Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Mr. Bush's Stem Cell Diversion
The executive order on stem cells issued by President Bush yesterday seeks to reorient research in new directions that may or may not pay off. But make no mistake, it is no substitute for the bill expanding embryonic stem cell research that Mr. Bush vetoed at the same time because it would involve the destruction of microscopic entities — smaller than the period at the end of this sentence — that the president deems a nascent form of life.
Both the Senate and the House, which passed the embryonic stem cell bill by comfortable but not veto-proof margins, need to summon the strength to override Mr. Bush's veto, so that important research into possible cures for Parkinson's, diabetes and other serious ailments can move ahead.
Mr. Bush knows that most Americans support embryonic stem cell research — while his political base does not — so yesterday he sought to at least blunt their dismay by touting new scientific studies focused on deriving potent stem cells from amniotic fluid, placentas and the skin of laboratory mice. Some of the alternative work is indeed promising. But almost all scientists in the field consider embryonic stem cell research the most promising. It is foolish to crimp that research by withholding federal funds to placate a minority of religious and social conservatives, including Mr. Bush, who deem the work unethical.
The president's executive order directs the secretary of health and human services to support research on alternative sources of "pluripotent" stem cells that are capable of developing into many other kinds of cells needed for therapy. The department already supports a lot of such experiments — on so-called adult stem cells. It has now been ordered to also explore the potential of deriving embryonic stem cells without killing embryos — perhaps from embryos that are deemed dead or from specially created biological entities that are not full embryos.
The feasibility of deriving embryonic stem cells that way will need fuller discussion. Making the order even less persuasive, the White House did not request any additional funding to carry out the work, but will simply use existing budgets at the National Institutes of Health.
The bill vetoed by Mr. Bush would have provided more research opportunities: greatly expanding the number of traditional embryonic stem cell lines that can be used in federally financed research by tapping into the thousands of surplus embryos that would otherwise be discarded at fertility clinics. If Mr. Bush cannot see the sense in such an approach, members of Congress need to tell him that they — and the American people — do.
The Senate, which has the best shot at overriding the veto, will vote first, in hopes that a victory there will inspire the House to follow. Americans will need to keep a close eye on which legislators favor the most promising stem cell research and which try to impede scientific progress.
© 2007 The New York Times
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
13 Comments so far
Show AllProtecting a microscopic size entity in leiu of possible medical breakthroughs while subjecting full grown men and women to maiming and death does not compute. Protecting these period size entities while leaving already born children completely without access to decent health care also doesn't compute.
"Mr. Bush knows that most Americans support embryonic stem cell research — "
Mr. Bu$h doesn't care what we mere 'Muricans support. We don't know anything, he is the authority...the Decider/Commander Guy. Stem cell research is immoral, the cellular version of murder and should be resrticted. It's absolutely inconceiveable that he would consider killing any form of life less than 17 years of age, unless however, that life form has inferior genes...in which case we simply irradiate them with depleated uranium.
Cheers?
More Bushist Manifest Insanity.
More reason to not try to make sense out of Bush without focusing on money, votes, and power. As dimwitted as he is, I doubt he cares about the microscopic embryos, but he feels that the harm he causes to the research with the veto is a small price to pay to keep the useful idiots in the Religious Right voting for Republicans against all reason, as the Republicans and their cronies rob the idiots, and the rest of us, blind and imperil the future of our children and grandchildren.
Bush and Cheney feel that they and their class of wealthy super-predators are like the early American settlers and the rest of us are the Native American Indians (i.e., they do not have our best interests at heart and will trick us if they can, imprison or kill us if they have to, to get their way).
Of course it is no surprise that Bush vetoed stem cell research. What is outrageous is that the bill isnt veto-proof in the House and Senate. That means to me that there must NOT be a clear majority of "Americans" supporting embryonic stem cell research.
The Times quotes, "It is foolish to crimp that research by withholding federal funds to placate a minority of religious and social conservatives, including Mr. Bush, who deem the work unethical."
Using the word UNETHICAL in any stance associated with Bush, the global war-for-profit murderer, is like asking Jeffrey Dahmer why he was not a vegetarian. Please...
If you tell Bush that stem cells will kill people he will sign it in a heart beat.H
There are billions of dollars in profits to be made out of the presumable and potential outcomes of concerted stell stem research. Bush's stance on this issue is surely surely surely about making sure that this knowledge/profit stays in the private sector (who must be lobbying him furiously) and that it does not enter the public domain (thanks to federal funding) where it might just end up helping mankind for free. Surely? I can't believe his stance is actually a "moral" one. Fellow Commondreamers, am I barking up the wrong tree here?
"Destroying human life in the hopes of saving human life is not ethical, and it is not the only option before us." - George W. Bush
The utter hypocrisy of his "moral" stance on human life is staggering.
When the bombs stop dropping and the hand of peace reaches out from the bush white house then, and only then will I acknowlege that maybe gw has morals. Of course I don't see this happening.
Mr. President (?) How can you trample the bodies of millions of (what other than unarmed?) babies, children, adults and old people in most of the Mideast? and elsewhere? holding aloft with self-praise your veto of stem-cell research, calling your veto moral when you are the exception to morality?
How can GW Bush be pro-life and pro-
war at the same time?
How many embryos die in the womb as their mothers are killed in Iraq?
What was the president thinking when he talked about honoring the "sanctity of human life?"
What was his crowd of supporters thinking when they applauded?
Stem Cell Veto & Morality
" I will not allow America to cross the moral line (George Bush in his recent stem cell veto).
Bush again protects us from our immorality by continuing his war against embryonic stem cell research. His brand of moral authority has granted him the right to render the conclusions of the dedicated international scientific community invalid; and to dismiss the fact that his veto will deprive hope from millions with incurable diseases even though these embryos would have otherwise been destroyed..
His pious stature, with backing the religious right & energy cartel mentors, has also sanctioned him to execute unprecedented and bold actions to preserve the direction of our republic. They include: misinformation and secrecy to protect us from misguided reformers; manipulation of science to impede dangerous environmental reforms; cancelation of family panning in improvished countries; character assassinations against those who question his policies, such as that used unseat Senator Max Cleland (a triple Vietnam amputee) for promoting a dangerous inquiry into the causes of 9/11--and the list goes on.
Credit for his moral guidance and its consequences belong to those who voted for and supported him; our legislators for their non-interference (albeit under intimidation); and the five supreme court justices who saw the need to override the constitution to plant him in office in order to save us from the dangers of a radical candidate such as Gore who promoted environmental reform & mitigation measures against global warming.
Robert Settgast
San Rafael, CA
415-492-1747
rhsettgast@hotmail.com