Obama to overturn funding ban on embryonic stem-cell research
posted at 12:25 pm on March 9, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Saying that he wants to restore science to its rightful place in government, Barack Obama will reverse the executive order signed by George Bush banning federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research. Ironically, the hEsc research has proven much less fruitful than the efforts on adult stem cells, which have yielded dozens of therapies and have demonstrated the ability to become as pluripotentiary as hEsc cloning:
President Barack Obama will reverse the U.S. government’s ban on funding stem-cell research today and pledge to “use sound, scientific practice and evidence, instead of dogma” to guide federal policy, an adviser said.
Harold Varmus, co-chair of a science advisory group to the President, said Obama will ask the White House Office of Science and Technology to create guidelines to incorporate ‘scientific integrity’ into decision-making by U.S. agencies. The action on stem cells, which can grow into any kind of tissue, may help speed research into cures for major illness.
Academic laboratories, led by Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and companies already using stem-cell technology, led by Geron Corp., of Menlo Park, California, could gain tens of millions of dollars in funding because of the decision. A “significant amount” of $10 billion given the National Institutes of Health in Obama’s stimulus plan will go to this area of research, Varmus said.
“We view what happened with stem-cell research in the last administration as one manifestation of the failure to think carefully about how government use of scientific advice occurs,” said Varmus, a Nobel prize winner who is president of the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York, in a conference call with reporters yesterday. “Public policy must be guided by sound, scientific advice.”
Obama’s move hardly surprises anyone, and likely would have happened in a John McCain administration. McCain promised to reverse the Bush restrictions as well during the campaign and spent the last few years criticizing Bush for restricting federal funding. This was one of several points of near-agreement between Obama and McCain during the campaign.
The advocates of this policy cheer the supposed triumph of science over politics, but in truth, it’s the reverse. Over a year ago, researchers found a way to unlock adult stem cells to have the same flexibility as hEsc lines, ie, the ability to transform into any kind of tissue. Bush’s policy in effect pushed the government-funded research in that direction, which prompted the breakthrough. With that process available, we have no need to grind up our offspring to cure diseases, especially since grinding up our offspring has yet to result in even one therapeutic result, despite billions of dollars of research into hEsc. A scientific approach would dictate that we follow success instead of failure.
In fact, the market has done just that. While some states (California being one) have provided public funds for hEsc research, most of the private money goes towards adult stem-cell research. Why? It’s a proven technology. That’s one of the reasons hEsc researchers are so desperate to overturn Bush’s ban on federal funding — they can’t compete for any other funding any longer.
This decision places politics ahead of science. People demand government funding for hEsc not because it works, but because it’s popular. Pro-abortion activists want it as an endorsement of abortion as some sort of mechanism for scientific advance, and they’ve managed to sucker the rest into thinking that we’ll all die unless we start destroying embryos to keep us alive. No one has offered a single scientific reason to have the federal government fund hEsc research.
Update: Science Daily reported last week on why hEsc funding is even more unnecessary (via Third Base Politics):
Mount Sinai Hospital’s Dr. Andras Nagy discovered a new method of creating stem cells that could lead to possible cures for devastating diseases including spinal cord injury, macular degeneration, diabetes and Parkinson’s disease. The study, published by Nature, accelerates stem cell technology and provides a road map for new clinical approaches to regenerative medicine.
“We hope that these stem cells will form the basis for treatment for many diseases and conditions that are currently considered incurable,” said Dr. Nagy, Senior Investigator at the Samuel Lunenfeld Research Institute of Mount Sinai Hospital, Investigator at the McEwen Centre for Regenerative Medicine, and Canada Research Chair in Stem Cells and Regeneration. “This new method of generating stem cells does not require embryos as starting points and could be used to generate cells from many adult tissues such as a patient’s own skin cells.”
Yet another scientific reason why federal funding should go elsewhere.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »
Above his pay grade…. right?
Yakko77 on March 9, 2009 at 12:27 PM
Yes, but adult stem cell usage doesn’t help justify the killing Barry supports.
