He finally vetoed a bill -- his first and only veto since being president...
What did he choose to veto? Not a Dubai Ports Deal, not a spending increase, nope -- He vetoed Stem Cell Research on human embrios -- He refused to ackknowledge science today and what could be done for millions of Americans in curing awful and debilitating disease. He just can't sign a bill that might actually help people in desparate need. It is a very sad state of affairs.
He says that he thinks embrios are human beings. So one has to wonder if he eats eggs for breakfast and calls it chicken.
He is a callous fool. But, I'll bet some of you are proud of him.
I really think the jig is up on you neoconmen -- I know life-long Republicans who told me they were speachless today over this...
Congratulations rightees -- you've almost reached the mountain top...
1) Who was the ONLY PUSA to ever fund embryonic stem cell research? a) Bush b) Bush 43 c) W. d) all of the above
2) Guess which PUSA said the quote below: a) Clinton b) Slick Willie c) Bubba d) all of the above
I do not believe that federal funds should be used to support the creation of human embryos for research purposes, and I have directed that NIH not allocate any resources for such research. In order to ensure that advice on complex bioethical issues that affect our society can continue to be developed.
We already are funding it. This is for additional funding. There is also something called the private sector that can fund it as well. Clinton said no to any funding.
But stay tuned I got some more info for you. Rove might hire me on after this next post.
A Short List of Successful Treatments Achieved by ADULT STEM CELLS: 1. rebuilding livers 2. repairing spinal cord injuries 3. curing Type1 diabetes in mice 4. putting Chron's disease into remission 5. treating sickle cell anemia 6. putting Lupus into remission 7. treating congestive heart failue 8. restoring bone marrow in cancer patients 9. putting Lukemia into remission 10. restoring sight in blind people 11. restoring blood circulation 12. reversing SCID
A Short List of Successful Treatments by EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH: ........................
If Christopher Reeve was going to walk again like that greasy VP of your's suggested, it would have been through adult stem cell research. Bush is funding embryonic stem cells. He put a cap on it. Just remember these facts listed above when you hear the hysterics of embryonic stem cells being their "only hope".
Last week, Karl Rove –- explaining why Bush planned on vetoing the stem cell bill — told the Denver Post that “recent studies” show researchers “have far more promise from adult stem cells than from embryonic stem cells.”
White House spokesman Ken Lisaius on Tuesday could not provide the name of a stem cell researcher who shares Rove’s views on the superior promise of adult stem cells.
In a letter to President Bush last year, a group of 80 Nobel laureates wrote that “current evidence suggests that adult stem cells have markedly restricted differentiation potential.”
You need to click on the links from the article. I guess you think I randomly made up a dozen or so stem cell treatments off the top of my head. Or maybe you think there has never been any progress after years of adult stem cell research.
C'mon man, you gotta source somebody more accepted than this guy. He's an "anti-everything" guy -- except for he is for the rightwing crap..surprise, surprise...
You really are nuts, you know that?
I gotta say, you make for some great entertainment, though.
If you don't want to read what cardiologists and oncologists say, then don't. Don't play this bull shit game with me. If you don't believe those medical advances have taken place because it goes againt your ideology, then you are insane.
Click on the links and read what the doctors have said. This is all established fact.
Businessweek ".... A Columnist Backed by Monsanto Michael Fumento's failure to disclose payments to him in 1999 from the agribusiness giant has now caused Scripps Howard to sever its ties to him..." (See below link)
The long and the short story about Fumento's challenges ethics is that he wrote glowing articles about Monsanto in his books and opinion pieces, all the while taking under-the-table payments from said company. His syndicator, Scripps-Howard, dropped him after learning of this practice.
Of course, for some conservatives, this is a long-standing practice, with such luminaries as Armstrong Williams and Maggie Gallagher also participating.
Sorry this is not established fact, and you'll need a better citation than 'damaged goods' Fumento.
On a non-partisan level (because I do play a scientist occasionally), there is no doubt among my colleagues that George W.'s policy is crippling stem-cell research in the U.S., regardless of what you might have heard.
Usually, when things get so politicized, most scientists will tend to study other problems. Also, the present rules are forcing institutions to set up parallel laboratories/buildings/administration etc. Since no portion of federal funds can be used to support embryonic stem cell research, completely separate funds (private, state) must be found.
One of the more interesting conundrums is what happens when stem-cell research is published in peer-reviewed journals. Those journals are housed in university libraries and grounds, many subsidized by federal funds. Moreover, the premier abstracting service and journal aggregator service, PUBMED (AKA Entrez Med) is run by the federal government. Will stem cell articles be included or excluded in PUBMED?
Hmm! After those questions, the meaning of life looks pretty simple.
He cites doctors in his article. Are you questioning the doctors? If Fumento said the sky was blue do we question that? You guys are playing the oldest trick in the book.
