Did anybody catch the first ever YouTube democratic debate last week? It was cosponsored by CNN and the cool thing about it was this: all the questions came in from Americans like you and me. Turns out two of the candidates spoke out on behalf of diabetes. Here's what they had to say...

Governor Richardson mentioned the fact that 33% of Medicare is wrapped up in diabetes costs. He suggests, "Let's have major prevention programs, and also ways that we can ensure that we find a cure." He still has not announced a plan to ensure a cure. But if he does - I'm willing to bet all of his campaign funding from Big Pharma might mysteriously disappear.

The other candidate addressing diabetes was Senator Chris Dodd of Connecticut. Dodd's promise came after from a woman's question about stem cell research. Somehow the senator was able to plug an endeavor to "deal with diabetes". However, much like Governor Richardson - he has yet to announce a plan to cure. Politics as usual. Stay tuned for the LIVE Republican Debate on September 17th.

Diabetes is making a name for itself and it's spreading like wildfire. Politicians are uniting to build a $120 million campaign to educate diabetics to prevent the spread of the disease and its complications.

Senator Clinton criticizes the reaction to the problem, rather than taking measures to prevent it from occurring. She questions why current money is unquestionably $pent on treating complications from diabetes -- such as amputations and dialysis. Good point, Senator. Ask Bush if he's got any friends up at Eli Lilly. A good answer can always be found in a temporary restraining order. She and fellow politicians propose more money be spent on programs for weight-loss, nutrition education and other preventive efforts to best curtail the growing number of diabetics in the United States.

The legislation proposed would provide $90 million to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Division of Diabetes Translation for diabetes surveillance, research and educational activities. It would also allot $30 million for three four-year projects that would examine how best to translate diet and exercise interventions into effective clinical practice.

After living with diabetes for over 50 years, and witnessing few changes in the treatment of the disease, Brent Hoadley has written Too Profitable to Cure.

Distressed that the cure is no closer now than when he was diagnosed, at the age of 14 -- Hoadley took it upon himself to find answers. He notes the current state of healthcare for those who suffer from chronic diseases, and contends that profit, not humanitarianism, is driving American healthcare. As an entrepreneur and an investor, he is aware, and appreciates the profit motive that drives capitalism. However, he feels the bottom line should not interfere with the pursuit of a cure. With pragmatic drive, he identifies culprits and urges activism as a countermeasure.

Diabetes is only one shining example of the pharmaceutical industry's criminal pursuit of profits. Patients' health, patients' lives, patients' freedom-all are fair game in the quest for limitless wealth and unbridled power.

The question of evening news and print advertisement for pharmaceuticals is posed. Is this marketing speaking to doctor's in lieu of doctor's reading unbiased research? Or does this research derive from the very company making the pill? Hoadley reveals pharmaceutical sales reps now supply more education to physicians than they obtained in medical school. In other words, Big Pharma has climbed to the top of the totem pole; medical professionals stubbornly cling to their subordinate position; and the poor patient (pun intended) supports the entire structure. Do I need to tell you that the support is vulnerable and under attack? Whether it can remain viable is, or should be, a question of great concern.

Too Profitable to Cure is available online through Hoadley's site. Scott Strumello had turned me on to Brent Hoadley after he posted an Open Letter to Eli Lilly and one of the comments left was from Mr. Hoadley, himself. Definitely worth checking out! Thank you to Scott for the great find and to Brent Hoadley for putting it into words for us!

After the successful outcome of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007, the White House has announced that it will veto the bill. However, congressional leaders have said that if the bill is vetoed, they will consider this legislation again later in the year.

The Senate passed the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007 last Wednesday, April 11th. The bill would change existing federal policy to allow the use of stem cells that were derived from human embryos donated from in vitro fertilization clinics.

The Senate also considered another bill, S. 30, the Hope Offered through Principled and Ethical Stem Cell Research Act sponsored by Senators Norm Coleman (R-MN) and Johnny Isakson (R-GA) that would allow for research on stem cells obtained through non-embryonic sources and "dead" embryos.

I apologize if I get out of line or offensive to anybody reading. But I am truly tired of being a pawn in this charade of politics being about what's best for the people. Initially I thought stem cell research reservations were based on the moral standing of embryos. But many of you insightful readers pointed out, it's all about the money. What would these businesses DO if they didn't have diabetes to fulfill a lifetime of drugs? I'd love to believe they could find another illness to cure - but diabetes is really a fruitful dia-business. Sad but true. So here goes - I apologize for anybody who is offended by my feelings. I'm just sounding off...

Listen Bush - if you keep vetoing these critically important bills - what are we going to do with you?? You've abused the prestigious position of President of the United States by acting like a reckless cowboy! You start unwarranted wars. Your vice president shot someone in the face. Start something good to makeup for the irreparable events your administration has inflicted. A good deed in the form of NOT VETOING this bill would be a convincing start.

The JDRF Government Relations would like to encourage all diabetics to take action and let your Senators know that you want them to support the Senate Bill 5 (S.5) - the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. Of course, if you do not support this bill you are in no way expected to do any of the following - but for the sake of enlightenment, I invite you to read on.

