Stem cells: Give us the cures, spare us the sermon

Newark (red)Star Ledger ^ | 12/22/02 | JOHN MCLAUGHLIN

[Incorrigible]

Stem cells: Give us the cures, spare us the sermon

Sunday, December 22, 2002

[Newark, NJ] -- Paul Byrne has been a political operative in Jersey City for 25 years. He is one of those guys for whom politics is both vocation and avocation. He knows everybody in Democratic politics, and everybody knows him.

Nine years ago, Byrne was diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes, which has led to a retina condition called macular degeneration. At 57, and despite two operations on both eyes, he has lost 98 percent of his sight. But he keeps up with the news because four or five friends call and read him the newspapers.

Among the stories that came to him this way was a piece about a breakthrough in stem cell research in India that has led to the successful restoration of damaged retinas.

It left him furious. It is a fury directed at President George W. Bush, who is an opponent of embryonic stem cell research because the technique results in the destruction of embryos. Accordingly, Bush has ordered that federal funding be denied for this kind of research. And never mind that the embryos at issue are those left over from in-vitro procedures at pregnancy clinics and would be destroyed in any event.

So, freeze in perpetuity superfluous embryos created in a lab to induce birth, and you are doing the Lord's work. Destroy embryos after their stem cells are extracted in an attempt to cure people suffering from a dozen different diseases, and you are in league with Satan. Insert a recipient's DNA into a stem cell to reduce chances the body will reject it and you are paving the way for human cloning.

Last week the state Senate passed a bill that would make New Jersey the second state in the nation to legalize embryonic stem cell research. (NJ Senate Votes to Harvest Babies for body parts (My Title))  The bill is sponsored by Richard Codey, the Democratic leader in the Senate. It passed in a party-line vote with most Republicans abstaining. It passed over the objections of the Roman Catholic Church and various anti-abortion allies. The Codey legislation may be altered a tad but Gov. James E. McGreevey is a supporter and it is going to become law.

Not surprisingly, Paul Byrne is an enthusiastic supporter of the Codey bill. It may help him see again. He believes it's good science and good politics in a state chockablock in pharmaceutical research firms.

Of the opponents, he says, "They are the very people who believed in miracles, yet they would deny me my miracle." And they are hard at work.

Joan Quigley is a Democratic assemblywoman from Hudson County. She is being flooded with form letters informing her that the Codey bill "is not part of God's plan."

"I tell them that it's more important that God help those to whom he's already given life," Quigley says.

For years now, I've been reading about the promise of stem cells as a cure for a bunch of diseases. Parkinson's disease as often as not heads up the list. This interests me because I've had Parkinson's disease for about six years now. I'm not complaining. If you have to get a heretofore incurable, degenerative disease, this one is not the worst. Still, it hasn't been much fun and it's nice to know there's a potential cure out there.

So I could do without President Bush playing politics with my future by buying into the religious right's contention that it knows what God is thinking and God believes the destruction of embryos in course of research isn't much different than killing babies.

As for the Catholic Church, if the bishops want to take the position they know the mind of God on the question of embryonic research, so be it. But they might want to think about confining their efforts to people who still put stock in what they have to say. Their moralizing rings a little hollow these days.

Let God and me handle this. If the bishops don't mind, I'd like the opportunity to be treated if and when the researchers come up with the right technique.

And I'm willing to take my chances that God won't make me out to be a mass murderer.

Not for commercial use.  For educational and discussion purposes only.

[Tailgunner Joe]

Obviously there are things only the embroyonic stem cells offer

But you only assume this. You're wrong. This is what is 'unproven.'

[jwalsh07]

That photo is a lot further along than a 4- or 8-cell embryo.

Your biblical citations mentioned no specific time period in the human continuum.

Or did I miss something?

[jwalsh07]

Please...

You're a very naive fellow.

Right now in China, human life is being taken so that some other humans may profit, one by making money and the other by a kidney or a liver.

You're faith in the inherent goodness of man is admirable but historically foolish.

[Humidston]

This hits close to home for me. I have a terminal disease and might possibly be cured some day with stem cells.

I go on record right now: I will REFUSE treatment if that treatment came from an unborn child. That's how strongly I stand by my principles. I'd rather die than live with that knowledge.

[Long Cut]

"? Will they have the right to decide whethor or not they wish to "donate"? "

Of course. That descision IS a right, and it is one which is not in any dispute.

"Organs are currently being purchased from desparate poverty stricken people in South America by wealthy people in need of a kidney transplant.In China, they are just taken."

Okay, in South America, it would seem a VOLUNTARY transaction, however distateful WE might find it. In China, the matter seems to be COERCION, by government decree, one MORE reason among many to oppose communism.

"Adult stem cells and discarded placenta provide all the tools for research needed at this point."

Are YOU qualified to make this descision? Unless you have some advanced degree in biology and chemistry, I submit not. In any case, my original point was that we should not close off ANY area from investigation, if it would help to cure disease. If we do shut down research on religious grounds,(and that is precisely what we are discussing) we are no better than those who muzzled Galileo and Copernicus.

[Long Cut]

"I go on record right now: I will REFUSE treatment if that treatment came from an unborn child. "

You have that right, no question. You do NOT have the right to deny it to someone else.

[Long Cut]

"But you only assume this. You're wrong. This is what is 'unproven.'"

Thus, it must be investigated. Artificially shutting this door is wrong. It is THAT which is shortsighted in the extreme. Don't forget, such avenues WILL be investigated, if not in America then elsewhere. The genie will not long remain in his bottle, regardless of all the bumper-sticker slogans in the world. History has shown this in great detail.

[Tailgunner Joe]

It should not be investigated at the expense of the innocent.

In China, they harvest organs from fully grown political prisoners. Your arguments could just as easily be used to justify this and other even greater horrors.

Let the blood of innocents be on the hands of other nations. I have no desire to follow the Europeans into the relativist morass they are plummetting themselves into.

[F.J. Mitchell]

Judging by your comments, you should change your name to Short Cut. You are right, this isn't Nazi Germany but the USA, where we have allowed the slaughter of so many unborn humans that we have more blood on our hands than the Nazis did. "It can't happen here" has been discredited long ago.

[Long Cut]

"Let the blood of innocents be on the hands of other nations. I have no desire to follow the Europeans into the relativist morass they are plummetting themselves into."

You miss my point, Sir. If it occurs, it matters not where. Those who need such cures will seek them out, regardless. The point is that such discoveries CANNOT be contained, any more than those of Copernicus and Galileo were.

At length, a few diehards will be left standing in a road with their eyes shut tight, while the convoy is 20 miles past.

As I said, the genie has ALREADY left the bottle. You are fighting a battle already lost.

[Long Cut]

"where we have allowed the slaughter of so many unborn humans that we have more blood on our hands than the Nazis did."

I have no wish to repeat all that I have written tonight. I will just say that NOT EVERYONE CONSIDERS IT A "SLAUGHTER"!. Likewise, not everyone considers these embryos "humans", and in fact they who do not have the preponderance of evidence on their side.

You CANNOT force others to subscribe to your religious point of view. Neither our legal system nor our government was set up thus. There is a name for those places in which it was, as long as we are engaging in wild words..."theocracies". As in "Taliban".

Hey, if you can bring up the Nazis with the same frequency as do the Leftists, then I can use OTHER distateful systems.

[Dianna]

As I said, the genie has ALREADY left the bottle. You are fighting a battle already lost.

Then why are you here arguing with us? Go find your cure. Better hurry up so you can live a little more before you die anyway.

[carenot]

If we do shut down research on religious grounds,(and that is precisely what we are discussing) we are no better than those who muzzled Galileo and Copernicus.

I ain't using religious grounds,the fertilized egg is a distinct human being.

[carenot]

Do you still have a link to "Is it a frog or a tadpole"?

[Coleus]

So, create, harvest then kill a baby for his parts so some guy who lived a full life can see again? Not if I can help it. And with Type II diabetes, which, in many cases, is 100% controllable and reversable with diet and exercise, this man need not to have been blinded.

And what they also don't tell you is when they put these totipotent cells in your body, they can grow skin and bone, I don't think that mixes well in your eyes and brain!

There are plenty of stem cells available in adult humans and umblilical cord blood to do any research and treatment with stem cells.


http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b3fd0b84dba.htm
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b35554f0a72.htm
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/760453/posts

http://www.gene-watch.org/
http://www.stemcellresearch.org/
http://www.usccb.org/prolife/issues/bioethic/stemfax1.htm
http://www.usccb.org/prolife/issues/bioethic/stemfax2.htm
http://www.usccb.org/prolife/issues/bioethic/stemfax3.htm
http://www.usccb.org/prolife/issues/bioethic/stemfax4.htm
http://www.nccbuscc.org/comm/archives/2001/01-142.htm

Source: Wall St. Journal; December 3, 2002

Research Shows Fetal Cells From Abortions Don't Help Parkinson's

Washington, DC -- A second study of transplanted fetal cells obtained from abortions has failed to show a therapeutic benefit in Parkinson's disease patients and produced serious side effects in some patients, the Wall Street Journal reports. The findings are "a blow" to researchers who had thought that transplants of brain tissue from aborted babies could stop the effects of the disease.

