Posted on 10/28/2004 11:05:49 AM PDT by areafiftyone
WASHINGTON, Oct. 28 /PRNewswire/ -- An ad-hoc group of scientists and university professors of medicine on Wednesday (10/27/04) delivered a letter to Democratic presidential nominee Senator John Kerry, challenging many of the statements he has made regarding stem cell research. Among the signatories are several members of Do No Harm: The Coalition of Americans for Research Ethics.
Noting that Sen. Kerry has made the promotion of embryonic stem cell research "a centerpiece of your campaign," the signatories say they are "alarmed" at statements he made that "misrepresent science," and "make exaggerated claims" about the medical potential of embryonic stem cells. The scientists said these claims are "scientifically irresponsible."
"There is too much hype about embryonic stems and at this point there is no data that cures are imminent," said Prof. Micheline Mathews-Roth, a researcher at Harvard, member of Do No Harm, and one of the letter's signatories. "At this time we just don't know and it is inaccurate to get people's hope up."
The letter also shows that there is no scientific consensus that embryonic stem cell and human cloning research are the best and most promising avenues towards treating numerous debilitating diseases and conditions. Indeed, as the letter shows, many in the scientific community have serious doubts and reservations that such research will deliver the promised therapeutic benefits.
HERE IS THE LETTER:
October 27, 2004
Senator John F. Kerry
John Kerry for President
901 15th Street NW
Suite 700
Washington DC 20005
Dear Senator Kerry,
Recently you have made the promotion of embryonic stem cell research, including the cloning of human embryos for research purposes, into a centerpiece of your campaign. You have said you will make such research a “top priority” for government, academia and medicine (Los Angeles Times, 10/17/04). You have even equated support for this research with respect for “science,” and said that science must be freed from “ideology” to produce miracle cures for numerous diseases.
As professionals trained in the life sciences we are alarmed at these statements.
First, your statements misrepresent science. In itself, science is not a policy or a political program. Science is a systematic method for developing and testing hypotheses about the physical world. It does not “promise” miracle cures based on scanty evidence. When scientists make such assertions, they are acting as individuals, out of their own personal faith and hopes, not as the voice of "science". If such scientists allow their individual faith in the future of embryonic stem cell research to be interpreted as a reliable prediction of the outcome of this research, they are acting irresponsibly.
Second, it is no mere “ideology” to be concerned about the possible misuse of humans in scientific research. Federal bioethics advisory groups, serving under both Democratic and Republican presidents, have affirmed that the human embryo is a developing form of human life that deserves respect. Indeed you have said that human life begins at conception, that fertilization produces a “human being.” To equate concern for these beings with mere “ideology” is to dismiss the entire history of efforts to protect human subjects from research abuse.
Third, the statements you have made regarding the purported medical applications of embryonic stem cells reach far beyond any credible evidence, ignoring the limited state of our knowledge about embryonic stem cells and the advances in other areas of research that may render use of these cells unnecessary for many applications. To make such exaggerated claims, at this stage of our knowledge, is not only scientifically irresponsible – it is deceptive and cruel to millions of patients and their families who hope desperately for cures and have come to rely on the scientific community for accurate information.
What does science tell us about embryonic stem cells? The facts can be summed up as follows:
• At present these cells can be obtained only by destroying live human embryos at the blastocyst (4-7 days old) stage. They proliferate rapidly and are extremely versatile, ultimately 2 capable (in an embryonic environment) of forming any kind of cell found in the developed human body. Yet there is scant scientific evidence that embryonic stem cells will form normal tissues in a culture dish, and the very versatility of these cells is now known to be a disadvantage as well – embryonic stem cells are difficult to develop into a stable cell line, spontaneously accumulate genetic abnormalities in culture, and are prone to uncontrollable growth and tumor formation when placed in animals.
• Almost 25 years of research using mouse embryonic stem cells have produced limited indications of clinical benefit in some animals, as well as indications of serious and potentially lethal side-effects. Based on this evidence, claims of a safe and reliable treatment for any disease in humans are premature at best.
