Scientific Empirical Stem Cell Truths vs. Michael J. Fox's Unconscionable Claims
By gamecock Comments (23) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Update
David Frum links
http://frum.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTliOWQ0ZmRjNmUxZTE1YjMyNGI4NTE4N...
http://frum.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Zjc0MjIyZmY1MWE1NmU2ZDRjNzQ0ZjI1N...
The American Thinker has published an invaluable piece by an expert physician on the subject of embryonic and adult stem cell research and results that deconstructs the substance of the claims made by Michael J. Fox's ads for Democrat candidates.
As revealed by the below scholarly scientific piece, the reason the MSM can't defend the substance of Fox's claims is because his claims, as pointed out by Rush Limbaugh, are not true and the real agenda issue in this imbroglio is abortion, not stem cell research per se, or the bogus lie that the Hearing-Challenged Limbaugh "made fun" of Fox's particular disability.
See more DeVine Gamecock commentary as well as expert witness supporting excerpts and link to full article below...
Dr. Mary L. Davenport in the American Thinker says:
"Mr. Fox and his ads’ sponsors are guilty of conflating embryonic stem cell research, which the GOP candidates and many Americans oppose for destroying a human life in the name of curing other people’s diseases, with stem cell research in general, which includes adult stem cell research and umbilical cord blood stem cell research."
As we have seen, the MSM, with few exceptions, has avoided any talk of the substance of the claims, choosing instead to demonize Rush Limbaugh for daring to question claims by a disabled person and question whether the disabled person is acting in accordance with his prior admitted conduct when in a persuasive role, i.e. to go off his medications, given that Fox does not usually show such severe effects of Parkinson's in his frequent public appearances and in his role on "Boston Legal".
But the other reason their is no MSM defense of the claims is that the real reason that the Left has made embryonic stem cells their cause celeb is because embryos are made available by abortions, and abortion is the issue that defines the Left.
Dr. Davenport continues
"The only limits in question are on federal funding of new embryonic stem cell lines, requiring the sacrifice of new embryos. Private and state-funded research (California voters are spending six billion dollars borrowing money to fund this) is ongoing. The implicit claim that research based on new embryos is “the most promising” is absurd, completely unsupported by the scientific literature, and an insult to voters, based as it is on the assumption that they are incapable of understanding the issue. Too stupid to tell the difference, is the elitist assumption underlying this campaign.
Flim-flam is a charitable description. Why would federally-funded research be more promising than state- and privately-funded research? And on what possible basis can the claim be made that embryonic stem cell research is more promising than adult stem cell research?
The plain fact is that embryonic stem cell research is proving to be a bust. There are currently 72 therapies showing human benefits using adult stem cells and zero using embryonic stem cells. Scientifically-minded readers can review this medical journal article on the status of adult stem cell research. Adult stem cell therapies are already being advertised and promoted while no such treatments are even remotely in prospect for embryonic stem cell research.
The fact is that adult stem cells have already produced remarkable cures, whereas embryonic stem cells have failed. This should come as no great surprise to anyone with a background in high school biology..."
The fact is that the Left is desperate to find a way to combat moral objections to abortion and they think that if they can make embryonic stem cells a political issue in the curing of diseases, they can defend abortion as producing life saving "products"!
These people have no shame. They will lie to sufferers of diseases and exploit them with false hope. They will lie about anyone that dares to contest the content of claims made by their carefully chosen victims supposedly immune from criticism. They will lie about the substance of issues. basically the Left Lies. That's what they do. And they expect that they will not be challenged given the many decades of media monopoly they enjoyed. The key word being "enjoyed" with the "ed".
They no longer enjoy that monopoly and with courageous conservatives like Rush Limbaugh and his 20 million dittohead army, they cannot count on not having their lies challenged even when they exploit the disabled to spout the lies.
We won't be holding our breath for the MSM to come to the rescue of Limbaugh even though he is deaf. You see Limbaugh opposes abortion, i.e. the sacrament of the Left's secular religion.
Read the whole thing
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5977&search=micha...
see gamecock elsewhere at
http://devine-gamecock.townhall.com and www.race42008.com
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan
Bill O'Reilly read his "Talking Points" about this issue last night on Fox News. He was rather neutral on the issue, saying that both sides had their points, but he did claim that
"nobody knows whether adult stem cell lines will turn out to be effective or not."
Since he invites "pithy comments", I cited Dr. Davenport's article and wrote the following to Bill O'Reilly:
"While you were trying to be “fair and balanced” about the stem-cell debate, your statement that “nobody knows whether adult stem cell lines will turn out to be effective” is factually incorrect. According to Dr. Mary Davenport, M.D. an OB-GYN, “there are currently 72 therapies showing human benefits using adult cells and zero using embryonic stem cells.” (http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5977). In the stem-cell debate, the pro-lifers have both morality and science on their side."
Maybe others here at RedState might want to get Dr. Davenport's message out to the MSM as well.
The bad news: Conservatism is hard to sell. The good news is that it works.
had played the 2000 clip of MJ Fox telling Diane sawyer that he went off meds before public advocacy appearances. O'Reilly is only so much better than the average MSM. Better, yes, but only so much and his jealousy of Rush and the exponentially larger size of Limbaugh's audience is palpable. Bill was uninfrmed about a lot on this issue.
http://devine-gamecock.townhall.com and www.race42008.com
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan
of the cloning controversy in the Missouri amendment:
I copied this from an article somewhere. I thought it was really concise and essential to send my family members to inform them why Amendment 2 is misleading. (I capitalized UTERUS. It's not in the amendment so it's easily overlooked.)
"The key portions of the amendment are:
> >
> >Section 2.1 says that "No person may clone or attempt to clone a human
> >being." Sounds pretty straightforward. But Section 6.2 defines cloning
> >as "to implant in a UTERUS or attempt to implant in a UTERUS anything other
> >than the product of fertilization of an egg of a human female by a sperm of
> >a human male for the purpose of initiating a pregnancy that could result in
> >the creation of a human feetus, or the birth of a human being."
> > THE PROBLEM:
> >Those terms/words are used as a bait and switch because to clone just means
> >to create a genetic copy of something and has nothing to do with
> >implantation in a UTERUS. The cloning process occurs before implantation
> >and the cloned human embryo is a cloned human whether or not it is
> >implanted in a UTERUS.
> >
> >So while the wording says it bans cloning, it really does not. It just
> >creates a new legal definition for Missouri.
Life is not fair, but It's still a Wonderful Life!
in full eventually. see 1984?
http://devine-gamecock.townhall.com and www.race42008.com
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan
The dhimmies can only win by confusing issues. that is why they chose to hide their lies behind MJ Fox's symptoms. It diverts attention, they hope, fromt he issue: their false claims.
Fighting fire with fire. Yes, the campaign around stem cell research is misleading, but so is this. Notice you only mention developed therapies and results. That is where the word research is key. The hope is that with more research, scientists may discover how to use them. The reason they have potential research value because we cannot find adult stem cells for certain types of tissues. In theory we could adapt an undifferentiated stem cell to any type of cell in the body.
You are correct, there are not yet promising results. That's not to say that that the potential behind the theory doesn't exist. It's like fusion power. No promising results, but if theories are correct, unlocking the potential of fusion power would be a monumental achievement.
http://devine-gamecock.townhall.com and www.race42008.com
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan
Aren't you lying as well by conflating existing results with theory and potential?
Fox left out key details to the in depth debate that may change the perspective of anyone that would stay awake long enough to hear them. That is lying, I agree. It is just so normal and common to leave details objectionable to your case our of an argument, I don't find it particularly mean spirited anymore. I'd be lying if I said I don't do it myself. Which is why I find it strange to take such offense to MJF doing it, only to turn around and produce a more detailed, yet no-less one-sided argument in response.
Instead of casually observing, you might try paying attention to the words used and their meaning. See Websters. Not a casual book.
I, unlike Fox, recognized the distinctions between adult vs embryonic and privately vs government funded stem cell research and I didn't lie about Talent's record. Why did Fox lie and why does The Left, to include the MSM and Dem party lie on this and most other issues? Because the truth doesn't support enactment of their policies.
The truth reinforces conservative policies and, sets us free.
http://devine-gamecock.townhall.com and www.race42008.com
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/aug/06082401.html
Dr. Peter Hollands, the Chief Science Officer of the UK Blood Bank and early pioneer of embryonic stem-cell research, explains that embryonic stem-cell researchers will keep their public mandate unless a vast media campaign educates the public about the superior benefits and proven cures of cord blood.
He says modern stem-cell advancements in umbilical cord blood have rendered human embryonic stem-cell research unnecessary He calls cord blood the “realistic future of stem-cell technology.”
Dr. Hollands takes issue with those who contend that patient therapies can be obtained from human embryonic stem-cells.
“To claim that there are enough ‘spare’ embryos in IVF clinics is nonsense,” says Dr. Hollands. “These embryos could not support the demand for stem cell transplants” adding embryonic stem cells also have a tendency “to form tumors on transplantation”.
Dr. Hollands says that embryonic stem-cell researchers have taken advantage of the public ignorance about stem-cells.
“We should be focusing our time, money and expertise on cord blood stem cell technology,” says Dr. Hollands. “The sooner we stop wasting precious resources on embryonic stem cells research the sooner we will have stem cell cures for the people who really matter in all of this - the patients.”
Mr. Fox misleads the public in his political commercial empahasizing ebtryonic stem cell research while ignoring the more promising research that nobody has any problem with.
aren't promoted more.
I honestly think there is a hidden agenda, when it comes to embryonic stem cells and the demand for them-and it is to essentially dehumanize the embryos or give them some kind of "value" in their death.
