Meryl Streep, Donny Osmond and Nathan Lane tonight
Tonight, I was invited by my best friend Jacqui to attend a fund raising event for the Christopher Reeve Foundation. Last year, I met people such as Michael Douglas, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Robin Williams, Meryl Streep, Uma Thurman, Paul Newman, etc.
This year, some of the big names include: Nathan Lane, Barbara Walters, Meryl Streep, Donny Osmond, Bebe Neuwirth, former NJ Governor Tom Kean, Real Estate Mogul and NJ Nets Owner Bruce Ratner, the cast of Tarzan, Jersey Boys and Bob Dylan & Twyla Tharpe’s The Times They Are A Changin’, etc.
A MAGICAL EVENING 2006
THEME A BROADWAY TRIBUTE TO CHRISTOPHER & DANA REEVE
PERFORMANCES BY:
Donny Osmond, now appearing as Gaston in Beauty and the Beast
Bob Dylan & Twyla Tharpe’s The Times They Are A Changin’
Josh Strickland and Jenn Gambatese from Tarzan
The Stars of Jersey Boys
HONOREES:
Visionary Leadership Award: The Honorable Thomas H. Kean and Bruce C. Ratner
Inaugural Dana Reeve HOPE Award: Cristina Carlino, President, Philosophy, Inc
DATE: Monday, November 6, 2006
PLACE: The Marriott Marquis, New York City
TIME: 6:30PM – Cocktail Reception (6th floor)
7:30PM – Dinner (Ballroom, 6th floor) Black Tie
PRICE STRUCTURE:
Champion Tables(s) for 10 at $100,000
Leadership Table(s) for 10 at $50,000
Underwriter Table(s) for 10 at $25,000
Sponsor Table(s) for 10 at $15,000
Patron Table(s) for 10 at $10,000
Underwriter Ticket(s) at $2,500 each
Patron Ticket(s) at $1,000 each
More than $2 million were raised tonight for the CRF!
Amazing! You’re everywhere doing so many incredible things! No one in chess history is as active as you.
Hey Susan! Chanced upon your blog tonight. Will be a frequent visitor hereon. Loved the tidbit provided by Ken. Edward Lasker happens to be my fav. player 🙂
Susan wrote:
Tonight, I was invited by my best friend Jacqui to attend a fund raising event for the Christopher Reeves Foundation.
Then the big bucks are shown.
I find it tragic, that Reeves’ name is abused in such a blatant fashion. Reeves broke his neck, severed his spinal cord, and as a result became quadriplegic. His star status and tragedy triggered some people to use and abuse his name. It was pretended that “if money would be available for this, Reeves could walk”.
The truth is that science is not even close to cure such problem. And I don’t mean that they already found out this and that, they have one more step to take and the cure for such problem might be invented. I mean, science have no clue whatsoever. The central nervous system, the spinal cord are still total unknowns. It is not a matter of money, at least not at this point. Even to explain why, would be too complicated.
Gabor
i wouldnt say big names and Donny Osmond together
gabor said…
“The truth is that science is not even close to cure such problem. And I don’t mean that they already found out this and that, they have one more step to take and the cure for such problem might be invented. I mean, science have no clue whatsoever.”
That assertion might come as a shock to Drs. Pembe Hande Özdinler and Jeffrey Macklis of the MGH-Harvard Medical School Center for Nervous System Repair, who last month announced rather significant progress in controlling the growth of corticospinal motor neuron (CSMN) axons both in vitro and in vivo.
It would be wise to scan current research before making assertions about science having “no clue” in a given field. If this is not already obvious to you, even to explain why would be too complicated.
gabor said…
“I find it tragic, that Reeves’ name is abused in such a blatant fashion. Reeves broke his neck, severed his spinal cord, and as a result became quadriplegic. His star status and tragedy triggered some people to use and abuse his name.”
Also, Christopher Reeve (not “Reeves”) willingly gave his personal and financial support as well as his name to the
Christopher Reeve Foundation (formerly the American Paralysis Foundation). I have no first-hand knowledge of the organization, but I respect Mr. Reeve’s decision to use his fortune as well as his misfortune to advance a worthy cause.
gabor said…
It was pretended that “if money would be available for this, Reeves could walk”.
The claim has always been that, given enough research (and yes, finance is a factor), meaningful spinal cord might one day be possible. This is an obviously true statement, applicable to a plethora of as-yet-incurable conditions, and evidenced by the entirety of medical advancement since the Stone Age. The fact that Mr. Reeve did not survive to see his work completed does not mean that it was in vain; Susan’s original post is testament to that.