Vashta.Nerada on March 9, 2009 at 12:27 PM
Another sad day for America.
jcheney on March 9, 2009 at 12:28 PM
Bingo. More and more of the scientific community is giving up the argument on this issue because they know the alternative is not only more palatable, but more effective in terms of potential.
Has anyone put forth another connection to the embryonic stem cell argument? “Sustainability”? That foul word that effectively means wiping out the poorer majority of the world?
MadisonConservative on March 9, 2009 at 12:29 PM
Can someone please send me a link to the federal constitution that allows for funding scientific research for non-defense purposes? The one I am looking at does have any right to do this.
WashJeff on March 9, 2009 at 12:30 PM
Obama is turning out to be a bigger SHOW PONY than John Edwards.
originalpechanga on March 9, 2009 at 12:31 PM
He HAD to do it! We were running out of things to spend money on!
Star20 on March 9, 2009 at 12:31 PM
.
Never underestimate how important advancing the culture of death is to this people. They will do anything to protect and validate abortion. That’s what Obama’s born alive vote was all about.
neuquenguy on March 9, 2009 at 12:31 PM
This has nothing to do with science or medical cures and EVERYTHING to do with sanctifying abortion.
Nothing so far has come of this research, and I suspect little will. Nothing good can come from murder.
wildcat84 on March 9, 2009 at 12:31 PM
Obama supports spending more federal dollars, what a shock.
zmdavid on March 9, 2009 at 12:32 PM
+1. This is another sad day for USA.
Question though, wasn’t McCain for this as well?
deidre on March 9, 2009 at 12:34 PM
Of all the stuff on his plate making him exhausted, this is at the top of his list. Shameless.
hoosiermama on March 9, 2009 at 12:35 PM
MORE throwing Money down a rat hole by the Obama Administration
originalpechanga on March 9, 2009 at 12:36 PM
I hope Barack Obama fails.
D2Boston on March 9, 2009 at 12:37 PM
Again, this is Allahs territory Ed. I can see it now : Good News : Kids killed to preserve the enlightened!!!
Fuquay Steve on March 9, 2009 at 12:37 PM
There never was a ban on using embryonic stem cells…never. Just a ban on federal funding…a limited ban at that.
A few points, the first…if embryonic stems cells showed as much promise as there is hype, then the private sector would have poured billions into it in order to realize a huge profit for the investors down the line. But, the present research indicates, embryonic stem cells are not the “lode stone” to cure all the diseases known to mankind…not even close. Adult stem cells fare much much better.
Second, now with the official emphasis on embryonic stem cells, how will other government funded research go?
Third, why not call this for what it is? it is an official government approval for abortion. Another justification for abortion. An embryo, a fetus, is just another commodity to be harvested.
One promising area that hasn’t garnered much attention is drawing off of bone marrow cells…your own stem cells…to facilitate developing cures for all sorts of maladies, your own maladies…cut nerves, organ re-generation, combating tumors…and more.
Once again Hype drives Hope…and in the end, seems “Hope” is all this Administration and those who support this Administration.
Bad law passed for all the best reasons, is still bad law.
coldwarrior on March 9, 2009 at 12:37 PM
If science and market forces are leading in other directions, then why not remove a government regulation that isn’t needed (for a change)? This is a very non-conservative viewpoint to take, and it undermines the general pro-market principles that are so often (and rightly) stated here. Plus, the following statement is almost always true:
People demand government _____ not because it works, but because it’s popular.
fehuq on March 9, 2009 at 12:38 PM
Something wicked this way comes…
Connie on March 9, 2009 at 12:39 PM
This is so true. ESC research has not produced treatment, only problems, while other types of stem cells have provided benefits in 73 areas, including Parkinson’s disease. I wonder if Michael J. Fox will stop pushing for ESC research now!
INC on March 9, 2009 at 12:39 PM
But, we all know, nothing gets done unless the federal government is involved. So in effect, it was a ban hEsc research.
