St. Louis Science Center’s kiosk on stem cells prompts concerns

St. Louis Review ^ | 09.22.06 | Jennifer Brinker

[Coleus]

An exhibit at the St. Louis Science Center aimed at explaining the basic concepts of stem-cell research has prompted some concerned reactions from opponents of a proposed stem-cell initiative on the Nov. 7 ballot.  The Science Center launched the exhibit Sept. 15 in conjunction with The Discovery Center in Springfield, Mo., and Science City in Kansas City, Mo.

Photo Courtesy of St. Louis Science Center

STEM CELL EXHIBIT - An exhibit at the St. Louis Science Center asks viewers to test their knowledge of stem cells. Critics of the display call it 'agenda driven,' but a spokeswoman for the center said it is not an attempt to influence the public about a ballot initiative.

The four-panel kiosk, located in the Science Center’s main building, attempts to describe the types of stem cells and their origins, compare adult and embryonic stem cells and cover the applications of stem-cell research in a five-and-a-half- minute video.  "The interaction, quite frankly, was disappointing," said Steve Rupp, who serves on the speakers’ bureaus for the archdiocesan Respect Life Apostolate and Missourians Against Human Cloning. "There were so many inconsistencies and so much innuendo on that display that it really is terribly misleading to the consumer who’s going to go in there and read this."

Some concerns have included lack of the use of the word cloning, especially when describing somatic cell nuclear transfer, and an imbalance in describing the benefits of using adult stem cells vs. embryonic stem cells, among others.  Opponents of Amendment 2, the Nov. 7 ballot initiative that seeks to constitutionally protect embryonic stem-cell research, have said that such research involves the creation, through cloning, and destruction of human embryonic life. Supporters of the amendment have said that such research doesn’t involve cloning and human life.

Cindy Encarnacion, staff member at the St. Louis Science Center who helped oversee the development of the exhibit, said that the goal was to present information on the issue "that’s consistent with what the science community has been presenting to the public."  She added: "We have made the information a bit more accessible and understandable for the lay public so that it’s not using very highfalutin, scientific language."  "What we’re saying in the exhibit is that both adult stem-cell research and embryonic stem-cell research need to be pursued," she said. "And we’re going on the statement of the American Medical Association."  Encarnacion said that the Science Center currently does not plan to make changes to the exhibit, and that it will remain at the center as long as there is interest in the subject.  Encarnacion said the exhibit was developed by the three participating science centers. The St. Louis Science Center, she added, consulted with its advisers, some of whom are from Washington University in St. Louis.

The exhibit, said Encarnacion, was funded through the center’s normal operating budget. The center’s sources of funding are 45 percent from taxpayer money, 25 percent from on-site revenues and some 30 percent through memberships and donations.  Encarnacion stressed that the Science Center is not trying to influence the general public one way or another about the amendment. "We’re obviously well aware of the emotions attached to this exhibit," she said. "We’re concerned with the fact that people really do need to get to know the science ... and really make their own decisions based on their personal, ethical, religious or moral beliefs. "All that we’re saying here is that they need to know and understand the science and then vote with their conscience."

But Al Kertz, a biological scientist and chair of the public policy committee with the Missouri Catholic Conference who has frequently spoken on the problems associated with Amendment 2, said he was "appalled" at the exhibit’s misinformation.  For example, the video displays two treatments discovered using adult stem cells, while more than 10 illnesses are listed as having potential benefit from embryonic stem-cell research.  "The impression is created that curing these depends on embryonic stem-cell research," Kertz wrote in an e-mail to Science Center president and CEO Doug King.  "It completely ignores the clinical trials and some degree of success in these areas with adult stem cells," Kertz said. "And only two diseases are acknowledged as being cured by adult stem-cell therapy. These are part of the over 70 diseases treated in human clinical trials with some degree of success using adult stem cells."

Encarnacion countered by saying that the exhibit explains that research using adult stem cells has been established for more than 50 years, and the work will continue.  "We’re saying that potentially, if we decide to pursue embryonic (stem-cell research) this is what scientists are saying," she said about the potential treatments.  "It’s not meant to be minimizing the importance of adult stem-cell research, but rather the potential of what embryonic stem-cell research could bring."  Pam Fichter, president of Missouri Right to Life, called the exhibit an "agenda-driven display ... to promote the deceit and fraud of Amendment 2."  She said the display uses "taxpayer money to promote something that the taxpayers are voting on in such a way that makes a very biased viewpoint."  "They give all this space to the potential and the promises for embryonic stem cells," said Fichter. "And nothing has come out of those yet. And yet when we have adult stem cells you don’t get the same treatment."  "Everyone needs to make a personal decision," said Encarnacion, "and they need to be informed ... on issues that might have impact the future of their health and quality of life."

[Lexinom]

I've BEEN to the St. Louis Science Center - many times, once in attempt to find a home for the last remaining Scanimate (the huge analog computer used to do the graphics on The Electric Company).

The problem here is that much of what is considered "the scientific community" has the agenda riding on top of the science. This forces the public into the position of having to choose to swallow the whole pill as though it were only about science.

[o_zarkman44]

I have no problem with the display. People are smart enough to make their own decisions about the issue.
A decision can ne rational, fanatical, informed, or uninformed.
The display presents information. It may be biased toward the pro stem cell vote. So what. If the opposition don't like it they can place their own display at a place of their choosing.

[dpa5923]

So what. If the opposition don't like it they can place their own display at a place of their choosing.

From the article...The exhibit, said Encarnacion, was funded through the center’s normal operating budget. The center’s sources of funding are 45 percent from taxpayer money, 25 percent from on-site revenues and some 30 percent through memberships and donations.

Hotly contested political issues should not be supported by tax payer money.

