Hi All,
I started out writing a stem cell article for submission as a guest
editorial, and I finished it in the form of a letter (appended below)
to President Bush. If anyone wants to use the letter in whole or in
part for a similar purpose, please do so.
Phil
=====================================================================
May 24, 2001
President George W. Bush
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President:
As person disabled by Parkinson's disease I will be affected by your
decision about whether to deny use of federal funds for highly
important medical research involving embryonic stem cells. I have
heard that you oppose the research, but that you have not disclosed
to the public your reasons. I urge you to consider the strong
medical, ethical and Constitutional reasons why this research needs
to be federally funded.
The embryos in question are cultured to the blastocyst stage from
fertilized eggs left over from in vitro infertility treatments. The
couples receiving treatment chose to donate them to medical research
rather than have them destroyed or possibly "adopted" by other
couples. The stem cells taken from these embryos can multiply
indefinitely and can differentiate into any of the over 200 specific
cell types in the body. They offer the potential to create a large
volume of transplantable tissue that can be used to reverse the
progress of diseases like diabetes, multiple sclerosis, and
Parkinson's disease. There is a compelling public need to find cures
for all these diseases.
The treatment potential of embryonic stem cells was demonstrated by
the recent work of Dr. Ole Isacson of Harvard and Ron McKay, Ph.D.,
of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), whose laboratories have
developed dopamine-producing brain cells from mouse embryonic stem
cells and have transplanted them to mouse models of Parkinson's
disease. The transplants reversed the Parkinson's. With federal
funding, human clinical trials of this procedure could start within a
few years.
The opponents of embryonic stem cell research are correct when they
note that there are other sources of stem cells -- umbilical cords,
placentas, bone marrow, even cadavers and, allegedly, fat from
liposuction. But they err in their judgment that the other stem
cells will serve equally well and that the use of embryonic stem
cells is unnecessary. Not all stem cells have equal potential.
Researchers tell us that it is far too early to rule out any avenue
of stem cell research. We won't know which stem cells work better in
which treatments for which diseases until all possibilities have been
tried and compared clinically. For Parkinson's disease there have so
far been no reports of non-embryonic stem cell successes that compare
with the achievements of Isacson and McKay.
The groups on the different sides of the stem cell issue do not
neatly correspond to the sides on the abortion issue. Some people
who oppose abortion -- Senator Strom Thurmond and former Senators Bob
Dole, and Connie Mack, for example -- support the research. How is
this possible? Here's one way. If you think abortion is allowable
in exceptional cases, then you necessarily believe that there are
important values that outweigh the life of an embryo in its earliest
stages. If you believe that these overriding values include saving
many lives and alleviating suffering through medical research, then
you can in good conscience support medical research using donated
embryos that would otherwise become medical waste.
Mr. President, you have said that you oppose abortion except in cases
of rape and incest. By virtue of these exceptions your position is
consistent with supporting embryonic stem cell medical research. You
need not, therefore, have reservations about funding it. Also Mr.
President, you must be concerned about the effects of the research
being done only privately, without NIH guidelines and without peer
review.
Some religions teach that embryos less than a week old are complete
people having souls and rights, and that by using them in research we
commit murder. In medicine, those patients whose religious beliefs
are incompatible with particular forms of treatment are accommodated
via the right to refuse treatment. For example, Jehovah's Witnesses
may refuse blood transfusions even if this refusal results in their
own deaths. Therapies based on embryonic stem cells can be handled
the same way.
Your decision may raise an issue of church-state separation, an
essential principle in the foundation of American democracy. Just as
it is unethical for physicians to force their religious views on
their patients, so it would be contrary to the Establishment Clause
of the First Amendment to impose on everyone a personal religious
belief in the form of an executive order regarding a public health
care policy for which there is no clear secular purpose.
For all these reasons I ask you to please reconsider your opposition
to this vital research. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Phil Tompkins
Amherst, Massachusetts
cc: The Honorable Edward M. Kennedy
The Honorable John F. Kerry
The Honorable John W.Olver
The Hampshire Gazette
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn
