Hillary promotes stem cell "ban" myth

In her speech to the Take Back America conference last week, Hillary Clinton was the latest Democrat to promote the myth (here, here, here, and here) that President Bush has instituted a "ban" on stem cell research:

You know, later today, apparently, the president will veto a bill passed by Congress to support stem cell research.

Now, this is research that…holds such promise for devastating diseases. Yesterday, I met with a group of children suffering from juvenile diabetes. I co-chair the Alzheimer's caucus in the Senate. I've worked on helping to boost funding for research to look for cures and a way to prevent so many devastating diseases. And we know that stem cell research holds the key to our understanding more about what we can do. So let me be very clear: When I am president, I will lift the ban on stem cell research.

This is just one example of how the President puts ideology before science, politics before the needs of our families, just one more example of how out of touch with reality he and his party have become. And it's just one more example as to why we're going to send them packing in January 2009, and return progressive leadership to the White House.

In fact, President Bush has limited the number of embryonic stem cell lines that are eligible for federal funding. No such limitations have been placed on private research. This myth needs to die.

Comments

[Rob]

Note that President Bush's limitation on stem cell lines eligible for federal funding applies only to embryonic stem cell lines. Research on non-embryonic stem cells is fully eligible for federal funding.

You wouldn't know that to read most criticism by Democrats of the White House position. Do they not understand the distinction? Doubtful. They choose to ignore the distinction because they wish to smear President Bush. Imagine that, Brendan: liberals smearing their opponents.

[bnyhan]

Thanks Rob - I added the word "embryonic" above to make sure this was clear.

[OTOH]

On the other hand, I suspect you know little about how research in health works - especially its financing.

Making research using embryonic stem cell lines ineligible for federal funding (crucial: NIH) makes said research incredibly hard to pursue.

Talk to health researchers about what life without federal funding is like. They will fill you in on many relevant details.

[Yvonne Perry]

The word "embyronic" is what has caused all the controversy in the first place. The research is conducted on "blastocyst" stem cells.

In one way, doctors and researchers are mislabeling their own product when they refer to fertilized eggs (zygotes, morulas, and blastocysts) as embryonic stem cells. The media is simply repeating this misnomer and fueling the flames of argument.

Yes, the cells are within the first two-month stage of development that is covered by the term “embryonic”; however, in vitro processes have opened a door that was previously unknown.

Even though the term “human embryonic stem cell” (hESC) is widely used by the scientific community, it suggests that a tiny baby has been formed in the lab. This is not scientifically possible.

An embryo is not automatically formed when eggs are fertilized in vitro. A blastocyst can only become an organism or embryo if it has implanted in a uterus where it receives proper nourishment to differentiate into all the cells and organs required to form a human being. IVF eggs cannot develop to the next stage and become an embryo while in the lab.

Y Perry
Author of RIGHT TO RECOVER
Winning the Political and Religious Wars over Stem Cell Research in America
www.right2recover.com