[AmishDude]

Did they mention the fraud?

Surely they mentioned the fraud.

And how the fraudulent research lead directly to increased funding for this area. Which is riddled with fraud.

Did they mention it?

[Coleus]

People are smart enough to make their own decisions about the issue. >>>

yea, sure they are.

this kiosk was funded by a science center that is almost half-funded by the taxpayers in a state where a
stem cell research bill is in committee in the state legislature. The kiosk shows there are a potential for ESCR to cure 10 diseases. That's a lie because after 25 yrs. of ESCR in animals and humans there has yet to be a cure. It further states that adult SCR only cured 2 diseases. That's a lie, the true amount is 72.

People are smart enough to make their own decisions about the issue. >>

and some FReepers aren't intuitive enough to understand the biasness of this kiosk and the biasness and evil abortion agenda in the press, govt. and medical community.

[o_zarkman44]

"Hotly contested political issues should not be supported by tax payer money."

Name me one election, government official, or proposition, that does not have funding by taxpayers. Since every election is contested and political, I see no way of getting around that.

[o_zarkman44]

gawd! Science appears to me to be the best source of factual information on stem cell research. My belief is that our God gave us the knowledge to pursue cures through science. I have yet to see a faith healer get widespread results. Holy water just don't seem to work either. Maybe it is time to look to other practical methods?

Put up your own kiosk somewhere and lay out the facts as to why you oppose research that can cure many diseases. If your presentation is well planned and layed out so people can understand why there should not be new directions of research to find cures, minds will be changed.

[Coleus]

you are very uninformed on the issue. Embryonic stem cell research in animals has been around since 1981 and has yet to cure anything. For 8 yrs. ESCR in humans has proved nothing and has actually killed people by growing tumors in their bodies. The "factual" information you quote is junk science and has yet to cure anything. Our God never gave us the permission to perform experiments on humans created in His image. Your mind needs to be changed.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=adultstemcells

http://www.stemcellresearch.org/facts/treatments.htm

[dpa5923]

Don't believe I can, but the state, using tax payer money to fund this display when a stem cell research bill is in committee in the state legislature is beyond reprehensible.

[o_zarkman44]

You better check your schools science books. But remember, state money is OUR money, mine included. I can support the use of OUR money for such an information project, much to your dismay. And really, exactly HOW much alleged state money is being spent here anyhow?
I know you would prefer to keep everyone in the dumb and spend nothing. But thats not how it works.

[o_zarkman44]

You won't change my mind. I just lost an aunt to Parkinsons after suffering for 25 years. And a grandmother before that. And a brother in law to lung cancer last year.
HOW DARE YOU tell me that if there is a potential cure, so that hereditary tendencys will not afflict me with the same, that somehow you have a moral right to deny me of that potential cure.

I understand you have a fear of walking zombies that you are afraid will be created by science in the name of stem cells. Your worst fears will not be realized so sleep well.

[Coleus]

experiment on and kill babies so you can live. that's so Christian of you. btw, we all have family members with those diseases and many Christians wouldn't think of experimenting on babies so they would be relieved from an ailment. they already did put embryonic stem cells in Parkinson's patients, the result was death to the patients due to teratomas growing in their brains.

[AmishDude]

There is no potential cure.

Well, I have heard that stem cells can make Christopher Reeve walk, even now that he's dead.

That's why there is the fraud.

Have I mentioned the fraud? Surely, I have mentioned the fraud.

[VOA]

The problem here is that much of what is considered "the scientific community"
has the agenda riding on top of the science.

Thanks for saying that.
I just about pull out my hair every time I hear (otherwise brilliant) folks
like Dennis Prager say that Political Correctness and liberalism
haven't infiltrated the science departments of the major universities.

Most scientists are just fact-oriented empiricists.
BUT, there are a number that have plenty of liberal-type agendas and
by and large they are very energized and often end up in administration.
Hence they get to put their hands on the rudder of the ship of science.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Opponents of Amendment 2, the Nov. 7 ballot initiative that seeks to constitutionally protect embryonic stem-cell research, have said that such research involves the creation, through cloning, and destruction of human embryonic life.

The destruction of human life part is correct, but human beings have not yet been cloned.

[VOA]

If the opposition don't like it they can place their own display at a place of their choosing.

Based on the funding of the scicence center...that should be right next
to the Science Center's presentation.

Actually, I don't advocate that.

I'd rather see the scicence center post plenty of "to the contrary" material.
Even if they say it's from folks approaching stem-cells with more of
a moral/ethical/religional concern than a scienctific viewpoint.

If a Science Center is about (partly) showing how Science works,
this would be an excellent opportunity to show that Science doesn't
work in a vacuum.
The strict core of Science gets effected (for good or ill) by politics,
economics, human imperfections, ideology, ethics and even lunatic attacks.

[Coleus]

The destruction of human life part is correct, but human beings have not yet been cloned. >>> 

and that is why they DON'T want that law passed as it did in NJ and CA. It will legalize the research. And that is why some congressmen have introduced these bills

S.3504 Fetus Farming Prohibition Act
H.R.5526 Fetus Farming Prohibition Act

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=scnt 
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=fetalfarming 

Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer also called therapeutic cloning as the liberals put it and fetal farming as the pro-lifers put it. At the moment both NJ and CA law allow the research to be conducted and are developing ways to do it. They almost succeeded in South Korea.

They succeeded in animals, dolly the sheep. there goal is not to make new humans walking on the earth, they want to make babies and then kill them for their organs. If I need a new kidney then I would then get a cell cloned, implant in a woman, grow the baby then kill it before its born for the kidney.

[Just mythoughts]

Yes amending the Constitution has always been the path to salvation.