WashJeff on March 9, 2009 at 12:40 PM
bottom line: my own stem cells stand a lot better chance coming up with ‘repair parts’ for me than an embryo that is a genetic match to no one individual. Looked at from this purely scientific viewpoint- devoid of any morality considerations- then adult stem cells are the only way to go.
michaelo on March 9, 2009 at 12:42 PM
Yes, so now women can actually feel as though they’re saving a life by exterminating one they’ve created.
It would be one thing if it worked, or was even slightly better than adult stem cells (which, since you can take them from the patient do not carry the risk of rejection that embryonic stem cells do), but like any other scientific issue, if there’s a religious objection, the left pretends it already won the debate and can’t be bothered to argue.
Anti-religion is not the same as pro-science.
Esthier on March 9, 2009 at 12:42 PM
Even if this worked,, it is the killing of one group to save another group!!
Kill a lot of babies to save a
lotselected few!JellyToast on March 9, 2009 at 12:42 PM
Oh, the irony.
okonkolo on March 9, 2009 at 12:42 PM
i guess we know how well germany rolled science into their government operation 70 years ago / sarc
gatorboy on March 9, 2009 at 12:42 PM
They have been using this to reach for some kind of moral justification for abortion, to advocate a false dilemma as to which life is more valuable and to paint those of us who are pro-live as uncaring.
However, God has certainly shown He has morally underwritten His universe. ESC research has turned to naught but harm while other types of stem cell research has prospered.
INC on March 9, 2009 at 12:43 PM
Nothing gets done unless the federal government is involved?
I hope that was sarcasm.
If not…then you are among the many who are part of the overall problem, not at all part of the solution.
coldwarrior on March 9, 2009 at 12:43 PM
The new rule is an interference in the market. Just because it is a bad idea doesn’t mean the government won’t dump money on it, creating an incentive to do this type of research.
zmdavid on March 9, 2009 at 12:43 PM
I hope you’re being sarcastic.
Esthier on March 9, 2009 at 12:44 PM
California still has its $6B albatross, and now that the brakes are off in the other 49 states, it’s looking even heavier.
I don’t think the science or the politics go there. Where they do go is to unfetter the ability of scientists to create new embryos and then to enslave them for the good of their fellow humans. Like Josef Mengele, the scientists who do this have to be firmly convinced that their subjects are not human. And, like Josef Mengele, they are firmly convinced yet they are wrong.
The place where this science works is obvious if you think of it. You take an existing embryo and you twin it — analogous to natural processes which result in identical twins. You allow one of the embryos to go to term. The other is kept on ice, so to speak, to provide parts for his or her sibling. Hence, we have significantly healthier and extended lifespans, but at the expense of deliberately stifling the development of another human.
The materials provided by the “spare” could include both brain and heart tissue, which certainly will require a diminishment of what is considered “alive”.
Obama claims that he wants to remove politics from science. As Mengele has shown, there can be no such removal.
unclesmrgol on March 9, 2009 at 12:46 PM
This British scientists points out the disparity of research money:
British Scientist Abandons England, Criticizes Embryonic Stem Cell Research
INC on March 9, 2009 at 12:46 PM
Ed, your post might make sense if Obama were pushing legislation to actually deallocate funding from elsewhere to find hEsc. He isn’t. He’s lifting a ban on such funding.
The way research works is that you follow many directions at once, and some work out. While it’s true that adult stem cells have started to yield fruit, in no way does this imply that embryonic stem cells are a dead end. They may be or they may not be. Overturning this order simply allows the funding of research to follow the scientific needs.
Now, once they divert funds from more needy research causes towards hSec, you’re welcome to write about how that’s wrong. Though I don’t really understand what your point would be there — these researchers are thirty for the blood of unborn fetuses so they would rather work on embryonic stem cells than adult ones? You really think they believe that it’s a research direction that will fail, but want to devote years of their lives to pursue it?
The problem with posts like this is that you’re masking your real complaint — you think it’s morally wrong to conduct this research. Which is fine. Say that. Don’t act like you’re reviewing a random funding list and criticizing where funds are being allocated based on research considerations alone.
tneloms on March 9, 2009 at 12:47 PM
Now, now, he is simply for being practical and scientific. Afterall, those dead fetuses can be useful.
