Posted on 06/28/2004 5:16:15 PM PDT by truthandlife
Focus on the Family founder and chairman Dr. James C. Dobson has issued a bold challenge to the national news media, urging them to tell the American people the truth -- and not the politically correct party line -- when reporting on the growing controversy over embryonic stem-cell research.
In a Friday speech before scores of journalists at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., Dobson called it a "scandal" that Americans are being allowed to believe that President Bush's policy restricting the use of federal funds for embryonic stem cell research is impeding progress on cures for diseases such as Alzheimer's.
"Embryonic stem cells are not going to be the source of a cure for Alzheimer's," Dobson told the capacity crowd. "Are you aware that not one human being anywhere in the world is being treated with embryonic stem cells? There is not a single clinical trial going on anywhere in the world, because (embryonic) stem cells in laboratory animals ... create tumors. Nobody will use them."
By comparison, adult stem cells have shown great promise in the treatment of diseases such as diabetes, Dobson explained.
And they do not require the destruction of embryonic human life, since they can be harvested from such sources as umbilical cord blood and bone marrow.
"This needs to be reported to the American people," Dobson said. "They don't know this -- especially when Ron Reagan is all over the place telling everybody that our government won't help fund a cure for Alzheimer's, which his wonderful father had."
Dobson amplified his call for accuracy and fairness today, challenging the media to live up to the principles it has long professed to be guided by.
"There's a plaque at the National Press Club building, just as you come off the elevators, that lays out the 'Journalist's Creed,' written about a hundred years ago by the founder of the University of Missouri's journalism school, " Dobson noted. "It says, in part, that 'the public journal is a public trust; that all connected to it are, to the full measure of responsibility, trustees for the public; that acceptance of lesser service than the public service is a betrayal of this trust.'
How does he know? Can he see into the future?
May I ask if you would approve of cannibalism to cure Alzheimer's Disease? Ronald Regan would not have, by his own professions regarding the sanctity of human individual life from conception onward.
As far as calling it cannibalism is concerned I don't agree. You must be against organ donation and blood donation too if you are to call yourself intellectually honest.
Nice try, but no soup for you. Organ 'donation' is a consent arrangement; in the case of a living donor, the alive individual consents; in the case of a deceased donor, the person is no longer alive and the family decides or the once alive individual's donor card decides the issue. You favor taking organs from alive humans?
Bumping!
I heard about this over a year ago. In fact, a canadian university actually has made great progress in the use of adult stem cells, IIRC. But junk science supports the death agenda, so there you go.
And as far as Reagan goes, Ron Junior is an uneducated opportunist with his recent whining about religious presidents and stem cells.
An unborn fetus, whether through abortion or miscarriage provides those cells and I think we should use them. I don't see your distinction between organs and stem cells. If you are opposed to one on ethical grounds you must be opposed to the other. Your excuses don't fly with me.
I want your stem cells. I have a right to them, even if it kills you, since it will help me.
My arguement against stem cells is this:
Can you imagine if I came up to you and said: "I want your eyes so I can see better?"
I know someone I like better than you who needs your heart, so we're coming to get it.
THAT is the difference.
Huh? Are saying that they are taking stem cells by force? That's the first I heard of this. Can you point to some evidence?
Where does this come from. Are you saying that they are taking stem cells by force? Can you point to evidence of this?
Read the rest of the article. He tells why.
Uh, yeah, I'd call killing an embryo to get stem cells taking them by force. It's not as though the child had a say in the matter. (Hey, you can have them when I'm done with them.)
The embryonic stem cells are harvested by immunologically stripping the trophoblast - chemicals are used to destroy the placenta. This necessarily ends all ability for the embryo to continue to develop, at least with our current technology.
http://www.cnn.com/2001/HEALTH/08/09/stem.cell.alternative/
Still no soup for you. But it was a nice try on your part.
Embryonic stem cells are not obtained by harvesting the products of an abortion. They are obtained from embryos that are the result of IVF or Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer and other cloning methods.
In the case of humans, the embryos must be at least at the 5 day or 250 cell stage in order to harvest sufficiently differentiated cells. Otherwise, the potential is twinning rather than stem cell lines.
http://www.healthnewsdigest.com/news/hlth_stemcell-17.html
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,167245,00.html
(Really, there's so much information available from Google, this site and Medline that there is no excuse for posting when you're so poorly informed.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.