research

California Proposition 38 voter guide: Funding research to prevent and cure diseases

p]:text-cms-story-body-color-text”>

Spearheading the campaign in opposition of Proposition 38 is Robert Kaplan, senior scholar at the Clinical Excellence Research Center at Stanford School of Medicine, and David Panush, who served as a senior health policy and budget advisor to five state Senate presidents.

Kaplan stated, “As written, Proposition 38 is deceptive,” because the proposed criteria for awarding the grant funding would appear to create an extremely minuscule pool of qualified recipients.

To qualify, a recipient institution must be established since Jan. 1, 2025, and have at least 200,000 square feet of research space it controls. From that start date, the recipients also must have an affiliation agreement with a UC campus and be affiliated with a UC Health system that records more than 35,000 inpatient admissions and 3.5 million outpatient visits annually. The qualification requirements also include having identified at least $250 million in philanthropic support and securing two $50-million commitments for designated research programs.

Kaplan argues medical research grants should be awarded through a competitive process that gives all applicants equal opportunity. Instead, his campaign states, only the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy, co-founded by billionaire Gary K. Michelson, would qualify under the proposed criteria. In a Cal Matters report, a UCLA spokesperson confirmed that among all nonprofit entities affiliated with the school, “only the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy could satisfy the stipulations of Prop. 38.”

Robin Swanson, spokesperson for the Yes on 38 campaign, said that “lots of institutions would qualify for funds under this measure.”

“But it is very likely that [the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy], which is a research institute affiliated with UCLA, will qualify for half of the funds under the current criteria,” she added during a virtual news conference in mid-September.

Swanson said it was likely that other research institutions from Stanford, Scripps Research, USC and Cedars Sinai would qualify for the other 50% of funds, “and that really is what we wanted to ensure that we had research institutes that were ready to hit the ground running.”

Ultimately, she said, the decision lies with the California Department of Public Health.

Michelson’s institute first became a nonprofit in 2022, and the co-founder has donated at least $120 million to the research organization. The billionaire is the board chair of the institute, which is housed at a research center owned by UCLA, according to the opposition campaign.

The Vote No on Prop. 38 campaign also argues against the financial model of the measure, saying a bond would saddle taxpayers with decades of debt and that any potential future revenue from the research is uncertain.

Source link

California Prop. 38 last-minute guide: Immunology, immunotherapy research funding

The Trump administration has frozen, terminated or delayed billions in congressionally approved research grants since last year. Proposition 38 aims to backfill some of that loss by creating a stable source of money to fund immunology and immunotherapy research.

The basics

Proposition 38 would authorize the state to issue $8.4 billion in bonds to fund immunology and immunotherapy research to uncover treatments that help the immune system fight diseases such as cancer and Alzheimer’s disease more efficiently.

The impact

The measure would require at least $4.2 billion of the funds to be used for immunology research on cancer, heart disease and Alzheimer’s. It also would authorize the state to enter a partnership with an immunology and immunotherapy research institute selected by the California Department of Public Health and allocate half of the bond revenue to it. The remaining funds would be used for competitive grants that focus solely on immunology and immunotherapy research.

Californians would take on an increased cost of $500 million to $600 million annually to repay the bond for about 20 years, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office.

The Yes on 38 campaign says the proposition pays for itself: 10% of all proceeds from the licensing of immunotherapies must be returned to the state to offset the total cost of the bond measure, including interest.

However, it’s difficult to predict whether any research projects will lead to marketable treatments.

Dig deeper

Proposition 38 is backed by organizations including the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research and the ALS Assn., as well as a majority of local chapters of Democratic organizations across the state. Supporters say the proposed funding could give those afflicted with chronic illness hope and potentially more options for treatment.

Its opponents have said the proposed criteria for awarding the grant funding would appear to create an extremely small pool of qualified recipients. Only the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy, co-founded by billionaire Gary K. Michelson, would qualify under the proposed criteria, according to No on 38, the campaign against the proposition.

Robin Swanson, spokesperson for the Yes on 38 campaign, said “lots of institutions would qualify for funds under this measure.”

But she said at a virtual news conference in mid-September that it was “very likely” that the California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy “will qualify for half of the funds under the current criteria.”

Ultimately, Swanson said, the decision lies with the California Department of Public Health.

More reading

Your guide to Proposition 38: Immunology and immunotherapy research funding (L.A. Times)

An analysis of Prop. 38 (California Legislative Analyst’s Office)

This CA proposition will send $4 billion to a single nonprofit. Who’s behind it? (Cal Matters)

This institute could get $4 billion from a ballot measure. With just three workers, is it ready? (Cal Matters)

Source link

NASCAR legend Fred Lorenzen becomes first driver diagnosed with CTE

Two months ago, legendary NASCAR driver and longtime Fox Sports broadcaster Darrell Waltrip stepped away from public life at age 79 because of a progressive brain disease. His family said in a statement that his frontotemporal degeneration (FTD) diagnosis was complicated by possible chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) — “likely from injuries incurred during his racing career.”

