Embryonic Stem Cell Breakthrough Reveals Religious Right Hypocrisy
But rather than demonstrate a desire to seriously examine an advance that could potentially cure hundreds of life-threatening diseases, Mr. Watts displayed stubborn partisan unwillingness to resolve a hot-potato political issue that serves to rally religious right voters to the polling booth.
And Watts did so using the exact same scientifically-inaccurate talking points as did a spokesman for conservative Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) to the press today.
Embryonic Stem Cell Therapy Breakthrough
On August 24, 2006, in the journal Nature, biologists for Advanced Cell Technology, Inc. (ACT), a Massachusetts company, announced that it had pioneered a new approach to embryonic stem cell therapy that does NOT cause the destruction of human embryos.
The religious right has refused to support embryonic stem cell research and therapy because, until now, all techniques caused the destruction of days-old human embryos. For this reason, President George Bush vetoed H.R. 810 in July 2006, a bipartisan bill passed by both houses of Congress that would have permitted federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.
ACT's landmark breakthrough addresses these ideological stumbling blocks by creating stem cells while not causing harm to embryos.
Basic Facts of New Embryonic Stem Cell Therapy Technique
I've studied a plethora of press details about this landmark scientific therapy technique, and it's quite complex. Here are the basic facts:
- Using techniques employed in in-vitro fertilization, a tiny glass tube is used to extract a single cell (called a blastomere) from an embryo extremely early in development.
- Per scientists, the blastomere is incapable of developing into a separate embryo, as "twinning" occurs at a later stage of embryonic development.
- In tests, the embryos developed normally at the same rate as those in commonly performed in-vitro fertilization techniques.
- Many dozens of blastomeres, each taken from a separate early-stage embryo, must be accumulated to form just one viable embryonic stem cell line.
- ACT's new technique is many years from public availability, and is presently inefficient and time-consuming. And unless goverment funded, this new embryonic stem cell therapy would be cost-prohibitive for all but the very wealthy.
Religious Right Reaction
On CNN this afternoon, echoing words from Senator Brownback's office, J.C. Watts commented that he objects to this new embryonic stem cell technique because the extracted cell could possibly grow into a twin, and the twin would die in the process.
According to scientists and researchers, Mr. Watts' statement is inaccurate and scientifically impossible.
A White House spokesman issued a cautiously ambiguous statement that subtly voices new objections : "Any use of human embryos for research purposes raises serious ethical concerns, but it is encouraging to see scientists at least making serious efforts to move away from research that involves the destruction of embryos."
What's Next?
Legislation permitting federal funding for embryonic stem cell research is dead via presidential veto, until a new bill is introduced in the next, 110th Congress, which convenes in January 2007.
The American public overwhelmingly supports federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, and both houses of the Republican-led Congress firmly support it, as well.
"There is no rational reason left to oppose this research," observed Dr. Robert Lanza, ACT vice-president, per the New York Times.
Dr. Lanza told the Los Angeles Times that federal funding for embryonic stem cell research would "give the field a badly needed jumpstart."
Pro-Life or Pro- Political Power?
Per Dr. James Dobson's Focus on the Family website , an influential beacon of religious right thought, "Focus on the Family opposes stem cell research that destroys embryonic humans."The embryonic stem cell therapy newly announced by Advanced Cell Technology, Inc. does NOT destroy "embryonic humans."
Yet, first word from the religious right community is that it opposes this ground-breaking technique.
So at heart, maybe the religious rights' issue isn't really about the destruction of days-old human cells in a lab petri dish. Maybe it's really about holding to a divisive "culture" issue that coalesces the political base and pleases deep-pocketed religious right lobbyists.
Maybe it's really about hypocrisy and love of political power.
And maybe... just maybe... it's about a lack of respect and compassion for human life, not love for human life.
Related Reading
Pros & Cons of Embryonic Stem Cell Research
H.R. 810, Stem Cell Enhancement Act of 2005, Vetoed by President Bush
Stem Cell Advance Spares Embryo, Los Angeles Times on August 24, 2006
A New Way to Create Stem Cells , San Francisco Chronicle on August 24, 2006
Stem Cell News Could Intensify Political Debate, New York Times on August 24, 2006
Comments
The only scientific way to conduct these experiments is to fund all types of studies from embryonic to adult stem cells and see which types hold the most promise for what. Good luck with this anti-science administration. They’d rather do moral things like supply Israel with cluster bombs.
Unfortunately, there’s a bit of hypocrisy on the side of the scientists on this one, which doesn’t do the liberal stance any good. A New Scientist magazine article reported several days after the initial story points out that in this research, the embryoes were actually all destroyed.
In this research, they took a number of blastocysts and split them up into individual cells, destroying the blastocysts, and then out of the individual cells they successfully got 2 (I think) lines of stem cells to replicate.
Previous studies have already proven that it was possible to remove a single cell from a blastocyst without damaging it, so the natural extension of this is that it should be possible to do both at once – remove a single cell from a blastocyst and get it to replicate into a new stem cell line.
However, they haven’t actually done that yet without destroying the blastocyst … and all of the original media coverage kind of made it sound like they had. Just goes to show how scientific findings shouldn’t be politicized for either side.
In this post, I wrote, ” ACT’s new technique is many years from public availability, and is presently inefficient and time-consuming.”
I’m always a tad suspicious when innovations are announced by the companies that stand to richly profit from the innovations. I’m not surprised by your words here.
That is exactly why government should be funding and performing this vital work: to remove the biased, profit-incentive from subjective reporting of research results.
I’m 19yrs old. If you would’ve asked me early morn of Aug 14,03 if I thought it was worth aborting a baby just to do stem cell research, like many of you I would’ve said NO!Later that day I broke C-5 during football practice for my school. I’m as much of a Christian as anyone but my feelings have changed! After being paralyzed from the chest down for almost 5yrs, I now understand why this issue is not going away! Before anyone says it’s wrong to do embryonic stem cell research, try living with all the obstacles of being paralyzed! I KNOW ,100%, THAT EVERYONE WILL PUSH FOR EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH TO CONTINUE, IF SOMETHING WERE TO HAPPEN TO YOU OR A LOVED ONE!!!!!