Bush-League Science

[stan2reason]

We can probably file this under "Things We Already Knew" but this ABC/USA Today report (http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=3450585&page=1) highlights the Bush administration's war on science. My heart broke a bit the day Bush, on "moral" grounds, effectively killed federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. It hasn't mended since.

S2R

[formerfundie]

We can probably file this under "Things We Already Knew" but this ABC/USA Today report (http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=3450585&page=1) highlights the Bush administration's war on science. My heart broke a bit the day Bush, on "moral" grounds, effectively killed federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. It hasn't mended since.

S2R

This is a clear example of someone (Bush) who is a much worse person *because* of his religious belief system. His sense of morality is actually adding to the human suffering equation. I agree that it is a sad, misguided policy. The medical miracles that will surely be the eventual result of embryonic stem cell research will happen... Just not in America.

[phrog]

It's amazing just how much religion impedes advancement of science and medical research. Similar repercussions came about back when the first heart transplants were introduced. Religion proclaimed them a travesty toward god. Since then they change and embraced the process as a gift from god. Eventually, they'll come around we can only hope, and we'll see similar exaltations from the church. Unfortunately, people that could have benefited from the research will probably be gone. My wife has MS. She's in a wheelchair now and in her late 50's. It's very possible that the douche nozzle in the white house is literally taking years off her life.

[stan2reason]

Shoot, I'm sorry to hear that Phrog. Tragically, I think you may be right. The last 6 dark years have undoubtedly been devastating for thousands if not millions of people.

The ESCR debate is what drove me from the comfort of my atheist closet.

[Aspirin99]

Wow, nice post.

[Stumpy]

Phrog, I hate to hear that. My father in law has MS and he hasn't walked in 15 years. My father died indirectly from diabetes and my wife and I both have it as do millions of other people. I studied biology in college and whole-heartedly embrace embryonic stem cell research as a key to future medical and scientific advancement.

Regardless of religious beliefs the benefits from this research would be the greatest thing for mankind. Too bad some bible thumpers have their heads straight up their asses on this one, particularly the goon in the White House. I can only hope that one day he has a debilitating disease that might be cured through stem cell research. Let's see what his hypocritical ass thinks of it then.

[minorwork]

From Stumpy,

Regardless of religious beliefs the benefits from this research would be the greatest thing for mankind. Too bad some bible thumpers have their heads straight up their asses on this one, particularly the goon in the White House. I can only hope that one day he has a debilitating disease that might be cured through stem cell research. Let's see what his hypocritical ass thinks of it then.


Boy, I'm not so sure there would be any change even then. Martyrdom is hardly, uh, dead.

[stan2reason]

Boy, I'm not so sure there would be any change even then. Martyrdom is hardly, uh, dead.

Good point--he might just be that stupid. It begins to hit home when it's someone you love very much that suffers because of inane decisions. I won't wish that on anyone, even him.

This is a topic of great interest/concern/dismay to me. I work in a job where literally thousands of children could benefit from ESCR. It cuts even deeper for me in the same way it does for Phrog. It's possible that we'll have a return to normalcy in 18 months or so but it's also conceivable that here in the US we'll be faced with another of W's ilk. Like those who argue for intelligent design, the opponents of ESCR try to use "science" to make their point. Typically, however, they bastardize science by cherry-picking data that seems to support their argument and ignore that which flies in the face of it.

You may face these people in debate so I'd like to include information that I posted on another forum quite some time ago (sorry David--I don't go there any more! :) I promise!). Most of this nonsense comes from a "scientist" by the name of Dr. David Prentice and his organization Do No Harm: The Coalition of Americans for Research Ethics.

Have at it!

The utilitarian argument is growing in popularity among those opposed to stem cell research. I believe that its popularity arises from how successful it is with politicians. I've heard a growing number of politicians question research on embryonic stem cells given that the adult variety seem to be so much more successful.

One prominent source for such arguments is Dr. David Prentice, a founding member of "Do No Harm: The Coalition of Americans for Research Ethics" Their website, www.stemcellresearch.org, states that some 72 disease can be treated using adult or cord blood stem cells whereas no diseases benefit from embryonic stem cells. They include a list of peer reviewed articles that support their list of 72 diseases. A close examination reveals some creative uses of the literature. The first 26 or so diseases are various forms of cancer which have been successfully treated using higher doses of chemotherapy followed by stem cell (bone marrow transplant) rescue. In the past, the dose of chemotherapy was limited by the toxic effects of the agent on bone marrow. It did no good to kill the tumor if the bone marrow was destroyed in the process. Bone marrow stem cell transplantation allowed for higher doses of chemo because the bone marrow could be restored following treatment. This is an extremely valuable option for people with cancer but to suggest to the public that adult stem cells are a treatment for brain cancer is stretching the truth a bit. If adult stem cells are a treatment for cancer then one could also say that a blood transfusion is a treatment for brain cancer when a patient is rendered anemic by the chemotherapy.

It could be said that I'm splitting hairs here or that this argument is pure semantics. Not so.

First, the argument that we should abandon a line of research simply because another seems more effective is untenable. It becomes more suspect when you closely review "Do No Harm's" list of peer reviewed support articles as Science Magazine did in the summer of 06. It turns out that there are only 9 disease processes for which adult stem cells can actually be considered a treatment modality. I'm thrilled that we have those 9 treatments and I believe with all my heart that research in this are should continue. The ability to treat 9 diseases with adult stem cells does not lead me to conclude, however, that I should abandon another line of study. I would wager that if we polled the scientists listed in "Do No Harm's" list, few would suggest that their successes should be considered a reason to eliminate embryonic stem cell research. Might be a fun project.

Secondly, they're different beasts with different applications. Adult or cord blood stem cells simply have not shown great potential to cross cell lines. Even successful therapies such as those that looked at damaged heart muscle have recently been called into question by a series of articles in the New England Journal of Medicine. One article showed no difference between the study and control groups and the other two showed improved left ventricular function but was unable to show any clinical benefit. Some now feel that the benefit of the adult stem cell injections had nothing to do with the cells themselves but rather the inflammatory reaction that is known to occur with stem cell injection. It's been known for some time that these factors can improve cardiac contractility even if only for a short time. Embryonic stem cells at least certainly have the potential to cross cell lines and, for instance, form new organs. This is a point that has been made many times on this forum--it's a good one. The potential here is astounding and warrants aggressive research.

[Stumpy]

Wonderful quote there S2R. I have to believe that you are all right, that he may never change his opinion. After all, the greatest weapon against scientific progress is ignorance, of which he is an expert in. Why learn and understand the science behind stem cells and their origin? Much better to avoid learning about it and simply calling it blasphemy in the face of god.