 |
 |
I don't want to get into the debate but need to say something that I think is not portrayed correctly. No one is forcing their religious beliefs on anyone. There is nothing in any religion that instructs not to clone. [that I know of] It does say, however, "don't kill", in many religions. It is the uncertainty of whether this constitutes killing that is at the core of many persons' inner conflict. They are as entitled to their feelings as much as those who want the research funded by everyone's money. No religion forced anywhere - they just don't agree, and the same thing happens when non-religious vote or campaign for and against things that many strongly disagree with. Bush is currently against federal funding beyond the limits set and is keeping his word to his constituents just as many are hoping Kerry will. Sorry - he has the right to do that. No one is having anyone's religion forced upon them. We all make decisions based on something within us. There will never be complete agreement. Votes decide and there should be respect for each others' views. And after the Edwards' comments this past week -both Mr, and Mrs. -don't even get me started about distorting anything and that most definitely includes science. It's not that I'm pro- Bush and I am hoping for answers about ESCR. I just can't stop shaking my head at the accusations based on faulty reasoning and with no constructive ways to solve them. Paula Wittekind ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brightline" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 3:48 PM Subject: Fw: Urgent Op-Ed by Lanza and Rohm > ----- Original Message ----- > From: [log in to unmask] > To: [log in to unmask] > Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 10:59 AM > Subject: Urgent Op-Ed by Lanza and Rohm > > > > Op-Ed > > Stem Cell 911 > > By Robert Lanza and Wendy Goldman Rohm > > In an unprecedented move, The Royal Society --Britain's National > Academy of Science--this week asked the United Nations to ignore > President Bush's call for a ban on all forms of human cloning > including stem-cell research. > What hangs in the balance, on the cusp of the UN vote and the > upcoming Presidential election, is not only the plight of millions of > patients, but the future of one of the greatest medical advances in > the 21st century. > It is alarming that the US policy being pushed by the > Bush administration is not in sync with either public opinion > (a recent Harris poll shows that 6 out of 7 Americans fully > support all forms of stem cell research), or the expert opinions of > thousands of scientists and scores of Nobel laureates in the U.S. > and worldwide. The President has also ignored the > recommendations of the most renowned scientific > and medical groups in the country, the American Medical > Association, the National Academy of Science, and the American > Association for the Advancement of Science. > Indeed, the President's ideological blinders seem to have put him > in the same factual vacuum he found himself in at the start of the Iraq > war: then and now, he refuses to look at the facts in an > objective/scientific > fashion. > Just a few months ago, even our new US ambassador to the United > Nations, John Danforth, called a press conference in support of > therapeutic > cloning and the urgent need for this research. Now, like NIH chief Elias > Zerhouni, > Danforth appears to have had the Bush policy shoved down his throat and > must > promote the Bush position to the UN that neither represents the scientific > facts > nor public opinion. > In the U.S., President Bush's habit of mixing personal religious beliefs > with public policy has slowly and subtly eroded the line between church > and state. This is inappropriate and damaging to human well-being and > public health. If the Bush administration succeeds in extending this to > the world via a UN ban, it will be a sad day indeed. > Bush's policies in the area of scientific research are as damaging to > the public interest as his foreign policies have been to the state of > international peace. > In the American arena, a careful look at the record will show that > a scientific and factual view of the world has rarely been incorporated > into decision-making by this President. Earlier this year, 5,000 > scientists > (including 48 Nobel laureates) spoke out in support of embryonic stem > cells > research and human cloning, and expressed outrage at the Bush > administration's > habit of distorting science. > When Laura and George W. Bush state that embryonic stem cell research > holds no near-term promise for helping patients with debilitating > diseases, > scientists on the front lines know that they are flat out wrong. With > adequate > funding, we can see the first therapies within the next five years. The > scientific > results so far speak for themselves. In animals, embryonic stem cells > already > have reversed diabetes and fixed damaged hearts. Nerve cells have been > used > to treat Parkinson's disease, multiple sclerosis and to restore function > to paralyzed rats. > Stem cell scientists worldwide have no interest in destroying lives. They > obtain stem > cells from tiny balls of cells left over in in-vitro fertilization > clinics. Some 400,000 of these > are either discarded or frozen in the U.S. alone. > It is puzzling to us that the President believes the potential life of a > group of > cells-smaller than a grain of sand-is more valuable, say, than the life of > a > living, feeling, 5-year-old with a life-threatening disease. > Leading Republicans like Senator Orrin Hatch are similarly puzzled. > They believe an embryo only has the potential for life when it is a fetus > in woman's > womb, not a ball of cells in a test tube. The question is whether a > microscopic > ball of cells warrants the same rights as a parent or a spouse suffering > from > Alzheimer's disease, or a young diabetic child who may go blind or have > limbs > amputated. > Even a generous private sector will be hard pressed to fill the > government's > role. Overcoming the scientific challenges that remain will require a > large and > sustained investment in this research. The government is the only > realistic > source for such an infusion of funds, and remains the greatest hope for > moving > embryonic stem cell research into the clinic in the next five to ten > years. > Without this support, research progress will be substantially delayed, and > many > scientists and companies may be driven overseas, to the UK, Singapore, > South Korea, > Israel, and many others, where stem cell research is more fully supported > by government. > Bush's dangerously flawed policy in the US should not be allowed on the > world stage, > where it will severely dampen efforts underway worldwide to relieve human > suffering and > disease with emerging stem cell therapies. Moreover, it should be > overturned in the US; > time is of the essence for millions of patients. > > --Robert Lanza, MD, editor in chief of "Handbook of Stem Cells," is > medical director > at Advanced Cell Technology. Wendy Goldman Rohm is author of "The Eighth > Day: > On the Front Lines of Stem Cell Research and The Countdown to a Human > Clone," > Random House (Harmony Books). > > ------------ > Please circulate freely > > Editors, for editing questions, > contact: Wendy Goldman Rohm 847-942-9534, [log in to unmask] > or Robert Lanza at [log in to unmask] > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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