And therein lies the answer. The politicization of embryonic stem cell is a cover for advancement of the abortion agenda. The Left desperately wants to legitimize abortion as life saving rather than life taking. Abortions provide the "work product" for embryonic research. Birth's provide umbilical cords which are to the abortion lobby what a cross is to Dracula.
http://devine-gamecock.townhall.com and www.race42008.com
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan
...that "embryonic" NEVER appears in any news reports and is not clearly distinguished from other forms.
The willingness/eagerness of the media to perpetuate the false generic "stem cell research" label is intellectually void and shameful.
The inability of conservatives to focus directly on that primary point of deceit and expose it thoroughly is dismaying...
As I wrote in another thread, a lot of the claims made in this article are just false. Take the claim that "There are currently 72 therapies showing human benefits using adult stem cells". In the article, Dr. Davenport cites this list in support of this claim. That list has been discredited; see here for an account.
I also can't see why the fact that there are nine diseases currently treatable with adult stem cells and none to date with embryonic stem cells shows that embryonic stem cells are not more promising. (Especially since it has only been eight years since embryonic stem cells were first isolated.) This is like saying that someone who was just first pick in the NFL draft couldn't be the most promising member of the team on the grounds that other members had already made several successful plays in the big leagues. It's just a mistake about the word 'promising'.
You claim that Dr. Davenport is an "expert". She's probably an expert in something, but I don't see any evidence that she's an expert in stem cell research, or any associated field.
There is no reason for opponents of embryonic stem cell research to rely on misleading or false accounts of the state of the science. If using embryonic stem cells is wrong, then is it, and we shouldn't do it. If it's not wrong, then I don't see why the fact that other sources of therapies are good would mean that we shouldn't proceed with this one. It's the moral issue that's key, not the scientific one; and I think the opponents of embryonic stem cell research do themselves no favors at all when they muddy their moral arguments with misstatements of scientific fact.
embryonic stem cell research in order to prevent government and private investors from applying limited resources to less efficient applications.
I disagree with your characterizations of my piece and the Thinker's, both from a moral and redundancy (I saw you comments in the other thread) standpoint! Original thoughts are welcome.
http://devine-gamecock.townhall.com and www.race42008.com
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan
http://www.redstate.com/blogs/gamecock/2006/oct/27/scientific_empirical_...
http://devine-gamecock.townhall.com and www.race42008.com
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan
where you explain your grounds for disagreement. You linked to my comment, and to two sites that contained a lot of other stuff, but nothing about this article that I could find.
http://devine-gamecock.townhall.com and www.race42008.com
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan
stem cell research to rely on misleading or false accounts of the science as well.
Why are those who are so supportive of embryonic stem cell research conflating it with "stem cell research" why not just call it what it is, in commercials and the like.
Also, why are we arguing the use of embryos, when we can use cord blood and not kill anything?
And in the end, why must the US taxpayer foot the bill for embryonic stem cell research? If it is such a promising research, why won't private investors touch it? Why doesn't Fox personally fund portions of it himself, instead of asking the taxpayer to do so?
Quote - "Let's review some obvious recent history. The media in this country lied about hurricane Katrina and the aftermath -- and they gave themselves Pulitzer Prizes for doing so. They lie constantly about the status of the Iraq war. They lied about Karl Rove in the Valerie Plame matter. They not only lied about Bush's National Guard records, they engaged in a conspiracy to create forged documents to further what they knew was a lie.
The Drive-By Media lies constantly about the economy. They lie about our judicial nominees. They lie about John Bolton. They lie about Donald Rumsfeld. They lie about Condoleezza Rice. They lie about Dick Cheney. They will lie about anybody who gets in their way. They lie about Halliburton. They lie about oil profits. They lie about tax cuts and how they are effective. They lie about practically everything. They carry the water for the Democrat Party. They carry the water for liberal elites, for anti-capitalists in the environmentalist movement and elsewhere. They carry the water for the appeasement crowd, the socialist elites in Western Europe. When someone stands up to them and questions them in their tactics, they try to intimidate and destroy.
Just think. Think about the last three days. There are literally hundreds of stories over the last three days about me. They're not focused on the phony science involving embryos. They're not focused on any aspect of the issue that the ad that Michael J. Fox produced attempts to persuade people about. They're not focusing on it. I wonder why? Because they know it's not a winning issue. The only way it's a winning issue is if nobody stands up to the ad. The only way it's a winning issue if nobody challenges the lie and the misrepresentation that they put forth in the ad. For three days, we've had news stories about me. No focus on the phony science involving the embryos." - Rush Limbaugh
http://devine-gamecock.townhall.com and www.race42008.com
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan
Thanks for pointing out this is not about Fox or even Rush. It is about the issue, science and most importantly content of the proposition.
This backdoor attempt to give the suffering false hope and legislate cloning is a specious endeavor. Missourians should read the content, understand the science and then ask why millions of their tax dollars should be spent on it? Once that conclusion is reached, ask yourself why McCaskill supports it.
"Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori"