|
|
 |
 |
 |
Get Involved! Sign Up For The BDFund Newsletter!
Learn the Human Rights Answers!
Click here to sign up for our FREE e-report.
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
Bioethics Defense Fund Condemns "Obsolete Science Bailout Plan"
The President's missed opportunity to use the latest science to unite the Nation
 | |
March 9, 2009. As part of its educational mission, Bioethics Defense Fund (BDF) issued the following statement in response to President Obama’s executive order regarding federal tax-payer funding of new human embryonic stem cell lines:
“The effect of President Obama's Executive Order is to direct scarce federal tax dollars to research that is immoral, ineffective and, given recent scientific advances, unnecessary," said BDF President and General Counsel Nikolas T. Nikas.
In highlighting the missed opportunity that President Obama had to unite our nation around recent breakthrough research methods, Nikas pointed to a March 4, 2009 article by former NIH head Dr. Bernadine Healy entitled Why Embryonic Stem Cells are Obsolete.¨
Bioethics Defense Fund has compiled the following educational resource highlighting the facts that President Obama should have relied on to bring the nation together behind the breakthrough alternative method of induced pluripotent stem cell research which provides cells virtually identical to embryonic stem cells, but without the need for embryos, cloning or egg harvesting.
BDF Senior Counsel Dorinda Bordlee called the order an irresponsible and immoral "Obsolete Science Bailout Plan." She pointed out that scientists won't be required to help one patient or develop one treatment in order to keep our federal tax-dollars coming in to fund research on destroyed human embryos.
Bordlee also expressed concern that the new federal funding will increase the exploitive market of egg harvesting to create embryos, which typically involves injecting cash-strapped college women with high doses of hormones that endangers their lives and their ovarian health.
The executive order will increase funding for the study of privately created embryonic stem cell lines, but not the direct destruction of human embryos. Efforts in Congress are now underway to repeal the Dickey-Wicker amendment, which currently prohibits the use of federal tax dollars for the actual creation and destruction of human embryos. If Dickey-Wicker is repealed, federal tax dollars could be used to fund human embryo cloning and the creation of IVF human embryos for the sole purpose of their destruction.
MISSED OPPORTUNITY: OBSOLETE SCIENCE BAILOUT FACTS
Bioethics Defense Fund has compiled the following facts that President Obama chose to ignore in his missed opportunity to bring the nation together for aggressive, effective and ethical research:
The stem-cell wars experienced an unexpected cease-fire shortly after President Bush vetoed expanded federal funding of embryonic stem cell research in early 2007. It was not because of any new-found common respect for the moral status of the human embryo. Rather, the solution came from science itself.
In November 2007, Shinya Yamanaka of Kyoto University and James Thomson of the University of Wisconsin reported that they had reprogrammed regular human skin cells to behave just like human embryonic stem cells. Scientists across the globe hailed the breakthrough method that created patient-specific induced pluripotent stem cells (IPS cells) without the controversial use of embryos, cloning or the use of human eggs.
The unexpected breakthrough was rated first in Time magazine's "10 Best Scientific Discoveries of 2007." It was rated the number two Breakthrough of the Year by the journal Science. It led Dr. Ian Wilmut, who cloned Dolly the sheep, to abandon his U.K. license to attempt the cloning of human embryos for destructive research. Dr. Wilmut said that these researchers "... may have achieved what no politician could: an end to the embryonic stem-cell debate."
At the end of September 2008, researchers at Harvard University overcame "a major obstacle to using [this] promising alternative to embryonic stem cells, bolstering the prospects of bypassing the ethical and political tempest that has embroiled hopes for new medical treatments." Wash Post, 9/26/2008.
Just one week before the President signed the executive order, the Washington Post reported on ips advances as "what appears to be a safer way to create a promising alternative to embryonic stem cells, boosting hopes that such cells could sidestep the moral and political quagmire that has hindered the development of a new generation of cures."
A March 4, 2009 article in U.S. News & World Report by former NIH head Dr. Bernadine Healy is entitled "Why Embryonic Stem Cells are Obsolete." Dr. Healy explains that "in the first six weeks of Obama's term, several events reinforced the notion that embryonic stem cells, once thought to hold the cure for Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and diabetes, are obsolete. The most sobering: a report from Israel published in PLoS Medicine in late February that shows embryonic stem cells injected into patients can cause disabling if not deadly tumors."
On March 9, 2009, despite the opportunity to use the advances of science to unite the nation, President Obama signed an executive order increasing funding of embryonic stem cell research, and opening the door to the repeal of the Dickey-Wicker amendment so that researchers can use our tax dollars to clone and kill human embryos, and to create IVF human embryos solely for the purpose of destroying them.
Meanwhile, the number of clinical trials and varying degrees of clinical success in treating diseases with non-embryonic stem cells has increased steadily. The number of treatments using embryonic stem cells? Still zero.
Even President Clinton's Bioethics Commission would not have funded embryo research with the advent of the alternative IPS cells:
“In our judgment, the derivation of stem cells from embryos remaining following infertility treatments is justifiable only if no less morally problematic alternatives are available for advancing the research. But as we have noted, ES cells from embryos appear to be different in scientifically important ways from AS cells and also appear to offer greater promise of therapeutic breakthroughs. The claim that there are alternatives to using stem cells derived from embryos is not, at the present time, supported scientifically. We recognize, however, that this is a matter that must be revisited continually as science advances.” - National Bioethics Advisory Commission, Ethical Issues in Human Stem Cell Research (Sept. 1999), Volume I, p. 53.
See the BDF-Westchester Institute Resource created in consultation with Dr. Maureen Condic, BDF’s science advisor:
DO WE STILL NEED EMBRYOS AND CLONING? Answering Common Claims about induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs), an ethically unproblematic alternative to human embryonic stem cells (hESCs).
This information is offered for the purpose of public education, and not for the passage or defeat of any particular legislation.
|
|
|
|