Posted by Cockney Robin & Damozel |
Don't let the wonks and shills blind you with science. That Bush forced scientists to find a workaround is not only not to his credit, it is an embarrassment and a disgrace. Though I applaud the scientists, I can barely keep from punching a hole in my laptop screen when I read the self-serving gloatings from America's far right. And Wisconsin professor James Thomson--- one of the very stem cell researchers praised by Bush---has 'slammed' the Bush Administration for the impediments it placed in the way of progress and the right wing for its self-congratulations for a misguided policy.
In an article co-written with president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science Alan Leshner, he states:
Far from vindicating the current U.S. policy of withholding federal funds from many of those working to develop potentially lifesaving embryonic stem cells, recent papers in the journals Science and Cell described a breakthrough achieved despite political restrictions. In fact, work by both the U.S. and Japanese teams that reprogrammed skin cells depended entirely on previous embryonic stem cell research.
At a time when nearly 60 percent of Americans support human embryonic stem cell research, U.S. stem cell policy runs counter to both scientific and public opinion. President Bush's repeated veto of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act, which has twice passed the House and Senate with votes from Republicans and Democrats alike, further ignores the will of the American people. (Standing in the Way of Stem Cell Research)
Responding to Charles Krauthammers' recent gloat, they say:
[T]he recent tandem advances in the United States and by Shinya Yamanaka's team in Japan are far from being a Holy Grail, as Charles Krauthammer inaccurately described
Krauthammer's central argument -- that the president's misgivings about embryonic stem cell research inspired innovative alternatives -- is fundamentally flawed, too. Yamanaka was of course working in Japan, and scientists around the world are pursuing the full spectrum of options, in many cases faster than researchers in the United States...
We simply cannot invest all our hopes in a single approach. Federal funding is essential for both adult and embryonic stem cell research, even as promising alternatives are beginning to emerge. them. Though potential landmarks, these studies are only a first step on the long road toward eventual therapies.Unfortunately, under the policy President Bush outlined on Aug. 9, 2001, at most 21 stem cell lines derived from embryos before that date are eligible for federal funding. American innovation in the field thus faces inherent limitations. Even more significant, the stigma resulting from the policy surely has discouraged some talented young Americans from pursuing stem cell research.
We hope Congress will override the president's veto of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. Further delays in pursuing the clearly viable option of embryonic stem cells will result in an irretrievable loss of time, especially if the new approach fails to prove itself. (Standing in the Way of Stem Cell Research; emphasis added)
The progressive blog Think Progress remarks:
In June, then-White House spokesperson Tony Snow said Bush’s veto of stem cell research was evidence of him “putting science before ideology.” In reality, the scientific community — including Bush’s own science advisers — thinks the opposite. (Prominent Stem Cell Researcher Praised By Bush Rips White House’s Stem Cell Policies)
The embryonic stem cell issue was always a faked-up 'dilemma' designed to stir up/placate people with little understanding of the actual science for the cynical purpose of scoring political points.
Whereas most voters and some well-known Republicans (such as Nancy Reagan and Arnold Schwarzenegger) were "eager for the benefits of this scientific advance," science and the potential welfare of a very large number of Americans has been put on hold in order to placate "the small but intense minority who believe that a clump of a few dozen cells floating in a petri dish has the same human rights as you or I." (see TIME)
In TIME, Michael Kinsley---a sufferer from Parkinson's and therefore one of those fully-fledged and suffering human beings for which America's conservative seem to care so little---sets out for more persuasively than I did why the new science fails to mitigate, let alone 'vindicate,' Bush's interference. . In his article, he sets out four reasons why the new developments do nothing to vindicate the wrong done to humankind by this misguided and essentially hypocritical policy:
But any Republicans who think the stem-cell breakthrough gets them off the hook are going to end up very unhappy. This issue will not go away.
First, even the scientists who achieved the latest success believe strongly that embryonic-stem-cell research should continue. No one knows for sure whether the new method of producing pluripotent cells will pan out or where the next big developments will come from. We are still many thresholds away from anything that can be of practical value to me and others. Scientifically, it makes no sense to abandon any promising avenue just because another has opened up.
Second, even if this were a true turning point in stem-cell research, people like me are not going to quickly forget those six lost years. I am 56. Last year I had a kind of brain surgery that dramatically reduces the symptoms of Parkinson's. It received government approval only five years ago. Every year that goes by, science opens new doors, and every year, as you get older and your symptoms perhaps get worse, doors get shut. Six years of delay in a field moving as fast as stem-cell research means a lot of people for whom doors may not open until it is time for them to shut.
Third, although the political dilemma that stem cells pose for politicians is real enough, the moral dilemma is not and never was. The embryos used in stem-cell research come from fertility clinics, which otherwise would discard them. This has been a powerful argument in favor of such research. Why let these embryos go to waste? But a more important point is, What about fertility clinics themselves? In vitro fertilization ("test-tube babies") involves the purposeful creation of multiple embryos, knowing and intending that most of them either will die after implantation in the womb or, if not implanted, will be discarded or frozen indefinitely. Even if all embryonic-stem-cell research stopped tomorrow, this far larger mass slaughter of embryos would continue. There is no political effort to stop it. Bush even praised in vitro fertilization in his 2001 speech about the horrors of stem-cell research. In vitro has become too popular for politicians to take on. But their failure to do so makes a mockery of their alleged agony over embryonic stem cells.
Finally, the position a politician takes on an issue tells you something about his or her character, values and intellect. And that understanding doesn't disappear even if the issue itself does. Over the past six years, Bush and most Republicans in Congress have done their best to stop medical research that could cure many diseases, including one that I have. They claimed that morality and ethics required no less, yet they demonstrated by their indifference toward in vitro fertilization that they couldn't possibly be serious about this. Now they hope that science will spring them from the trap they walked into with full knowledge. Bush Administration apologists even say the President deserves credit because he directed research away from embryonic stem cells and encouraged scientists to look for more acceptable alternatives. In fact, the new research would not have been possible without the kind involving embryonic stem cells, which Bush believes is immoral. (Why Science Can't Save the GOP; emphasis added)
MEMEORANDUM discusses the issue here.
Watch The Corner
spin out the rationalisations, even in the face of this repudiation by
the very scientists on whom they base their whole argument that Bush's
policies have been vindicated.
RELATED POSTINGS
New Breakthrough in Stem Cell Research?
Scientist Withdraws Paper to Prevent Misuse by Creationists
More on Gore and Media Memes: Did "A Gaggle of Journalists" Misreport the "9 Errors" Case?
I've long held the opinion that anybody who would place the life of a ball of cells above the life of an actual person is not really aware of the reality of the embryo.
It's understandable(though sad)in the mass of people who get scientific information third-hand from a pastor or preist. It's unforgivable in a politician who's supposed to have a brain and know how to use it.
Posted by: marilyn | December 04, 2007 at 10:55 AM