Also (speaking of our illustrious 8th district U.S. House rep), the Bucks County Courier Times added a bit of clarification to a Guest Opinion this morning criticizing Fitzpatrick’s flip flop on stem cell research, stating that Fitzpatrick supports the use of non-embryonic stem cells.
I had something to say about this a little while back, and also here is a related Boston Globe article from March that contains this excerpt:
The biology of mice and humans is quite close, but technical problems often emerge when techniques that work in mice are attempted in humans.Doesn’t it sound to you like working with stem cells from mice is a bit of a leap from working with embryonic stem cells, which is a huge leap in and of itself? An analogy I can relate to on this is learning how to drive in a beat-up economy sedan with an automatic shift first before you contemplate getting behind the wheel of a Porsche 911 with a 6-speed stick and a multi-point injection fuel system (I’ll let any bioethicists out there tell me whether or not I’m full of beans on this). Working on mice first sounds like you’re going right to the Porsche after you pass your driver’s test.
The new (mouse testicular) cells are clearly stem cells, but they may prove to be more difficult to work with than embryonic stem cells, or less able to form particular types of tissue (according to Dr. George Q. Daley, a stem cell scientist at Children's Hospital in Boston and Harvard Medical School).
I guess it’s fair comment for the paper to offer that clarification, but to me, it still obfuscates the issue that we’ve basically taken a pass on development in this new industry that could hold the keys to solving various illnesses for the sake of offending the sensibilities of the holier-than-thou zealots who run our government. And if we think this won’t ultimately affect our own quality of life, then we truly are living in a dream world.
No comments:
Post a Comment