This bill is similar to H.R. 3, which passed the U.S. House in January and H.R. 810, which passed both the House and the Senate last year. This legislation will allow federally funded researchers to use additional stem cell lines for their research.

If you wish to take action, and let your Senators know that you support this important bill--you can personalize a letter that will be faxed to your Senators offices on your behalf by following one simple step:

Visit the Take Action page. Review the letter supplied and enter your personal story in the paragraph provided.

So here's my personal story - and why I'm disappointed that any politician appointed for the welfare of the citizens that elected him or her would disrupt the promise stem cell research could offer diseases like diabetes:

My name is Allison Beatty and I am a juvenile diabetic. I was diagnosed in July, 1985. As a type 1 diabetic for over 21 years (and of legal voting age for 11 years) I am disappointed that officials governing the use of my tax dollars have impeded the most promising avenue of research to remedy a National problem like diabetes.

The incentive of those who oppose stem cell research is strictly religious and I am insulted that my quality of life on Earth today is compromised by the FAITH in where they will end UP in the afterlife.

Please do not allow the religious forum to dictate the scientific relevance of one of he most promising answers to address life-threatening illness. I trust your decision as a politician will best serve the needs of those living on Earth today, and not on your destination in the afterlife.

Although they are not currently targeting my Senator(s) for this campaign – that's my personal story, and I'm sticking to it. I hope the politicians who oppose stem cell research can see past their personal crusade to save their soul and start acting on saving lives!

If you want a job done right, you do it yourself. That's apparently the way dLife founder and CEO Howard Steinberg went about bringing stem cell research to the fore, and did so by personally heading straight to Capitol Hill. Meeting with the new Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, Steinberg discussed the importance of the DeGette-Castle stem cell research bill's passage.

But, what about the Big Guy? No, not God -- although He factored into the discussion, as well. I'm talking about President Bush. While he has promised to veto any stem cell related bill, Pelosi hopes that he will ultimately opt against doing so. In furtherance of prior legislation, this new Stem Cell Enhancement Act of 2007 will increase the amount of lines from which stem cells can be sourced for research purposes. So, fingers crossed on that one, folks.

Stem cell research continues to be a widely debated topic, one that may also play a crucial role in the upcoming 2008 elections. And, as Madam Speaker explained to Steinberg in their recent interview, embryonic stem cell research is now receiving bi-partisan support, thereby making it far less politically divisive than it once was. The hope (well, I can at least say my hope) is that the new Congress, the new President, and the new year will hasten change in favor of supporting stem cell research. Again, fingers crossed. Maybe a toe or two as well, providing you are that dexterous. Whatever the case, and whatever the crossed extremity, the key word here is Change. And, thanks to the dedicated efforts of people like Nancy Pelosi and Howard Steinberg, it seems to be well underway.

**Be sure to check out the full dLife interview of Nancy Pelosi here: www.dlife.com/pelosi

Charity is a beautiful thing. This is especially true for Eugenia "Gene" Dodson, who was a beautician for most of her career. On October 17, 2006 the Diabetes Research Institute Foundation and the University of Miami Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center jointly announced the receipt of a $35.6 million gift from the estate of the late Eugenia J. Dodson of Coral Gables. Mrs. Dodson died 24 days before her 101st birthday.

The touching story of Mrs. Dodson's generosity begins with her two brothers, Russell (bottom left) and Raymond (bottom right) Johnson. Both brothers passed away from diabetic complications. Mrs. Dodson survived lung cancer. When her husband and the love of her life, J. Enloe Dodson (top right), passed away he left Gene a modest inheritance. Throughout the past 50 years, she preserved and discreetly grew this money for the purpose of funding research to cure diabetes and cancer.

The DRI Foundation plans to use the gift for a number of cure initiatives. The funding will be used to create the J. Enloe and Eugenia J. Dodson Diabetes Center for Translational Research and establish the Raymond and Russell Johnson Fellowship in Type 1 Diabetes Research. Eugenia's gift represents the single largest donation in the 35 year history of the Diabetes Research Institute Foundation. In her wake, Mrs. Dodson has strengthened our hopes of someday finding a cure for diabetes. Without question, she has left a beautiful impression on the world.

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) has issued a formal statement on the topic of embryonic stem cell research, urging federal powers-that-be to give the green light to future research. The Senate is expected to vote on the issue tomorrow, and either approve or reject the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act (H.R. 810). The Act would ease restrictions on stem cell research imposed by the Bush administration in 2001.

The ADA's view is that to restrict the research would be a waste of resources, since tests involve the use of embryos cultivated to help with infertility treatments that would otherwise be discarded. The ADA also states that stem cell research, more than any other area of medical research, offers the greatest hope of a cure for diabetes. Chair Lawrence T. Smith says the ADA "is committed to finding a cure for this disease and we support the exploration of every ethical avenue of research. The most respected scientists in our field view human embryonic stem cells as an area of research that must be explored. Under the current restrictions, this is not happening on the scale necessary to pursue lifesaving cures." The ADA also condemned the possibility of a presidential veto of the bill, which President Bush has threatened in the past.