• E-mail
• Print
• Comment
• Font Size
• Digg
• del.icio.us
• Discuss article

Adult Vs. Embryonic Stem-Cell Research

Posted on: Monday, 22 August 2005, 18:00 CDT

The Advocate's Aug. 13 article titled "Poll: Support for stem- cell research rising" continued the media disinformation campaign for embryonic stem-cell

research. Regarding ESCR, the article stated:

"... Americans' opinions on the research were fairly fuzzy. But, as they learned more about the issue and its potential benefits, Americans grew more solid in their support of the research." The implications of the article are obvious - those in favor of ESCR are smart, but those who oppose it ar e dumb Christian fanatics. The reality is just the opposite - today, most people actually have no idea about adult stem cells and their successes and potential, because the media have kept the information from them. Some facts: Adult stem cells (which do no harm to the donor) have been used to help thousands of people with leukemia and genetic disorders, and have been shown to have great potential for curing other diseases. In fact, according to a study in the July 1 issue of "Molecular Biology of the Cell ," muscle-derived adult (not embryonic) stem cells have the ability to multiply in large numbers - a necessary step for effective treatments of diseases. To date, embryonic stem- cell research (which destroys the human donor) has resulted in zero treatments. Many scientists believe ESCs will never result in any cures.

Most people are led by the mainstream media to believe that ESCR is the only hope for cures of diseases such as diabetes and Parkinson's. But the MOST important fact - that ESCR kills human embryos is danced around as if the notion is only "Christian belief" - not fact (ESCR is also a major component of human cloning). The dictionary defines an embryo as "the earliest stages in the development of an organism ... in the human species, the first eight weeks." Any disagreement that human embryos are alive is merely rhetorical junk science.

Would not the law, the media and the community be appalled at a mad scientist who, in the name of science (and to help find a cure for diabetes), were found hovering over the body of a one-year-old he had just murdered? Would we trust such a "scientist," or would we call him insane? Why, then are we not appalled at human embryocide and its "professional" perpetrators?

Randy LaBauve

7846 O'Neal Road

Baton Rouge

Source: Advocate; Baton Rouge, La.

More News in this Category