For the study, which involved 34 participants, Mount Sinai School of Medicine and University of South Florida researchers infused brain tissue from up to eight aborted babies, ranging from six to nine weeks old, into 23 patients with Parkinson's disease.

Brain scans of the participants indicated that the transplanted cells functioned "normally," but researchers were unable to "find any measurable improvement on tests of motor and other skills," according to the report.

In addition, the "most severe setback" was side effects that included uncontrolled limb movement in 13 patients. Three patients experienced such severe side effects that they required additional surgeries to control them.

The study -- the second of two federally funded studies to examine if embryonic stem cells can repair brain tissue in Parkinson's patients -- could lead to a "winding down" for future fetal-cell transplants. Anthony Lang, a Parkinson's expert at Toronto Western Hospital in Canada, said, "This is a surprising result that forces reconsideration of transplantation without a great deal more research."

The study could also have implications for embryonic stem cell research, which has recently "upstaged both politically and scientifically" research using fetal cells from abortions. Some researchers consider stem cells "more versatile" than fetal cells.

President Bush in August 2001 prohibited federal funding for any new embryonic stem cell research. Research using fetal cells from abortions, however, is covered by a separate rule established in 1993 under former President Clinton.

---

Fetal Cell Study a Bust
By David Brody, Washington, D.C., correspondent

SUMMARY: A federally funded medical study shows
conclusively that fetal cells taken from abortions do not
benefit Parkinson's patients. As a matter of fact, many of
them experienced serious side effects.

For years, liberal scientists had thought taking cells from
aborted fetuses would be a cure-all for adults that have
debilitating diseases. But a study from the University of
Florida shows that's not the case at all. Researchers
infused brain tissue from up to eight aborted babies into
Parkinson's patients. Not only did the treatments not
help the patients, but 13 of them suffered uncontrollable
limb movement. Three of them needed additional
surgery to fix the problem.

Richard Doerflinger, a spokesman for the National
Conference of Catholic Bishops, says it's a case of "I
told you so."

"This is what the pro-life movement was saying 10 years
ago -- that this was not so promising, that is was morally
problematic," Doerflinger said. "It looks, once again, as
though we were right. I don't imagine anyone's going to
thank us for that."

Two years ago, another federally funded study showed
the same type of results. So, the question really is: Why
doesn't this type of research end once and for all? Tom
Lothamer, executive director of Baptists for Life, has a
theory.

"It is satanic to me. That's really the bottom line,"
Lothamer said. "It doesn't make sense why they
continue to have to keep trying to go down this road
when ... they're finding negative results."

Some might hope that these negative results using
aborted fetal tissue might also give researchers pause
before plunging further into the area of stem cells
derived from human embryos. However, Doerflinger
doubts that will happen and, in fact, he envisions a far
worse scenario.

"The reaction that some people are having to this latest
study is that, 'Oh, the fetal tissue doesn't work so we
must renew our efforts to go even further down the
ethical sink by going more and more into embryonic
stem cell research,' " he said.

In addition to being unethical, Doerflinger noted such
research would be scientifically irresponsible because, in
the past, when cells from an embryo were placed into
animals, the animals got tumors.

[Long Cut]

"I ain't using religious grounds,the fertilized egg is a distinct human being."

Do not confuse "potential" with "is". The fertilized egg has not yet been born.

What it exactly is, prior to that time, is the heart of the dispute, and it is NOT a descision I am willing to trust to the government OR those who operate on a religious basis. Banning will work no better here than it does with ANYTHING, so the only option left is to allow the research to continue.

[Long Cut]

"So, create, harvest then kill a baby for his parts so some guy who lived a full life can see again? Not if I can help it. "

At least you're willing to admit that government coercion is allright with you, so long as YOU get to direct it.

The "Create, harvest, and kill" part of it is, once again, WIDE open to interpretation. Oh, and NICE JOB on the judging of a "full life" for the guy who is going blind. I'm sure he would disagree with both your opinion AND your right to FORCE it on him.

My uncle lost his vision AND his kidneys to type II diabetes. Before he lost them HE lived a "full life", at least as much as he could. You have NO RIGHT to tell someone like him that he should not seek a cure for his illness.

[Coleus]

The Problem is that you do not have to Harvest and Kill Humans to do so. There is plenty of evidence that umbilical cord blood and Adults have plenty of stem cells used in PRACICE already today, it's just not reported.

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b3fd0b84dba.htm

[carenot]

Do not confuse "potential" with "is". The fertilized egg has not yet been born.

What is it then? Maybe a frog egg?

[Coleus]

The Catholics are blamed again.