to try to defeat the stem-cell bill
Clash over stem cell research heats up.
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| As the week drew to a close, commentators opposed to the research, such as William Kristol, editor of the conservative Weekly Standard, released fiery commentaries urging senators to reject the bill. And several scientific and medical groups, including the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, released countervailing warnings that patients and their families would suffer if the bill failed. Yesterday, in one of the more incendiary volleys, the journal Science published a letter by three researchers documenting apparently significant misstatements made by a leader in the movement to block the bill. … The letter to the journal focused on David A. Prentice, a scientist with the conservative Family Research Council. Prentice has been an adviser to Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) – a leader in the charge to maintain tight restrictions on the research – and an “expert source” often cited by opponents of embryonic stem cell research. Prentice has repeatedly claimed that adult stem cells, which can be retrieved harmlessly from adults, have at least as much medical potential as embryonic cells. He often carries a binder filled with references to scientific papers that he says prove the value of adult stem cells as treatments for at least 65 diseases. In the letter to Science, however, three researchers went through Prentice’s footnoted documentation and concluded that most of his examples are wrong. “Prentice not only misrepresents existing adult stem cell treatments but also frequently distorts the nature and content of the references he cites,” wrote Shane Smith of the Children’s Neurobiological Solutions Foundation in Santa Barbara, Calif.; William B. Neaves of the Stowers Institute for Medical Research in Kansas City, Mo.; and Steven Teitelbaum of Washington University in St. Louis. |
Typical stuff here - the right-wing gets a quack scientist doing quack research & try to make it seem like he’s legit.
http://in.today.reuters.com/news…9-1.xml
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| But in Friday’s issue of the journal Science, three stem-cell experts – Steven Teitelbaum of Washington University in St. Louis, Shane Smith of the Children’s Neurobiological Solutions Foundation in Santa Barbara, California and William Neaves of the Stowers Institute for Medical Research in Kansas City – wrote a detailed rebuttal of these claims and said at best Prentice accurately portrayed only nine of the studies. |
I want to see Bush veto it. The fact that he never has vetoed any bill (just ignored the law when it suited him) will make all of this front page news, and right before the election. I heard one doctor say that about 1 in 3 people has a disease that might eventually be cured through this research. Opposing the research is a losing proposition, politically.
Remember when this was the big issue, in August just before 9/11?
Me too - I hope he veto’s it with a vengeance!
Is it wrong to be exicted about something (his veto) that will cause so many people so much harm?
Actually, I think it is, on reflection. So I hope he does not veto it.
Oooh, that was hard to say, Mike. 
How can he NOT veto it? His position has always been against it and HE is the decider.
He loses either way. (not that he has much dignity left to lose mind you)
We’ve lost 6 years of science so another 2 won’t really matter if his veto works against their party.
I say veto #### it!
KF
Looks like it will happen.
I’ve been reading a book by historian Jean Gimpel, froim the 1970s, in which he argued for a model of cultures as going through a period of innovation, a period of maturity, and a period of decline, the last period characterized by a hostility to reason and science. he draws parallels with medieval society up to the end of the 13th century, which he argues was progressive until the turn against reason to mysticism. He saw the US entering the same late phase, and China coming up, 30 years ago. Intriguing read…
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| Is it wrong to be exicted about something (his veto) that will cause so many people so much harm? |
No because it’s politics, and we, as individuals, have little control for what these politicians do. Having said that, I’m hoping that the House/Senate will override his veto.