Next on his list, turn executed prisoners into fertilizer. And be quick about it, it’s March already!
Soylent Green next?
mugged by squirrels on March 9, 2009 at 12:48 PM
Whew, I’m sure we’ll be seeing a cascading torrent of medical breakthroughs now that the Gov’mt can fund stem cell research…
Ladies, ankles in the air…time to generate some research material.
Wyznowski on March 9, 2009 at 12:49 PM
I would hope that Michael J Fox gets his ESC today. After a few dozen brain tumors, perhaps he will be able to disavow them.
And since when was it Government’s authority to put science “where it belongs?”
One more thing. thus far the faux science of anthropogenic climate change is horse menure and our Fed gov is laced with it.
OTH, as many have noted before, Obama truly believes in absolutely nothing other than Marxist socialism so he couldn’t care less about life at any stage of development.
larvcom on March 9, 2009 at 12:51 PM
I remember in the 1980s there was a big debate because some German scientists had collected data on the death process in human beings due to hypothermia, and while such data would have been useful in saving lives, the scientific community made a decision to disregard it.
You see, the research was performed on live human beings. Jews. In the 1940s death camps.
Those men were scientists.
The “men” who claim the mantle of science today may well be intellectually accomplished, but they are moral retards.
What Mr. Obama did today is a radical break from the tradition of real science. What Mr. Obama did was based on the ideology of the culture of death.
Shame on him.
jeff_from_mpls on March 9, 2009 at 12:51 PM
This only goes to show that Dear Leader is more interested in poking George Bush in the eye than taking care of real business.
behiker on March 9, 2009 at 12:51 PM
He has, multiple times. Does he need to say it every time? He’s fairly transparent on the issue, and that’s the whole point here. Adult stem cells are more effective and have no more issue. It’s a no brainer.
And as others have said, other countries are researching embryonic stem cells with federal funding and without success. Just because America isn’t doing it, doesn’t mean it hasn’t been done. We really aren’t the center of the world, even though we’re a very large part of it.
Esthier on March 9, 2009 at 12:52 PM
And, WashJeff, that is a crock. There is substantial private money in research; take if from someone who spent many years in tissue culture research.
michaelo on March 9, 2009 at 12:53 PM
The is the water being poured down the snowy mountain.
leetpriest on March 9, 2009 at 12:55 PM
getalife is not on this thread, so I figured I step in fill-in and provide insane arguments.
WashJeff on March 9, 2009 at 12:55 PM
Glad we don’t have to worry about pesky concepts like “ethics” getting in the way of science any more.
When does the Tuskegee Experiment get started back up?
CDeb on March 9, 2009 at 12:56 PM
OK, then. :-)
Sure you are up to that standard of insanity?
coldwarrior on March 9, 2009 at 12:57 PM
You must not be staying up with stem cell research.
Did you see this part of the post?
This came out just last week:
Stem cell research has made many advancements–only none in the area of ESC. Other stem cells are making the need for ESC obsolete.
He’s not masking his real complaint. This is for federal funding. Why should our money go to something that is wrong when it has not shown any benefits?
INC on March 9, 2009 at 12:57 PM
INC…you’ve just hit precisely on target my reservations about all of Obama’s policies.
coldwarrior on March 9, 2009 at 12:59 PM
Eshier: You’re correct. What’s not mentioned is that this is truly a ponzi scheme for tax money pure and simple just like the abortion industry, if the government wasn’t offering money it would be substantially lessor in size.
Ths research will be aimed to legitimize abortion so that we have an endless supply of fetal material.
larvcom on March 9, 2009 at 1:00 PM
Michael J. Fox is going to have to abandon ESC:
Groundbreaking Paper Publishes Long Term Results of a Successful Phase I Clinical Trial Using Autologous Neural Stem Cells to Treat Parkinson’s Disease
INC on March 9, 2009 at 1:00 PM
Let’s see:
This is Bush’s depression!
Cannot write anything else that is in the regressive mindset without getting a headache. So, no, I am not up the task.
WashJeff on March 9, 2009 at 1:02 PM
Gotta admire your moxie, nonetheless.
coldwarrior on March 9, 2009 at 1:02 PM
I don’t see a problem with ESC research, and the allocation of Federal funds for research IF such path leads to results. These are embryos that would have been destroyed anyway for in vitro fertilization. Unless you have a problem with the latter too, I think you don’t have much of a moral argument against ESC research.
haner on March 9, 2009 at 1:02 PM
larvcom on March 9, 2009 at 1:03 PM
SO true. Every single one of his policies from economics, etc., has a track record of failure.
Someone said the other day the Hippocratic Oath needs to be incorporated into politics: Above all, do no harm!
INC on March 9, 2009 at 1:03 PM
This is so true. It has always been a wedge used to buttress the abortion cause.
whitetop on March 9, 2009 at 1:04 PM
And yet, according to Drudge he’s going to ban CLONING outright.
Which is… what they’re doing with these Stem cells…
I thought this guy was Mr. Science?
Skywise on March 9, 2009 at 1:06 PM
Mona Charen addressed this quite a while back in answer to criticisms by Michael Kinsley along that line. I think this post is from at least 2007, however, I don’t see a year on it. It’s worth reading the entire short column. This is just a bit of it.
I’m sure there are clinics who are exceptions to this, however, people have thought about this, you know!
INC on March 9, 2009 at 1:06 PM
Begin, the clone wars
Kini on March 9, 2009 at 1:08 PM
Cap’n Ed…..ESCR and ASCR are complimentary, not competitive.
Scientists, doctors and researchers know this.
ESCR is vastly more useful in disease modelling for example.
The premise that ASCR is exactly peer or even superior to ESCR is a lie perpetuated by the Socon Agenda, and not endorsed by any scientists or researchers in the world.
BTW, do you happen to know what is going to happen to the
Bioluddite CouncilPresident’s Council on Bioethics?Perhaps tar and feathers and being ridden out of town on a rail?
strangelet on March 9, 2009 at 1:08 PM
Ed there may indeed be valid scientific reasons for pursuing embryonic stem cells, such as telomere shortening that may possibly be more extensive in adult stem cells. This may impact on the number of productive divisions the cells may undergo upon differentiating into the appropriate cell types. As a scientist who has attended seminars for researchers doing hESC studies, I can say that they are not devoting their investigative careers to advance a political football. They are doing the research for scientific reasons that may have a very substantive impact on therapeutically treating disease. I agree as a layman on stem cell research, I agree that human stem cells show the greatest potential for therapies, but they have shortcomings that hESC may adress.
Dilophos on March 9, 2009 at 1:09 PM
Next, little hussein will be using our taxpayer dollars to pay girls for their aborted fetuses. The fetuses will simply be donated to the government for “the common good.”
Sick. However, no one should be surprised by this. Elections have consequences.
ErinF on March 9, 2009 at 1:09 PM
What exactly is science’s rightful place in government? I’m digging through my copy of the Constitution and I’m not finding it. Must have been left out at the printers…
DrMagnolias on March 9, 2009 at 1:09 PM
Slightly O/T, but Jill Stanek has this info up (my emphasis in bold:
Congressional doctors fight Obama plan to overturn healthcare conscience rights protection; Comment email address DEFUNCT
INC on March 9, 2009 at 1:10 PM
Why repeat the lie Ed?
There never was a ban on stem cell research.
There was a ban on federal money being used on new stem cell lines. Federal money could be used on any of the lines that existed at the time the order was signed. And there never were any limits on non-federal funds.
MarkTheGreat on March 9, 2009 at 1:11 PM
Politics is part of science. The subjects, goals, and methodologies of scientific research will ALWAYS be influenced by politics at some level — whether in D.C., within the field of science, or at the institutional/corporate level.
I see ESC has having two political dimensions. First, scientists who want to get funding to do that work will clammor for it and will pooh-pooh any other stem cell as not being good enough. Second, liberals see it as a way to strike back at Christians, and will therefore push ESC purely out of spite.
Outlander on March 9, 2009 at 1:11 PM
You just haven’t let your penumbras emanate far enough.
CDeb on March 9, 2009 at 1:12 PM
I didn’t. I wrote about the “funding ban”. Try reading it again.
Ed Morrissey on March 9, 2009 at 1:13 PM
Well, I for one do have a problem with it. I think whether you’re talking about abortion or about in vitro, both are the human race trying to play God. Adoption is the answer to both issues.
If people aren’t meant to conceive, they should adopt (Lord knows there’s enough children in the world who need good homes.)
If people don’t want to be parents after willingly conceiving a child, they should put the child up for adoption. (Lord knows there’s enough couples out there who can provide good, loving homes.)
ErinF on March 9, 2009 at 1:13 PM
Slightly O/T, Jill Stanek has this (my emphasis in bold):
Congressional doctors fight Obama plan to overturn healthcare conscience rights protection; Comment email address DEFUNCT
INC on March 9, 2009 at 1:13 PM
That is what I never understood. If ESC really was the way to go you would think private drug company money would be flooding into it – think of the potential patents.
katiejane on March 9, 2009 at 1:14 PM
A little too late for Christopher Reeves though.
carbon_footprint on March 9, 2009 at 1:15 PM
I’m pretty sure that it was the Japanese experimenting on US POW’s.
MarkTheGreat on March 9, 2009 at 1:16 PM
Silly conservatives. Don’t you know there’s no standing in the way of the new “Bill of Entitlements”? I’m especially looking forward to the Chicken McNuggets Clause (banning McDonald’s from running out of them, duh).
“The circle is complete. The student has become the master. Now prepare to die, conservatism!”
cackcon on March 9, 2009 at 1:17 PM
Your ideolgy in Science has ended.
Another promise kept by the President.
getalife on March 9, 2009 at 1:17 PM
Probably with the phrase “provide for the general welfare”. I believe that Hamilton and Madison publicly differed on the meaning of the phrase. Ultimately, SCOTUS endorsed the Hamiltonian view, which would support congress using its taxing power in this way.
dedalus on March 9, 2009 at 1:18 PM
We’re all going to die eventually.
MarkTheGreat on March 9, 2009 at 1:19 PM
Back at you Ed. As I pointed out, there never was a “funding ban” on stem cell research.
MarkTheGreat on March 9, 2009 at 1:20 PM
Is this really the hill Republicans want to die on? Make the argument that it is a waste of money, which I’m sure it is, but leave the bible-thumping “all mitochondria are precious” out of it.
Speedwagon82 on March 9, 2009 at 1:21 PM
The socialists want to have every possible motivation to kill babies, including using them to harvest for “scientific” experiments. Doesn’t anyone remember Josef Mengele?
stonemeister on March 9, 2009 at 1:21 PM
Lydia! we have been missing you. Glad you are here. All commenters making sense all the time gets boring.
neuquenguy on March 9, 2009 at 1:21 PM
I believe I saiud that and many times before that they are looking to tap the federal cash caw and man has it grown some udders.
larvcom on March 9, 2009 at 1:21 PM
Don’t worry, there’s still global warming research for those who like a little dogma in their science.
CDeb on March 9, 2009 at 1:22 PM
So if in the future there is a major breakthrough thanks to ESC, will you be willing to admit that it must mean god has switched sides and is now pro-research?
jonknee on March 9, 2009 at 1:22 PM
We’re not talking mitochondria here.
INC on March 9, 2009 at 1:22 PM
He’s fully aware of that, of course. They’ve never been above misrepresenting a position to make its holders appear foolish.
CDeb on March 9, 2009 at 1:23 PM
What do you mean when you talk about reversing “Bush restrictions”? Bush expanded federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. I expect that kind of idiocy from the media, but not from you, Ed.