Now Fred Lorenzen — another Hall of Fame NASCAR driver — has been diagnosed posthumously with CTE, according to a statement Tuesday from his children, Chris Lorenzen and Amanda Lorenzen Gardstrom.

His is the first known case of CTE in a NASCAR driver, according to the Concussion & CTE Foundation. CTE can only be diagnosed after death through a microscopic examination of brain tissue during an autopsy.

Lorenzen, who went by the nicknames “The Golden Boy” and “Fast Freddie” when he dominated NASCAR in the 1960s, died Dec. 18, 2024, at age 89. He lived with dementia for 20 years, yet had the foresight in 2016 to pledge to donate his brain for research. Lorenzen had been inducted into the NASCAR Hall of Fame a year earlier — one of the first 25 drivers to be enshrined — but was already living in a nursing home, unable to walk. His son, Chris, delivered his Hall of Fame speech for him.

Researchers at the Boston University CTE Center — a renowned research facility that conducts high-impact research on repetitive brain trauma in athletes, military personnel, and first responders — diagnosed Lorenzen with Stage 3 CTE, the second-most severe of four stages.

Although safety precautions for drivers have vastly improved since the heyday of Lorenzen and Waltrip, concussions and the prospect of CTE remain a constant fear within the sport.

Former NASCAR Cup Series champion Kurt Busch was forced to end his full-time racing career after sustaining a severe concussion during a qualifying crash at Pocono Raceway in 2022. Dale Earnhardt Jr. estimates that he suffered as many as 50 concussions over his 20-year racing career and 10 years ago tweeted that he intends to have his brain donated for concussion research after his death.

CTE is most closely associated with football players. A study published in the British Medical Journal in August reported that 315 of the 338 brains studied from players who died between 2008 and 2021 were diagnosed with CTE. It is becoming clear that NASCAR drivers may also sustain the kind of brain trauma that can cause the condition.

Lorenzen’s children made a $1 million donation to the Concussion and CTE Foundation, creating the Fred Lorenzen Memorial HelpLine to help drivers and their families find care when necessary.

Outgoing and friendly during his career, Lorenzen was the first driver in series history to earn $100,000 in prize money in a single season. He was voted NASCAR’s most popular driver in 1963 and 1965.

He won 26 races from 1961 to 1967, more than “The King” Richard Petty, and won the Daytona 500 in 1965 and the World 600 (now the Coca-Cola 600) in 1963 and 1965. He also won six times at Martinsville Speedway, famously launching the tradition of giving the winner a Ridgeway grandfather clock.

Source link

Trump signs an order aimed at boosting women’s health research, a plan backed by the first lady

President Trump on Monday directed the federal government to bolster federal research into women’s health, a move pushed by his wife, first lady Melania Trump.

The Republican president signed an executive order that creates a new women’s health division at the National Institutes of Health and a White House task force to focus on the issue. That panel was set to hold its first meeting Monday after the Trumps held a Rose Garden signing ceremony.

“Beginning today we will change the reality of women’s health,” Melania Trump said. “Previous generations fought for women’s rights. Our generation will fight to discover the cures that will ensure a woman can live her life in health and to the fullest.”

The president, who spoke after his wife, said the order will “promote new research and really go after the understudied diseases affecting women.” The order is also intended to promote diagnostic technology and improve treatment.

White House chief of staff Susie Wiles, who recently completed treatment for breast cancer, and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. will lead the White House task force. Donald Trump said the task force will coordinate with various federal agencies and programs. The order does not include specific funding goals.

The initiative comes after a series of meetings the first lady had with federal health officials.

The president called it a “historic action” and praised the first lady’s work.

“She’s accomplished so much,” he said before pivoting into unscripted commentary on White House renovations, including the patio stone that now covers what was once the Rose Garden lawn.

Shifting back to women’s health, the president expressed surprise that some of the order’s requirements had not already been imposed.

“Who the hell wouldn’t have a women’s health division?” he said, after recalling that he’d asked Melania Trump, “Are you sure they don’t have that?”

The executive order calls for targeting maternal health, mental health and endometriosis. It also mentions other health concerns and diseases, including Alzheimer’s, osteoporosis, heart disease and stroke.

Melania Trump helped shape the order and the task force in consultation with physicians, White House officials, Kennedy and the Republican president. The initiative adds a new dimension to her policy portfolio as first lady.

In Donald Trump’s second term, the first lady has focused on improving foster care systems and expanding technology and artificial-intelligence access in education. In Trump’s first presidency, the first lady’s signature initiative, Be Best, focused on child well-being, safe social media use and reducing drug abuse.

The White House ceremony comes weeks before Nov. 3 elections and as Donald Trump’s job approval ratings have declined, including among women.

About 4 in 10 independent women supported Trump during the 2024 election against Democrat Kamala Harris and in the pre-presidency period, according to AP-NORC polls. That dropped to around a quarter in the opening months of this midterm election year, the period marked by Trump’s hard-line immigration crackdown in U.S. cities and the opening weeks of the Iran war.

Barrow writes for the Associated Press.

Source link