August 04, 2005

IF THEY WORKED THEY WOULDN'T NEED GOVERNMENT FUNDING:

With Stem Cells, Frist Backs a Loser (Michael Fumento, August 4, 2005, Townhall)

A bit of reading will give you more knowledge about these cells than the average doctor possesses. You might learn that ASCs are CURRENTLY used in over 250 human clinical trials and are treating over 80 different diseases.

ESC researchers sniff that this is only because their field is newer, but research on both types of cell dates back to the 1950s. ESCs aren’t playing catch-up; they’re falling behind.

Oddly, although Frist is a heart transplant physician he seems clueless that some of the most exciting ASC work directly involves his field. ASCs have induced either muscle or vessel growth in human hearts in hundreds of patients worldwide. Next month, Brazil begins heart ASC experiments involving 1,200 persons.

Another myth that Frist propagated in his “breakaway” speech is that “embryonic stem cells uniquely hold specific promise for some therapies and potential cures that adult stem cells cannot provide.” In fact, ALL that ESCs have is promise. That’s why advocates feel obliged to claim they’ll eventually cure every disease from Alzheimer’s to acne. But again, had Frist done his homework he’d know that three years ago scientists began changing ASCs into ALL three types of cells the body produces.

Since then, countless labs have used various forms of ASCs to make all those cell types, but ESC advocates insist you not know this. They also go bonkers if you mention at least four different methods of creating ESCs without destroying embryos are being developed, as the June issue of Wired documents. They want that money NOW!

Ironically, the clamor for massively-increased public funding for ESCs is precisely because their practical applications, if any, lie many years in the future while those of ASCs are here and now. The media may go gaga over ESC researchers’ pie-in-the-sky claims but private investors know better.


It's not about science, but about devaluing life.


MORE:
Moral Maturity: Bill Frist, closet pro-choicer (William Saletan, Aug. 3, 2005, Slate)

Does Bill Frist think unborn human beings have a right to life?

Frist, the Senate majority leader, calls himself pro-life. He has a 100 percent pro-life voting record, according to the National Right to Life Committee. But last week, he asked his colleagues to lift President Bush's restriction on federal funding of human embryonic stem-cell research—a restriction that Bush imposed on the grounds that such research required the destruction of embryos. Why remove Bush's constraints? Because they "slow our ability to bring potential new treatments for certain diseases," said Frist. What about the embryo? That's up to the family, the senator concluded: "Obviously, any decision about the destiny of an embryo must clearly and ultimately rest with the parents."

In other words, when it comes to aborting embryos, Frist is pro-choice.

Posted by Orrin Judd at August 4, 2005 12:00 AM
Comments

Frist is not in favor of killing living things. The embryos he is talking about are frozen in liquid nitrogen and are as dead as doornails.

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at August 4, 2005 01:33 PM

They can't be implanted?

Because if you freeze a baby, they don't work after you thaw them out. Trust me.

Posted by: RC at August 5, 2005 05:51 AM
« FORGET NUANCE: | Main | WELL, THE ATTIC WAS FULL: »
Post a comment









Remember personal info?