JohnJ on March 9, 2009 at 1:24 PM
We’ve been producing in vitro embryos in excess over that needed to cause pregnancy for a long time. Then we fight over what to do with the excess. Why is it ethical to produce the excess at the outset? If creating in vitro originated pregnancy demands an excess of embryos, why is the procedure itself ethical?
a capella on March 9, 2009 at 1:24 PM
That’s a logical fallacy to use the term pro-research as if to imply if you’re against ESC research you don’t want any research at all.
INC on March 9, 2009 at 1:25 PM
As long as there is a .00001% chance of any of this curing a disease, it will be hard to not support it unless its financially ridiculous. THAT is the argument that should be used, not that we are going to create Khan from Star Trek.
Speedwagon82 on March 9, 2009 at 1:25 PM
True.
INC on March 9, 2009 at 1:25 PM
I’m sure Science could make a lot of advances if it were allowed to conduct vivisections on liberals. If you oppose allowing Science the freedom to vivisect liberals, you’re anti-science.
JohnJ on March 9, 2009 at 1:26 PM
I am going to get eaten a live but: It isn’t
neuquenguy on March 9, 2009 at 1:26 PM
I’m not a religious expert by any means, but I’m pretty sure God would agree in vitro is unethical. It’s people playing God, just as much as abortion is.
ErinF on March 9, 2009 at 1:27 PM
I quite obviously meant pro-ESC-research. You said god must be anti-ESC because there haven’t been any major breakthroughs (or funding, but hey, that’s another debate). So I simply said that if a major discovery is made thanks to ESC will that mean god is now suddenly for said research? If you’re consistent, you should switch your position if these discoveries are made since you don’t want to be caught on the opposite side of god.
(Personally I think it’s quite silly to bring god into this at all, but hey that’s me.)
jonknee on March 9, 2009 at 1:29 PM
We’ve been producing in vitro embryos in excess over that needed to cause pregnancy for a long time. Then we fight over what to do with the excess. Why is it ethical to produce the excess at the outset? If creating in vitro originated pregnancy demands an excess of embryos, why is the procedure itself ethical?
What is with this “we” crap? The ethics of a couple’s decision has apparently been left to them, since no jurisdiction has banned in vitro. (Correct me if I’m wrong, but hasn’t SCOTUS stuck their pointy noses in to prevent regulation of the procedure?)
However, the ethics of federally-funded destruction of embryos is an entirely different question. And distinctions, dear friend, are critical for conservatives–less so for the libtards who now run the country.
cackcon on March 9, 2009 at 1:29 PM
Only upon brain death.
dedalus on March 9, 2009 at 1:31 PM
So, in the future, if we perform testing on the Jews like the nazis did and get a major breakthrough from it, will you be willing to admit that it must mean sacrificing anyone for science is good?
Or do you have limits to your “pro-research” views?
Skywise on March 9, 2009 at 1:32 PM
Wow, ignorant of most basic facts Ed is now playing an expert on biological research, too. If one thing is success and another is failure then guess what…
Attention! OMG! Teh new! Who would have thunk?!111
… then program directors at funding agencies will not approve funding for specific programs that yield no positive result and/or are prohibitively expensive in every meaning of the word. Imagine that! Much like thousands of other research venues all perfectly legal yet universally viewed as dead ends, this one will not be pursued by anybody with a brain, provided Ed’s assessment is correct. (And we all know Ed wouldn’t have pictures of himself with a mic if he weren’t an authority on cellular biology.)
radiofreevillage on March 9, 2009 at 1:33 PM
JohnJ Bush expanded funding on the 21 pre-existing stem cell lines, which were basically useless for human research until Johns Hopkins solved the mouse-feeder-cell contamination problem in 2006.
Immediately thereafter it was discovered the 21 “blessed” lines were degrading and needed restarted from fresh tissue cultures.
The “expansion bill” that Bush veto’d was just to restart the existing lines.
So basically Bush was funding junk research on useless embryonic stem cell lines as a political gimmick………or, in simpler terms, throwing your money away.
strangelet on March 9, 2009 at 1:35 PM
Just another earmark.
patrick neid on March 9, 2009 at 1:35 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »