecute jews in iran.


talk about ying and yang!
 
Re: Iran scientists have more freedom than N.american scient

I'm not sure that the title of this thread corresponds to the actual content of the article.

There is considerable political motivation to many scientific research programs (sometimes too much). But to suggest that Iranian scientists "have more freedom" than North American scientists begs the question as to what you would mean by "freedom."

By the way, while Bush can veto a bill, congress can override his veto. So he does not have dictatorial powers.

I don't have a source in front of me, but I recall that the NIH and its affiliated organizations spend over thirty billion dollars on health care research in the United States.

You claim that Bush does not pay attention to his population. He just happens to pay attention to them in a way that you disagree with (which is your right). The two things are quite different. By far the largest amount in terms of dollar value.

As for Ahmednajad's attitude towards Jews in Iran, do you really think that a person who publically expresses a desire to wipe out the population of country has a deep and undying respect for the people of the same religion in his country?
 
Re: Iran scientists have more freedom than N.american scient

I'm not sure that the title of this thread corresponds to the actual content of the article.

i used the title in relation to this part of the article...


"But in the cutting-edge field of human embryonic stem-cell research, the scientists work with a freedom that US researchers can only dream of: broad government approval, including government funding, to work on the potent cells from early-stage embryos that researchers believe hold the promise to cure many diseases."

There is considerable political motivation to many scientific research programs (sometimes too much). But to suggest that Iranian scientists "have more freedom" than North American scientists begs the question as to what you would mean by "freedom."

look at previous point.

By the way, while Bush can veto a bill, congress can override his veto. So he does not have dictatorial powers.

it seems that way to me. to scrap a law just because he doesn't like it? maybe his grounds for re-election should have been based on if he got 2/3 of the vote.


I don't have a source in front of me, but I recall that the NIH and its affiliated organizations spend over thirty billion dollars on health care research in the United States.

and none of that is allowed to go to embryonic stem cell research.


You claim that Bush does not pay attention to his population. He just happens to pay attention to them in a way that you disagree with (which is your right). The two things are quite different. By far the largest amount in terms of dollar value.

gay rights issues, stem cell research, etc, he's not paying attention. just sticking with his dogma.

As for Ahmednajad's attitude towards Jews in Iran, do you really think that a person who publically expresses a desire to wipe out the population of country has a deep and undying respect for the people of the same religion in his country?

i thought that jews would be driven underground in iran and i was talking to a friend (who is jewish) about this and she told me that she has family in iran and they are allowed to be free and practice their religion. i was very suprised.

what's even more crazy is that meeting a while ago with ahmednajad, chavez and david duke. there were a group of jews who were also calling for the destruction of isreal because they did not respect the way isreal was formed. something to do with some aspect of their particular branch of judaism. that was the strangest thing i ever saw on TV.

p.s, just to be clear, i'm not praising ahmednajad's foregin policy, internal policy, world views, etc. from what i've heard so far, there's only one thing he's doing right and something the west should have started doing a lomg time ago and that's fund and support embryonic stem cell research. it's just weird to think that someone with some pretty twisted views would actually do something helpful.
 
Re: Iran scientists have more freedom than N.american scient

there were a group of jews who were also calling for the destruction of isreal because they did not respect the way isreal was formed.

There is a sect of Orthodox Jews that is against the existance of the state of Israel not because of how it was formed but because they believe that Israel should only come into existance after the coming of the Messiah.

Unfortunately, people still equate the state of Israel and Zionism with Judaism in general. They are very different things.

www.nkusa.org/
 
Re: Iran scientists have more freedom than N.american scient

There is a sect of Orthodox Jews that is against the existance of the state of Israel not because of how it was formed but because they believe that Israel should only come into existance after the coming of the Messiah.

that's what i ment. the current state was formed by people & not a messiah.

i never expected to see them side by side with the leader of iran. :eek
 
Re: Iran scientists have more freedom than N.american scient

and none of that is allowed to go to embryonic stem cell research.

While I can sympathise with your desire to see such research proceed, I don't think that it is a pivotal issue that defines whether a group of people are free or not. Stem cell research is not about freedom, or lack thereof, it represents a considerable moral issue to some people. This issue should be explored; but as it deals with abortion, I don't think there will be any quick conclusions.

it seems that way to me. to scrap a law just because he doesn't like it? maybe his grounds for re-election should have been based on if he got 2/3 of the vote.

Nevertheless, the veto of a president can be overridden by congress. As for electing the president, you will have to take your issue up with the American public as it is a constitutional item.
 
Re: Iran scientists have more freedom than N.american scient

While I can sympathise with your desire to see such research proceed, I don't think that it is a pivotal issue that defines whether a group of people are free or not. Stem cell research is not about freedom, or lack thereof, it represents a considerable moral issue to some people. This issue should be explored; but as it deals with abortion, I don't think there will be any quick conclusions.


embryonic stem cell research is not abortion. one can claim that masturbating into the toilet is abortion or bleeding onto a pad is abortion because those cells could have been humans. the cells used for research come from surplus embryos from fertility clinics that get thrown in the garbage anyway. a fetus has consciousness and abortion is still legal. an embryo has no consciousness at the stage where stem cells are extracted.


"moral" religious values should not get in the way of medical research and dictate what the law is. we can thank the spread of aids on moral values which prohibit the use of condoms, etc.


P.S....

Doctors mum on treatments they oppose
By LINDA A. JOHNSON
The Associated Press

A disturbing number of doctors do not feel obligated to tell patients about medical options they oppose morally, such as abortion and teen birth control, and believe they have no duty to refer people elsewhere for such treatments, researchers say.

The survey of 1,144 doctors around the country is the first major look at how physicians’ religious or moral beliefs might affect patients’ care.

The study, conducted by University of Chicago researchers, found 86 percent of those responding believe doctors are obligated to present all treatment options, and 71 percent believe they must refer patients to another doctor for treatments they oppose. Slightly more than half the rest said they had no such obligation; the others were undecided.

“That means that there are a lot of physicians out there who are not, in fact, doing the right thing,†said David Magnus, director of Stanford University’s Center for Biomedical Ethics.

According to an American Medical Association policy statement, doctors can decline to give a treatment sought by an individual that is “incompatible with the physician’s personal, religious or moral beliefs.†But the physician should try to ensure the patient has “access to adequate health care.â€

The study was published in today’s New England Journal of Medicine and led by Dr. Farr Curlin, a University of Chicago ethicist and internist. The findings were based on a survey mailed to 1,820 practicing U.S. family doctors and specialists, chosen randomly from a national database; 63 percent responded.

Doctors describing themselves as very religious, particularly Protestants and Catholics, were much less likely than others to feel obligated to tell patients about controversial treatments or refer them to other doctors, and were far more likely to tell patients if they had moral objections.

Overall, 52 percent said they oppose abortion, 42 percent opposed prescribing birth control to 14- to 16-year-olds without parental approval, and 17 percent objected to sedating patients near death.

Female doctors were much more likely than male ones to feel obligated to refer patients for treatments they personally oppose, far less likely to present their own objections to a patient and slightly more likely to disclose all treatment options.



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

and everyone is bitching about muslim taxi drivers that refuse fares that are carrying booze.

you know, sometimes there's more serious crap to worry about.

religious dogma and medical advice (or lack of) not a good combination. what's next? "i can't operate on you because if you got cancer, god wants you to die"
 
Re: Iran scientists have more freedom than N.american scient

embryonic stem cell research is not abortion. one can claim that masturbating into the toilet is abortion or bleeding onto a pad is abortion because those cells could have been humans. the cells used for research come from surplus embryos from fertility clinics that get thrown in the garbage anyway. a fetus has consciousness and abortion is still legal. an embryo has no consciousness at the stage where stem cells are extracted.

I am well aware of the issues surrounding this debate. What I am telling you is how the debate is being translated and interpreted by some members of the American government. I am also pointing out that access to such research (or lack of) does not necessarily meet the criteria of defining whether a group of people are "free" or not.
 
Re: Iran scientists have more freedom than N.american scient

less restrictions on research translates to more freedom in my books.
 
Re: Iran scientists have more freedom than N.american scient

^The only example you cite is stem cell research. The work on nuclear research is highly restricted. One area of inquiry does not add up to freedom; and most certainly not in a country that has "morality" police and restricts the movement of women.
 
Re: Iran scientists have more freedom than N.american scient

There are plenty of human rights violations in Iran, but I don't think the restriction of freedom of movement for women is a significant one.
 
Re: Iran scientists have more freedom than N.american scient

Women may disagree with your judgement.
 

Back
Top