Again, I respectfully suggest that you research your statements before publishing them—especially when your statements are implicitly defamatory and your chosen medium is someone else’s blog.
tony said…
Hande Özdinler and Jeffrey Macklis of the MGH-Harvard Medical School Center for Nervous System Repair, who last month announced rather significant progress in controlling the growth of corticospinal motor neuron (CSMN) axons
You are both right. This study demonstrates progress in understanding a motor neuron growth factor, however the distance between that and being able to get the correct motor neurons hooked up properly to muscles, AND getting at least some kind of correct connectivity in the reverse direction (we control muscles using feedback from muscle tension, joint angle sensors, etc.) is rather large. (There was a great Star Trek about this, with Bones trying to reconnect Spock’s brain to his body.. 😉 So yes, there is realistic progress towards the goal, but it is very far off.
But there’s no reason to get up an arms about the spending of research money even if it IS a far-off goal. Scientists work on the questions they can find answers to, no matter what the nominal ultimate goal of the funding is. And there are far worse uses of money (which I won’t mention since this isn’t a political blog) to take issue with.
Well said, anonymous. Long-term goals are essential to long-term success. We’ve all seen how easily a simple chess-playing computer can be trapped by its lack of vision; God forbid that humanity fall prey to its own “horizon effect.”
Tony said…
gabor said…
…………….
That assertion might come as a shock to Drs. Pembe Hande Özdinler and Jeffrey Macklis of the MGH-Harvard Medical School Center for Nervous System Repair, who last month announced rather significant progress in controlling the growth of corticospinal motor neuron (CSMN) axons both in vitro and in vivo.
It would be wise to scan current research before making assertions about science having “no clue” in a given field. If this is not already obvious to you, even to explain why would be too complicated.
Well, first, I am a practicing physician for 30+ years. Second, it is too complicated, because one must know not only the anatomy, but the physiology of the human brain and spinal cord to really understand the subject. So, I won’t get into the details, I will mention just one item which may get those a bit closer to understanding the problem with this, who know what a cell is and what healing (any tissue) in general is.
Healing is the damaged cells being replaced by new healthy cells. In general. Many details are specific to different tissues.
The problem in the spinal cord is, that the cells are very unique and specific to the spinal cord: each cell can be as much as almost one meter long. These special cells start in the brain and reach down, millions across in the spinal cord, to their next connection. Therefore, nothing can heal at the point of disruption. The traditional way of healing (millions of tiny cells replacing millions of damaged cells) is not applicable. Even if we would figure out some local growth process, how will it grow both back into the brain and down to the distal region to the next connection? Furthermore, even that would be somehow possible, how would any individual cell find it’s original connection in the brain, and distally to the target neuron?
Since the problem is always tragic, many people try this and that, and many people supports these attempts with money. Unfortunately, it is almost like supporting the construction of a faster than the speed of light spaceship (:-).
At this point, at least.
Gabor
This was a worthwhile event in that it brought support to a cause which deserves some recognition. “Gabor” is right in that the full extent of the challenge is tremendous and we are still far away from a practical ‘cure’ for spinal paralysis unlike say if you had a broken bone which could be casted, pinned or otherwise fixed.
It is therefore an enormous challenge but the ground work has to be done somewhere – why not now? Consider the many incredible technology developments in the 20th century: heavier than air flight, mass telecommunication, space flight, etc., the fundamental mathematical basis for these achievements were for the most part done in the 19th century; the world needed to have engineering to catch with physics and math. Biology (including human biology) is in a similar situation. We have only had a basic grasp of DNA since the 1950’s and each year our understanding of how the body works, regulates and develops improves – but unless we continue to expand and refine that knowledge we’ll never get a cure.
An analogy in chess would be how the so called hyper modern revolution changed how we view chess openings and the middlegame. We now accept that control the center is more than having two pawns there. We now accept that a cramped position is not necessarily fatal and that there can be a lot of energetic counterplay which could pop out. Someone had to take the first step and try out these ideas and risk them in actual play.
I was also close with Edward Lasker, and in fact helped arrange his memorial service at Rockefeller University where he played on our team at times! The reason Edward gave for not finishing the Thomas game by O-O-O was that as an engineer he felt it was inappropriate to move two pieces when mate could be delivered by using just one!