OrdinaryGal at Daily Kos has written an extraordinarily unintelligent post tying President Bush's veto of taxpayer-funded human embryo experimentation with her lament that a blind U.S. baby will have to go to China to participate in an umbilical cord stem cell study that may restore his vision.
OG says she has "been reading up" on stem cell research. Well, she needs to read a little more, first learning the most basic fact: There are different kinds of stem cells.
OG wondered, "Why couldn't the Bush Administration follow the lead of California and try to make a difference in the field of medical research relating to serious, chronic health conditions," after lauding the Golden State for passing Proposition 71, "which will provide ten billion dollars in state funding for human embryonic stem cell research."
Actually, it was $3 billion, doubled to $6 billion with interest, but facts didn't figure into OG's post.
And actually, not one taxed penny earmarked to fund human embryo experimentation could go toward sight-saving umbilical cord stem cell research.
Since umbilical cord stem cell research is so important to OG, she may want to switch from supporting John Edwards, as she professed, to supporting Republicans and the Bush Administration.
Because in December 2005, President Bush signed the pro-life Republican-sponsored Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Act of 2005, which authorized $79 million to establish a cord blood matching network and to add 150k cord blood units to the national inventory, so as to create a 90% patient crossmatch.
The Act also authorized any cord blood deemed unsuitable for transplant to be donated for research. Bill sponsor, Rep. Chris Smith, noted, "Published studies have shown that cord blood stem cells have the capacity to change into other cell types, including nerve cells, heart cells and insulin-secreting cells."
In fact, a study less than two weeks old found cord blood stem cells successful in treating children with Type I Diabetes.
[Photo courtesy of Medical Journal of Australia. Retrieving cord blood is painless. It is drawn from the umbilical cord section still attached to the placenta after the cord is cut going to the baby.]
Comments:
I must say, umbilical cord blood is some NIFTY stuff. I'm all for research into its use. I hope it's capable of doing wonders in healthcare so that the embryonic stem cell debate DOESN'T have to occur. I'm still torn on that.
Posted by: Lyssie at July 9, 2007 11:06 AMI think her [OG's] overall point is that the ground breaking research is going on China, not the US. And, speaking of extraordinarily unintelligent ... Bush's 75 million, is nowhere near CA's billions... so you I don't see the case for her "supporting republicans" per your foolish economic recomendation.
Posted by: Cameron at July 9, 2007 11:21 AMI think this only shows the US has to get out of its embryonic stem cell time warp and catch up to the rest of the world. Why are we wasting time on embryonic stem cells when other countries are having such success with adult and umbilical cord stem cells. New mothers at our hospital are bringing kits to collect and save cord blood. These ladies need to share their information source with the rest of the country.
I think its a national embarassment that a US baby must go to China and that the late performer Don Ho had to go to Thailand in order to get adult stem cell treatment. Brazil treated type I diabetics and South Korea treated a paralyzed woman, both with adult stem cells. Other countries are leaving us in the dust.
Mary,
That's because we are so focused and brainwashed on the "right to reproductive" rights issues that no one is even noticing that the terminology has been spun to make it look like pro-lifers are against stem cell research.
Apparently the pro-choice side is so afraid of losing their right to abortion that they are willing to risk peoples lives and health by lying about what embryonic stem cells are and how little has been done with them.
Poor Michael J Fox. 75 million going to research that works beats billions going towards wishful thinking.
Posted by: MK
at July 9, 2007 12:21 PMCameron, so are you making a case for more adult stem cell research funding?
Posted by: Jill Stanek at July 9, 2007 1:30 PMMK,
This is not a new tactic but part of a continuing pattern of exploiting the fears and hopes of sick and debilitated people with promises of miracle cures, if only pro-lifers weren't standing in the way. RU486 was touted as a miracle treatment and possible cure for numerous diseases when in fact its only purpose was to induce abortion. The same with fetal tissue transplants which were supposed to be a miracle cure in the waiting, but were shown to be otherwise.
This portrays abortion advocates as the champions of scientific progress and the sick and debilitated. Pro-lifers are portrayed as caring more about doomed embryos and unborn babies than about those in medical need. For some reason, abortion advocates never have to answer for being proven wrong.
I'm throwing a big two thumbs up for stem cell research! WOO!
Posted by: Skinhead Dan at July 9, 2007 4:00 PMYes Dan,
So are we...ADULT stem cell research that is!
Posted by: MK at July 9, 2007 4:17 PM"Cameron, so are you making a case for more adult stem cell research funding?"
????
I'm pointing out that you don't make a strong case for voting republican considering Bush's funding was smaller... not to mention the fact that Edwards won't be running against Bush. That was your whole point, that OG should be voting republican because of what Bush has done. Seriously, with campaign help like that, Republicans don't need any enemies.... "we haven't and we're not going to fund as strongly as our oponents..."
LOL
Perhaps you could put a little research in to one of your blogs and make a case for a republican candidate that's actually running against Edwards.... How much would said candidate put towards stem cell research compared to the oposition.
OG's whole point is that we're falling behind other countries, regardless of how or where the stem cells are derived, and we need more funding... thus she's pointing out that we need to know where the candidates stand on this sort of funding.
Sorry... not everything is about destroying pre-babies, no matter how hard you try.
Posted by: Cameron at July 9, 2007 5:09 PMSH Dan,
Adult and umbilical cord blood stem cells have indeed shown great promise, that's why I wonder why so much time and energy is wasted on what embryonic stems cells might do while other countries are leaving us in the dust with their research and advances in the area of umbilical cord blood and adult stem cells. Isn't it embarassing when our citizens must go to other
countries to obtain such groundbreaking treatment while we continue all this bickering over the purely speculated benefits of EBCs?
Cameron, you appear to think OG's point should be my point, since you keep reiterating it. My point was to analyze OG's premise and demonstrate it was false.
Normally, people would analyze that information and conclude OG's point made on false information is suspect. Apparently not so you.
Posted by: Jill Stanek at July 9, 2007 6:10 PMJill,
"My point was to analyze OG's premise and demonstrate it was false."
Your point was that if OG is concerned about research she should vote republican. My point was that the numbers you employ to make this point suggest she vote otherwise. You $76million
I suspect you wouldn't even agree with me regarding her premise after a few more exchanges, but I'll take a stab at it... are you talking about how many billions of dollars? If so, it seems you've only qualified OG's premise and not falsified it. Of course... in Stanek Hyperbole Land... that's par for the course.
Posted by: Cameron at July 9, 2007 7:40 PMCam, my post was my point. I don't have time to golf at the same hole twice.
I must say your denseness in upholding the CA $3 billion along with OG surprises me.
She didn't know the difference between embryo stem cells and umbilical cord stem cells. You must now either. Again, what was your major?
Posted by: Jill Stanek at July 9, 2007 8:28 PMI believe it was "major" headache.
Posted by: MK at July 9, 2007 10:10 PM"She didn't know the difference between embryo stem cells and umbilical cord stem cells."
She quite clearly calls one embryo research and the other umbilical, after which she points out the US is lagging behind everyone in stem cell research in general. She's skillfully dancing around that they are different, but she apparently knows there's a difference and she avoided directly pitting one form as the same as the other.
Haven't you got anything better to do than try to find fault with other people's blogs? Today's and yesterdays.... tenuous arguments on your part at best. There must be an aweful clod of a pro-choice blogger out there with which you could more easily pursue your demigoguery??
Posted by: Cameron at July 10, 2007 12:37 PMBut Cameron,
We have you...
Posted by: MK at July 10, 2007 5:40 PM