CALL FOR VOTES: FETAL-CELL-DIAGNOSTICS/bionet.diagnostics.fetal-cell

[David Kristofferson]

Voting is now open on the following proposal to create the mailing
list & newsgroup FETAL-CELL-DIAGNOSTICS/bionet.diagnostics.fetal-cell.  The
proposal below was not modified after the discussion period.

*** NOTE *** We are currently running several votes for other
newsgroups, so please be certain to follow the voting directions
*carefully*!  If you just send in a message saying "YES" or "NO" it
will not be counted if it is not clear which proposal you are
responding to.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposal to etablish FETAL-CELL-DIAGNOSTICS/bionet.diagnostics.fetal-cell

Proposed USENET name:       bionet.diagnostics.fetal-cell

Proposed mailing list name: FETAL-CELL-DIAGNOSTICS

Proposed e-mail addressess: fetldiag at net.bio.net
                            fetldiag at daresbury.ac.uk

Discussion leaders:         Aneal Chandra
                            chandra at cardiff.ac.uk

                            David Miller
                            davidm at pathology.leeds.ac.uk


Newsgroup Charter:

Cytogenetic testing is a relatively common procedure during pregnancy
to examine the health of the fetus. At the present time, amniocentesis
is often used to obtain fetal cells for the testing. Because 
amniocentesis is an expensive, invasive and therefore potentially 
harmful procedure to the fetus, alternative procedures are 
being sought.

Clearly, a small number of fetal cells cross the placental barrier 
and enter the maternal circulation during a normal pregnancy. If 
these cells have nuclei, they contain the genetic material of the 
fetus suitable for analysis. However, routine separation and 
identification of these rare nucleated fetal cells represents a 
considerable technical problem and several approaches are currently 
under evaluation.

bionet.diagnostics.fetal-cell will be of potential benefit to all
within this dynamic field. It is intended to provide an easy access
environment facilitating

* rapid exchange of technical information between researchers in 
fetal cell diagnostics

* co-operation between clinical laboratories, research biologists 
and instrument designers permitting the technological refinements 
necessary for the successful implementation of routine non-invasive 
procedures

* discussion of the logistical and social impact of new technology 
in prenatal diagnosis

Subscribers are welcome from academic and commercial institutions 
including, but not limited to, developmental biology, genetics, 
haematology, pathology, immunology, cell biology, etc. 
Contributions within the functions outlined above are encouraged. 
The newsgroup is expected to run in an unmoderated fashion and we 
are willing to act as current coordinators.

Aneal Chandra
Scientist, Cytogentics Unit for Wales, UK

David Miller   
Lecturer, Institute of Pathology, Leeds, UK
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Voting is now open on the proposal for
FETAL-CELL-DIAGNOSTICS/bionet.diagnostics.fetal-cell and will run
through 24:00 hrs Pacific Time on 30 August 1994.  Please send your
vote to either of the following addresses:

Address                               Location        Network
-------                               --------        -------
biovote at daresbury.ac.uk               U.K.            JANET
biovote at net.bio.net                   U.S.A.          Internet/BITNET

PLEASE BE SURE TO FOLLOW THE FORMAT BELOW - WE OFTEN RUN MORE THAN ONE
VOTE AT A TIME SO A SIMPLE "YES" OR "NO" MESSAGE WITHOUT THE NEWSGROUP
NAME MAY BE AMBIGUOUS.  Your vote should contain a single line:

YES on FETAL-CELL

if you favor allowing the creation of this newsgroup or

NO on FETAL-CELL

if you think that this proposal will adversely affect the
BIOSCI/bionet system.  While not intended to be an exhaustive list of
possible concerns (more specific concerns may have been raised during
the discussion period on BIOFORUM/bionet.general and interested
readers are referred to these), some general reasons for voting NO
might be if you are concerned about newsgroup proliferation and/or
believe that the proposed group will not be utilized, or if you think
that the proposed newsgroup would substantially duplicate or overlap
with the function of existing newsgroups.  If you are simply not
interested in participating in the newsgroup above, please don't cast
a NO vote, but instead just don't vote at all.

The newsgroup proposal must receive at least 80 YES votes to pass and
the number of YES votes must be greater than the number of NO votes by
at least 40.  Discussion of the newsgroup proposal is now closed and
we strongly discourage posting any messages in other forums about the
fact that a CALL FOR VOTES has been issued.

				Sincerely,

				Dave Kristofferson
				BIOSCI/bionet Manager

				biosci-help at net.bio.net