For Embryonic Stem Cell Research
The following excerpt is from the First Things blog on January 13.
The battle over embryonic stem cell research is over. A few skirmishes will no doubt continue—perhaps even for years—and some embryonic stem cell research advocates will refuse to acknowledge defeat. But they have decisively lost. Years from now, when we look back in astonishment at having been fleeced for billions to pay for therapeutically worthless research, we’ll recognize that California was the Waterloo for embryonic stem cell research.
In 2004, California approved Proposition 71, a ballot measure that would allow the state to borrow $3 billion for embryonic stem cell research. At best the measure would have been an epic boondoggle: pharmaceutical companies would have been able to profit off the taxpayer-funded research without the state sharing any of the profits or even obtaining any of the developed drugs at a cheaper cost. But because it was considered a “progressive” measure (embryonic stem cell research has always been a stalking horse for abortion rights) it received the support from a long list of billionaires, Silicon Valley tycoons, Nobel laureates, and Hollywood celebrities. Convinced that the only thing standing between science and cures was time and money, the citizens of California opened the state’s coffers.
But five years later, the hype has died down and embryonic stem cell research has provided no cures, no therapies, no progress, and no hope. Investors Businesss Daily notes, “The California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, the state agency created to, as some have put it, restore science to its rightful place, is diverting funds from embryonic stem cell research to research that has produced actual therapies and treatments: adult stem cell research. It not only has treated real people with real results; it also does not come with the moral baggage embryonic stem cell research does.”
To us, this is a classic bait-and-switch, an attempt to snatch success from the jaws of failure and take credit for discoveries and advances achieved by research Prop. 71 supporters once cavalierly dismissed. We have noted how over the years that when funding was needed, the phrase “embryonic stem cells” was used. When actual progress was discussed, the word “embryonic” was dropped because embryonic stem cell research never got out of the lab.
Click here to read entire blog.
The battle over embryonic stem cell research is over. A few skirmishes will no doubt continue—perhaps even for years—and some embryonic stem cell research advocates will refuse to acknowledge defeat. But they have decisively lost. Years from now, when we look back in astonishment at having been fleeced for billions to pay for therapeutically worthless research, we’ll recognize that California was the Waterloo for embryonic stem cell research.
In 2004, California approved Proposition 71, a ballot measure that would allow the state to borrow $3 billion for embryonic stem cell research. At best the measure would have been an epic boondoggle: pharmaceutical companies would have been able to profit off the taxpayer-funded research without the state sharing any of the profits or even obtaining any of the developed drugs at a cheaper cost. But because it was considered a “progressive” measure (embryonic stem cell research has always been a stalking horse for abortion rights) it received the support from a long list of billionaires, Silicon Valley tycoons, Nobel laureates, and Hollywood celebrities. Convinced that the only thing standing between science and cures was time and money, the citizens of California opened the state’s coffers.But five years later, the hype has died down and embryonic stem cell research has provided no cures, no therapies, no progress, and no hope. Investors Businesss Daily notes, “The California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, the state agency created to, as some have put it, restore science to its rightful place, is diverting funds from embryonic stem cell research to research that has produced actual therapies and treatments: adult stem cell research. It not only has treated real people with real results; it also does not come with the moral baggage embryonic stem cell research does.”
To us, this is a classic bait-and-switch, an attempt to snatch success from the jaws of failure and take credit for discoveries and advances achieved by research Prop. 71 supporters once cavalierly dismissed. We have noted how over the years that when funding was needed, the phrase “embryonic stem cells” was used. When actual progress was discussed, the word “embryonic” was dropped because embryonic stem cell research never got out of the lab.
Click here to read entire blog.