You are attempting to make the argument that years of adult stem cell research has produced nothing (and the advances listed are outright lies) and embryonic stem cells are the magic elixer.
The fact that Clinton refused funding continues to not be acknowledged.
I'm not questioning the doctors in his article, but I am questioning Fumento's ethics and reliability.
You might find this instructive. Here's what happens when a scientist is proven to have cheated, lied, or is guilty of fraud and misrepresentation. That 'scientist' is thrown out of the community, is no longer employable, and all of his work is treated as suspect and unreliable...all of his work.
Fumento is guilty of these types of transgressions, and as such all of his work (including this article) will be ignored by me, and indeed any other scientist would treat him the same way.
However, I would be happy to look at any sources for this information, independent of Fumento.
Sorry, two of the references that you provided are just Abstracts, so I couldn't tell much from them. The articles themselves are blocked.
Below is the link to the original Chicago Tribune article on stem cell researchers critical of Rove's remarks.
The general consensus, to the extent that there is one, is that research should continue into both adult and embryonic stem cells. If research is not conducted here in the U.S. on embryonic stem cells, it will done elsewhere.
The irony here is that by denying Federal funding of embrionic stem cells, the Right-Wingers are throwing open the doors to unregulated and uncontrolled experimentation. It will be a wild and truly "Brave New World", when this Genie get's completely out of the bottle. Buckle up!
Clinton did not say no to any funding. In FY 2001 (Clinton's final budget) the National Institutes of Health spent $306 on funding of stem cell research.
scientists tell you they want to do something. You have a political objection. Exactly what is it?
It seems to me that the history of politics meddling in science hasn't been very useful. Sure it can work the other way around, but that hasn't been the history, and that doesn't seem to be the situation here.
It sounds to me like Pat Robertson wants to resurrect the catholics' inquisition, and Dubya is playing along. I ain't impressed.
I read the articles on your links -- I could not find where it said Adult Stem Cells were JUST AS promising as emrionic stem cells. Maybe you can point out that sentence or paragraph for me?
I read the articles on your links -- I could not find where it said Adult Stem Cells were JUST AS promising as embrionic stem cells. Maybe you can point out that sentence or paragraph for me?
Nowhere in the links provided by rightwinger did it say that adult stem cells were either just as promising, or indeed, more promising than embryonic stem cells. It was Rove who claimed before a Denver Post editorial board that researchers have found "far more promise from adult stem cells than from embryonic stem cells."
This statement by Karl Rove is a lie. The Chicago Tribune article, entitled "Experts rip Rove stem cell remark" indicated that the very researchers studying adult stem cells flatly disagreed with Rove's statement.
Here's what adult stem cell researchers had to say in the Chicago Tribune article:
"...But Rove's negative appraisal of embryonic stem cell research--echoed by many opponents of funding for such research--is inaccurate, according to most stem cell research scientists, including a dozen contacted for this story.
The field of stem cell medicine is too young and unproven to make such judgments, experts say. Many of those researchers either specialize in adult stem cells or share Bush's moral reservations about embryonic stem cells.
"[Rove's] statement is just not true," said Dr. Michael Clarke, associate director of the stem cell institute at Stanford University, who in 2003 published the first study showing how adult stem cells replenish themselves.
If opponents of embryonic stem cell research object on moral grounds, "I'm willing to live with that," Clarke said, though he disagrees. But, he said, "I'm not willing to live with statements that are misleading."
Dr. Markus Grompe, director of the stem cell center at the Oregon Health and Science University, is a Catholic who objects to research involving the destruction of embryos and is seeking alternative ways of making stem cells. But Grompe said there is "no factual basis to compare the promise" of adult stem cells and cells taken from embryos.
Grompe said, "I think it's a problem when [opponents of embryonic research] make a scientific argument as opposed to stating the real reason they are opposed--which is [that] it's a moral, ethical problem...."
Interestingly, Dr. Markus Grompe was a co-author on the peer-reviewed paper that rightwinger cited as one of his links which purported to indicate that adult stem cells were equal/superior to embryonic stem cells.
Below is the link to the full Chicago Tribune article.
we all know the value of editing. So Fumento is your witness, you need to defend him. If the MDs made your point, you'd cite them.
I notice that Fumento doesn't seem to have any scientific background, and is probably better characterized as a publicist.
So why aren't you going to the original source?
If Fumento said the sky was blue, then we ask, why does that matter (ie, materiality to what)? If it does, then we ask where and when. You're pretty damn dumb if you don't realize the sky isn't always blue.
Unfortunately it looks like your attempt to purchase VIP membership has failed due to your card being declined. Good news is that we have several other payment options that you could try.
VIP MEMBER
, you are now a VIP member!
We thank you for your purchase!
VIP MEMBER
, Thank you for becoming VIP member!
Membership should be activated shortly. You'll receive notification!
