The following is being posted on behalf of a colleague.
+++++++
Ruth:
Thanks for the effort. More info. We are in direct contact with HHS as
well, but they haven't weighed in at the White House yet. Tommy Thompson
said in a letter to our US Rep. Doc Hastings that he wouldn't let anything
happen to FFTF which would threaten the nation's adequate supplies of
isotopes. This has not happened yet. We need to get HHS to weigh in at the
White House. This strategy lets Abraham off the politic hook as well. They
(DOE) did their job, their missions and now it is needed for major health
advances in the US. (Never mind that this was spelled out 50 years ago in
the Atoms for Peace Plan and the Atomic Energy Act of 1954). One HHS major
contact is Thompson's technical advisor, Dr. William Raub, who seemed quite
enthusiastic several months ago, as did several other HHS types. HHS could
be a major customer for isotope production, even at the research and
clinical trial stages. I did notice HHS contact with Al Conklin, suggesting
that they are working the issue. This is a major national health issue.
All one has to do is talk to some survivors who have received this therapy
to be moved. At this stage people in clinical trials must have failed both
chemo and whole body radiation just to get into them. Even with patients
like these 80-90% remission rates have been achieved at the UW and
elsewhere. In dismal contrast patients at UC Davis in the midst of their
recent clinical trials were sent home to die, for lack of Cu-67. Cu-67
requires a fast reactor for production.
BTW the Europeans are way ahead of the US in these technologies even though
they are strapped for isotope production as well. At this time for certain
cancers (such as gliomas) we can only recommend that Americans get to
Europe. FYI in certain kinds of cancer such as liver cancer and
neuroendocrine cancer the survivor rates are essentially zero. Doomed. These
increase to 80-90% survivor rates with nuclear techniques (cell-targeted
therapies or implants). Europeans doctors are advising against chemo since
its effective in only 10-20% of the patients. Many American oncologists
are not even aware of this progress, let alone bureaucrats and the general
public. Feel free to put this into Radsafe.
Best Wishes
Mike Fox
09-25-02