The public marketing of embryonic stem cell research differs from the reality, according to Kathleen Gallagher who wrote the following in a recent Newsday editorial:
Despite all the hype of promises to come, no human therapies from embryonic stem cells have yet to be developed or tested, and none are on the horizon. Despite decades of testing with animals, scientists are not even close. In fact, there have been some disastrous setbacks with embryo stem cells, including tumor growth and tissue rejection. It's not nice to fool Mother Nature.Thanks to Jamie for the tip.This isn't about cures. If it were, lawmakers would be maintaining our current health care system and channeling new resources into adult stem cell research, which is already curing disease and saving lives. Patients with heart disease, leukemia, even spinal cord injuries have been able to have their own adult stem cells used to repair and heal their broken bodies. These cells are found in bone marrow, umbilical cord blood, even human fat, and can be obtained without the ethical controversy surrounding embryonic cells. And because the adult stem cells come from the patient's own body, there is little chance of tissue rejection.
more ...
Please take care to identify stem cells as embryonic or adult. One of the uphill battles the prolife movement is currently fighting is making that very distinction obvious to non-scientists. Those who support ESCR have done a terrific job of making people believe that opposition to ESCR is unscientific and medieval. They've done this by removing distinction between adult and embryonic stem cells. If we want to change peoples' minds and stop the frankensteinian field of ESCR, we need to educate the public. Let's start by calling things by their proper names.