 |
 |
I'm not sure I understand. I'm not angry. I just posted an article from the Washington post. I made no comment. The quote is an excerpt from the article that gives the tone of the article. It is not my quote. Have a great day. Regards Frank ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lee Wu" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2004 4:12 AM Subject: Re: ARTICLE: Washington Post concerns about false hope > Frank, > Ever thought about doing an anger management course? > > FrankandTeri <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > "Hope is good. False hope is bad. Deliberately, > for personal gain, raising false hope in the catastrophically > afflicted is despicable." > > Washington Post Article, by Charles Krauthammer > > > > After the second presidential debate, in which John Kerry used the > word "plan" 24 times, I said on television that Kerry has a plan for > everything except curing psoriasis. I should have known there is no > parodying Kerry's pandering. It turned out days later that the Kerry > campaign has a plan -- nay, a promise -- to cure paralysis. What is > the plan? Vote for Kerry. > > This is John Edwards on Monday at a rally in Newton, Iowa: "If we do > the work that we can do in this country, the work that we will do when > John Kerry is president, people like Christopher Reeve are going to > walk, get up out of that wheelchair and walk again." > > In my 25 years in Washington, I have never seen a more loathsome > display of demagoguery. Hope is good. False hope is bad. Deliberately, > for personal gain, raising false hope in the catastrophically > afflicted is despicable. > > Where does one begin to deconstruct this outrage? > > First, the inability of the human spinal cord to regenerate is one of > the great mysteries of biology. The answer is not remotely around the > corner. It could take a generation to unravel. To imply, as Edwards > did, that it is imminent if only you elect the right politicians is > scandalous. > > Second, if the cure for spinal cord injury comes, we have no idea > where it will come from. There are many lines of inquiry. Stem cell > research is just one of many possibilities, and a very speculative one > at that. For 30 years I have heard promises of miracle cures for > paralysis (including my own, suffered as a medical student). The last > fad, fetal tissue transplants, was thought to be a sure thing. Nothing > came of it. > > As a doctor by training, I've known better than to believe the hype -- > and have tried in my own counseling of people with new spinal cord > injuries to place the possibility of cure in abeyance. I advise > instead to concentrate on making a life (and a very good life it can > be) with the hand one is dealt. The greatest enemies of this advice > have been the snake-oil salesmen promising a miracle around the > corner. I never expected a candidate for vice president to be one of > them. > > Third, the implication that Christopher Reeve was prevented from > getting out of his wheelchair by the Bush stem cell policies is a > travesty. > > George Bush is the first president to approve federal funding for stem > cell research. There are 22 lines of stem cells now available, up from > one just two years ago. As Leon Kass, head of the President's Council > on Bioethics, has written, there are 3,500 shipments of stem cells > waiting for anybody who wants them. > > Edwards and Kerry constantly talk of a Bush "ban" on stem cell > research. This is false. There is no ban. You want to study stem > cells? You get them from the companies that have the cells and apply > to the National Institutes of Health for the federal funding. > > In his Aug. 7 radio address to the nation, Kerry referred not once but > four times to the "ban" on stem cell research instituted by Bush. At > the time, Reeve was alive, so not available for posthumous > exploitation. But Ronald Reagan was available, having recently died of > Alzheimer's. > > So what does Kerry do? He begins his radio address with the > disgraceful claim that the stem cell "ban" is standing in the way of > an Alzheimer's cure. > > This is an outright lie. The President's Council on Bioethics, on > which I sit, had one of the world's foremost experts on Alzheimer's, > Dennis Selkoe from Harvard, give us a lecture on the newest and most > promising approaches to solving the Alzheimer's mystery. Selkoe > reported remarkable progress in using biochemicals to clear the > "plaque" deposits in the brain that lead to Alzheimer's. He ended his > presentation without the phrase "stem cells" having passed his lips. > > So much for the miracle cure. Ronald D.G. McKay, a stem cell > researcher at NIH, has admitted publicly that stem cells as an > Alzheimer's cure are a fiction, but that "people need a fairy tale." > Kerry and Edwards certainly do. They are shamelessly exploiting this > fairy tale, having no doubt been told by their pollsters that stem > cells play well politically for them. > > Politicians have long promised a chicken in every pot. It is part of > the game. It is one thing to promise ethanol subsidies here, dairy > price controls there. But to exploit the desperate hopes of desperate > people with the promise of Christ-like cures is beyond the pale. > > There is no apologizing for Edwards's remark. It is too revealing. > There is absolutely nothing the man will not say to get elected. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] > In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn > > > > --------------------------------- > Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] > In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn