|
STEM CELL PRO AND CON
BY MIKE REAGAN AND HOWARD DEAN, M.D.
Our two columnists, Michael Reagan
and Howard Dean, both happened to write opposing columns about
stem cell research today, so I'm presenting them here as pro
and con points of view.
Mike Reagan's opinion is interesting
because we've heard so much in the media about Nancy Reagan's
support for stem cell research after Ronald Reagan's long battle
with Alzheimers disease; Mike disagrees with Nancy. E-mail Mike
at mereagan@hotmail.com
Howard Dean's point of view is
also interesting, as a medical doctor and a vocal supporter of
stem cell research. Howard was recently the frontrunner for the
Democratic nomination for president. E-mail Howard at howarddean@democracyforamerica.com.
I'm With My Dad on Stem Cell Research
By Michael Reagan
The media continues to report
that the Reagan "family" is in favor of stem cell research,
when the truth is that two members of the family have been long
time foes of this process of manufacturing human beings
my dad, Ronald Reagan during his lifetime, and I.
The media should keep in mind
that we are also members of the Reagan "family," and
my father, as I do, opposed the creation of human embryos for
the sole purpose of using their stem cells as possible medical
cures.
Moreover, using the widely promoted
and thoroughly discredited argument that stem cell research can
lead to a cure of Alzheimer's disease, the media and proponents
of stem cell research have suggested that had the research been
done a long time ago, my dad might have avoided the ordeal he
endured. This is junk science at its worst.
As William Clark, dad's national
security advisor, interior secretary and one of my dad's closest
friends and aides wrote in a recent op-ed piece in the New York
Times my father's "suffering under Alzheimer's disease was
tragic, and we should do everything we can that is ethically
proper to help others afflicted with it. But I have no doubt
that he would have urged our nation to look to adult stem cell
research - which has yielded many clinical successes - and away
from the destruction of developing human lives, which has yielded
none." And he warned, "Those who would trade on Ronald
Reagan's legacy should first consider his own words."
Here's what my father said way
back in 1983: "My administration is dedicated to the preservation
of America as a free land and there is no cause more important
for preserving that freedom than affirming the transcendent right
to life of all human beings, the right without which no other
rights have any meaning."
To make matters worse, those
arguing for embryonic stem cells have embarked on a campaign
of disinformation, claiming that there are scientific reasons
for believing that their research can be expected to lead to
a cure for Alzheimer's disease.
Listen to what Ronald D.G. McKay,
a stem cell researcher at the National Institute of Neurological
Disorders and Stroke told the Washington Post: "People need
a fairy tale," he said, explaining why scientists have allowed
society to believe wrongly that stem cells are likely to effectively
treat Alzheimer's disease. He added "Maybe that's unfair,
but they need a story line that's relatively simple to understand."
A story line that is a flat out
lie.
Writing in the Weekly Standard,
lawyer, ethicist and human life advocate Wesley J. Smith reported
that "Researchers have apparently known for some time that
embryonic stem cells will not be an effective treatment for Alzheimer's,
because as two researchers told a Senate subcommittee in May,
it is a 'whole brain disease,' rather than a cellular disorder
(such as Parkinson's). This has generally been kept out of the
news. But now, Washington Post correspondent Rick Weiss, has
blown the lid off of the scam, reporting that while useful abstract
information might be gleaned about Alzheimer's through embryonic
stem cell research, 'stem cell experts confess . . . that of
all the diseases that may be someday cured by embryonic stem
cell treatments, Alzheimer's is among the least likely to benefit.'"
People such as Nancy, however,
have been allowed to believe otherwise - "a distortion,"
Weiss writes that "is not being aggressively corrected by
scientists." Why? The false story line helps generate public
support for the biotech political agenda. As Weiss noted, "It
[Nancy Reagan's statement in support of ESCR] is the kind of
advocacy that researchers have craved for years, and none wants
to slow its momentum."
Unlike the hyped embryonic stem
cell research, adult stem cell research is already paying dividends.
According to Michael Fumento, one of the nation's most skilled
debunkers of junk science, "Over the horizon are so-called
adult stem cells (ASCs), extracted from people of any age and
from umbilical cords and placentas. Not only don't they carry
the moral baggage of embryonic stem cells (ESCs), but research
with them is much further along.
Fumento adds, "Unfortunately,
embryonic stem cell researchers have so powerful a PR machine
that many influential people don't even know there's an alternative."
Note to the media: Next time you write about the "family,"
remember both dad and me. It's our family too.
Mike Reagan is a board member
of the John Douglas French Alzheimer's Foundation and is heard
on more than 200 talk radio stations nationally as part of the
Radio America network. E-mail Mike at mereagan@hotmail.com
GO TO HOWARD
DEAN ON STEM CELL RESEARCH
|
Kirk
Walters, Ohio -- The Toledo Blade
Dana
Summers, Orlando, FL, The Orlando Sentinel.