• Embryonic stem cells obtained by destroying cloned human embryos pose an additional ethical issue – that of creating human lives solely to destroy them for research – and may pose added practical problems as well. The cloning process is now known to produce many problems of chaotic gene expression, and this may affect the usefulness and safety of these cells. Nor is it proven that cloning will prevent all rejection of embryonic stem cells, as even genetically matched stem cells from cloning are sometimes rejected by animal hosts. Some animal trials in research cloning have required placing cloned embryos in a womb and developing them to the fetal stage, then destroying them for their more developed tissues, to provide clinical benefit – surely an approach that poses horrific ethical issues if applied to humans.
• Non-embryonic stem cells have also received increasing scientific attention. Here the trajectory has been very different from that of embryonic stem cells: Instead of developing these cells and deducing that they may someday have a clinical use, researchers have discovered them producing undoubted clinical benefits and then sought to better understand how and why they work so they can be put to more uses. Bone marrow transplants were benefiting patients with various forms of cancer for many years before it was understood that the active ingredients in these transplants are stem cells. Non-embryonic stem cells have been discovered in many unexpected tissues – in blood, nerve, fat, skin, muscle, umbilical cord blood, placenta, even dental pulp – and dozens of studies indicate that they are far more versatile than once thought. Use of these cells poses no serious ethical problem, and may avoid all problems of tissue rejection if stem cells can be obtained from a patient for use in that same patient. Clinical use of non-embryonic stem cells has grown greatly in recent years. In contrast to embryonic stem cells, adult stem cells are in established or experimental use to treat human patients with several dozen conditions, according to the National Institutes of Health and the National Marrow Donor Program (Cong. Record, September 9, 2004, pages H6956-7). They have been or are being assessed in human trials for treatment of spinal cord injury, Parkinson’s disease, stroke, cardiac damage, multiple sclerosis, and so on. The results of these experimental trials will help us better assess the medical prospects for stem cell therapies.
• In the case of many conditions, advances are likely to come from sources other than any kind of stem cell. For example, there is a strong scientific consensus that complex diseases such as Alzheimer’s are unlikely to be treated by any stem cell therapy. When asked recently why so many people nonetheless believe that embryonic stem cells will provide a cure for Alzheimer’s disease, NIH stem cell expert Ron McKay commented that “people need a fairy tale” (Washington Post, June 10, 2004, page A3). Similarly, autoimmune diseases like juvenile 3 diabetes, lupus and MS are unlikely to benefit from simple addition of new cells unless the underlying problem – a faulty immune system that attacks the body’s own cells as though they were foreign invaders – is corrected.
In short, embryonic stem cells pose one especially controversial avenue toward understanding and (perhaps) someday treating various degenerative diseases. Based on the available evidence, no one can predict with certainty whether they will ever produce clinical benefits – much less whether they will produce benefits unobtainable by other, less ethically problematic means.
Therefore, to turn this one approach into a political campaign – even more, to declare that it will be a “top priority” or receive any particular amount of federal funding, regardless of future evidence or the usual scientific peer review process – is, in our view, irresponsible. It is, in fact, a subordination of science to ideology.
Because politicians, biotechnology interests and even some scientists have publicly exaggerated the “promise” of embryonic stem cells, public perceptions of this avenue have become skewed and unrealistic. Politicians may hope to benefit from these false hopes to win elections, knowing that the collision of these hopes with reality will come only after they win their races. The scientific and medical professions have no such luxury. When desperate patients discover that they have been subjected to a salesman’s pitch rather than an objective and candid assessment of possibilities, we have reason to fear a public backlash against the credibility of our professions. We urge you not to exacerbate this problem now by repeating false promises that exploit patients’ hopes for political gain.
SIGNED:
Adam, M.D. Professor of Medicine and Microbiology/Immunology University of Arizona College of Medicine William J. Burke, M.D., Ph.D. Professor in Neurology Associate Professor in Medicine Associate Professor in Neurobiology Saint Louis University Medical Center Michael J. Behe, Ph.D. Professor of Biological Sciences Mark W. Burket, M.D. Lehigh University Professor of Medicine Division of Cardiology Thomas G. Benoit, Ph.D. Professor and Chairman of Biology McMurry University Medical College of Ohio W. Malcolm Byrnes, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Howard University College of Medicine Abilene, Texas David L. Bolender, Ph.D. Department of Cell Biology, Neurobiology and Anatomy Medical College of Wisconsin Steven Calvin, M.D. Assistant Professor of OB/GYN and Women's Health Daniel L. Burden, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Chemistry Co-Chair, Program in Human Rights in Medicine Wheaton College University of Minnesota School of Medicine * Affiliations listed for identification purposes only and do not imply institutional endorsement. 4 James Carroll, M.D. Lawrence W. Elmer, M.D., Ph.D. Professor of Neurology, Pediatrics, and Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Associate Professor, Dept. of Neurology Director, Parkinson's Disease and Movement Disorder Program Medical College of Georgia Medical Director, Center for Neurological Disorders John R. Chaffee, M.D. Assistant Clinical Professor Medical College of Ohio Department of Family Medicine University of Washington Kevin T. FitzGerald, SJ, Ph.D., Ph.D. David P. Lauler Chair in Catholic Health Care Ethics Robert Chasuk, M.D. Clinical Assistant Professor Research Associate Professor Department of Family Medicine Department of Oncology Tulane University Georgetown University Medical Center William P. Cheshire, Jr., M.D. Raymond F. Gasser, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Neurology Professor Mayo Clinic Department of Cell Biology and Anatomy Louisiana State University School of Medicine Richard A. Chole, M.D., Ph.D. Professor and Head of Otolaryngology Hans Geisler, M.D. Washington University in St. Louis Clinical Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology School of Medicine Indiana University Medical Center Maureen L. Condic, Ph.D. Associate Professor Donald A. Godfrey, Ph.D. Department of Neurobiology and Anatomy University of Utah School of Medicine Professor of Otolaryngology Department of Surgery Medical College of Ohio Keith A. Crist, Ph.D. Associate Professor Samuel Hensley, M.D. Department of Surgery Assistant Clinical Professor Medical College of Ohio School of Medicine University of Mississippi Keith A. Crutcher, Ph.D. Professor David C. Hess, M.D. Department of Neurosurgery Professor and Chairman University of Cincinnati Medical Center Department of Neurology Medical College of Georgia Frank Dennehy, M.D., FAAFP Assistant Clinical Professor of Family Medicine Paul J. Hoehner, M.D., MA, Ph.D., FAHA Associate Professor Virginia Commonwealth University Department of Anesthesiology The University of Virginia School of Medicine Kenneth J. Dormer, M.S., Ph.D. Professor of Physiology C. Christopher Hook, M.D. University of Oklahoma College of Medicine Consultant in Hematology and Internal Medicine Assistant Professor of Medicine Mayo Clinic College of Medicine * Affiliations listed for identification purposes only and do not imply institutional endorsement. 5 Elizabeth A. Johnson, M.D. Mary Ann Myers, M.D. Consultant, Hematology/Oncology Associate Professor Mayo Clinic Jacksonville Medical College of Ohio Assistant Professor of Oncology Mayo Clinic College of Medicine Rimas J. Orentas, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pediatrics Hematology-Oncology Section Nancy L. Jones, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pathology Medical College of Wisconsin Wake Forest University School of Medicine Robert D. Orr, M.D., CM C. Ward Kischer, Ph.D. Clinical Ethicist and Professor Emeritus Professor University of Vermont College of Medicine Cell Biology and Anatomy Specialty in Human Embryology Jean D. Peduzzi-Nelson, Ph.D. University of Arizona College of Medicine Research Associate Professor Department of Visual Sciences Kirsten J Lampi, M.S., Ph.D. University of Alabama at Birmingham Associate Professor of Integrative Biosciences School of Dentistry Edmund D. Pellegrino, M.D. Oregon Health Sciences University Emeritus Professor Medicine and Medical Ethics John I. Lane, M.D. Center for Clinical Bioethics Assistant Professor of Radiology Georgetown University Medical Center Mayo Clinic School of Medicine John A. Petros, M.D. David L. Larson, M.D. Associate Professor Professor and Chairman Urology and Pathology Department of Plastic Surgery Emory University Medical College of Wisconsin David A. Prentice, Ph.D. Micheline Mathews-Roth, M.D. Affiliated Scholar Associate Professor of Medicine Center for Clinical Bioethics Harvard Medical School Georgetown University Medical Center Roger R. Markwald, Ph.D. Paul J. Ranalli, M.D., FRCPC Professor and Chair Lecturer, Division of Neurology Department of Cell Biology and Anatomy Department of Medicine Medical University of South Carolina University of Toronto Victor E. Marquez, Ph.D. John F. Rebhun, Ph.D. Chief, Laboratory of Medicinal Chemistry Center for Cancer Research Adjunct Scientist Indiana University School of Medicine National Cancer Institute Frederick, Maryland Leonard P. Rybak, M.D., Ph.D. Professor of Surgery Ralph P. Miech, M.D., Ph.D. Southern Illinois University School of Medicine Associate Professor Emeritus Department of Molecular Pharmacology, Physiology & Biotechnology Dwayne D. Simmons, Ph.D. Brown University School of Medicine Director, Inner Ear Research Core Center Department of Otolaryngology Washington University School of Medicine * Affiliations listed for identification purposes only and do not imply institutional endorsement. * Affiliations listed for identification purposes only and do not imply institutional endorsement. 6 Joseph B. Stanford, M.D., MSPH Associate Professor Family and Preventive Medicine University of Utah John M. Templeton, Jr., M.D., FACS Adjunct Professor of Pediatric Surgery University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine Claire Thuning-Roberson, Ph.D. Vice President Product Development and Compliance Sunol Molecular Corporation Miramar, Florida Anton-Lewis Usala, M.D. Chief Executive Officer and Medical Director Clinical Trial Management Group Greenville, North Carolina Richard A. Watson, M.D. Professor of Urologic Surgery The University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey Medical School Dennis D. Weisenburger, M.D. Director of Hematopathology Dept of Pathology and Microbiology University of Nebraska School of Medicine H. Joseph Yost, Ph.D. Professor of Oncological Sciences University of Utah Joseph R. Zanga, M.D., FAAP, FCP President, American College of Pediatricians Professor of Pediatrics Brody School of Medicine East Carolina University
Well, they are obviously delusional, twisted, Rove-controlled liars. Oh, wait...that's the swift vets. Nevermind.
An impressive endorsement. Wonder what Mrs. Reeves thinks
of this one!
Wow! Look at that list!
It's obvious they think the Johns have been irresponsible in their promises regarding stem cell research.
Actually I think there is more evidance proving more success w/adult step cells/umbilical cord stem cells than embyonic stem cells. But, it won't matter to the democrats! They want to kill babies any way they can!
I'm sure she and the Media outlets will never see this letter. They sent it to Kerry's office I'm sure it's been burned and the ashes buried by now!
bump for later
I am sure the Slimes will print this...maybe on page 846?
No, They will print this, before they don't print this.
Fat is going to be the perfect answer
Wow -
Thanks - I need this to help persuade someone, plus will keep it for future reference!
This is a keeper! Thanks for posting.
I recognize these institutions. They are all right-wing diploma mills.
:-)
I think I will blast this to the RNC. They should make an ad for this!
what's the actual story link?
What in the heck is the P.R. Newswire???
JUST BLASTED THIS OVER TO THE ED GILLESPIE!
Wow, look at all those signatories.
Here is the website with the letter and press release Stem Cell Research
Go to the left side of the webpage.
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.