It's hard to find such a short article with so many misrepresentations approaching outright lies as the one by Tim Macaluso on "stem-cell economy."
1) Despite what Professor Mark Noble may think or say, "access to human embryonic stem-cells suitable for clinical use" was never "resisted," let alone denied, by the Bush administration. Embryonic stem-cell research is NOT illegal. Mark Noble was always free to conduct the research had he had the properly equipped lab and the money. And being that he thinks this research holds such "tremendous promise," he should have had no problem finding venture capitalists - of the "greedy" type, of course - to finance him.
All Bush could do, and had the authority to do, was deny him "federal" funds, that is, taxpayers' money. An ethical issue was at stake, and Bush's "resistance" consisted in not sanctioning with federal funds an immoral pursuit.
2) Obama did no such thing as "free science from political agendas." On the contrary, by releasing federal funds for research on embryonic stem cells, he tied in double knots the research to the political agenda of abortion and all life-denying and life-destructive procedures. Because, you see, embryonic stem-cell research has nothing to do with curing diabetes or Michael J. Fox's Parkinson's disease, and everything to do with legitimizing abortion. If you can create an embryo and then proceed to destroy it in order to harvest embryonic stem cells, then what's wrong with killing a fetus?
3) By the third paragraph, we come to the rub: the URMC received $6.8 million in stem-cell research grants, part of the $100 million recently authorized by Governor Paterson in New York State. So there you have it: The welfare queen, which is what the URMC is, got its handouts to conduct a research that all evidence tells us holds no promise. If it did, it would need no public funds.
But the professor, revealing his true colors, ends by repeating the Obamanesque bromides that, given the $30 billion we spend annually on one disease (diabetes), this research is an "investment, not just in our health-care system, but in our economic stability."
Please!!!
ITALO SAVELLA, GREECE
Comments for "SCIENCE: Bush didn't ‘resist' research on stem cells" (3)
City Newspaper is not responsible for the content of these comments. City Newspaper reserves the right to remove comments at their discretion.
Don C. Reed said on Aug. 05, 2009 at 3:12pm
President Bush also "enthusiastically" (his word) backed a law which would have put stem cell scientists in jail for ten years and fined them one million dollars-- for somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT)-- I would call that pretty strong resistance. A decade in jail and a fine which would financially cripple most people for life?
Harry Davis said on Aug. 05, 2009 at 5:50pm
Mr. ITALO SAVELLA of GREECE should list his academic qualifications if he wants to go after Dr. Noble, a world-wide leader for in his field of CNS discovery for decades.
He says: "Embryonic stem-cell research is NOT illegal." Right, but what are you going to do if there is no money for it, as Bush did? Try to rent an apartment with no money and see how far you get. Same difference.
Uof R welfare queen for research? Give a break. Stem cell research favoring abortion arguement?
I wonder why City Newspaper prints this dribble so freely and yet edits some of my comments so quickly?
Italo Savella said on Aug. 08, 2009 at 7:21pm
Well, Mr. Davis, it seems you have more of a problem with the editors of CITY than you have with me since they edit your comments but they post my "dribble." Not having read any of your contributions but on the safe bet that you are a liberal, I assume that, typical of your ilk, they are so nasty as to be unprintable. Ms. Towler is an exception: She's not afraid to post well written contrary views on her ever-so-liberal paper. She's a jolly good fellow!
But let me address a couple of your points.
No, I do not have the academic qualifications to go "after" Dr. Noble. But I wasn't going after him. I was disputing the proposition that embryonic stem cell research holds "tremendous promise." I know that, as of today, no wonder cure is anywhere in sight as a result of this researchâ€"Christopher Reeve wouldn't be walking any time soon had he been still aliveâ€"while, on the other hand, research on adult stem cells has yielded some promising treatments.
Secondly, why is there no money for this research? Why does it have to be federal money? Don't you think there are enough "greedy venture capitalists" ready to back a potentially hugely profitable enterprise?
But there's a reason why liberals fit the sobriquet that is the title of Ramesh Ponnuru's book: The Party of Death. You name any life-destroying procedureâ€"embryonic stem cell research, abortion on demand, euthanasiaâ€"and the libs are for it.
Leave A Comment
Respond on Your Blog
Create an Account
or
Login
If you have a City Account you can not only post comments, but you can also respond to articles in your own City Blog. It's just another way to make your voice heard.