BlogHer - Michael J. Fox and Embryonic Stem Cell Research - Comments

The research began in 1991.

Dana J. Tuszke — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 14:34:21 -0600

The research began in 1991. They didn't start killing babies in 1998 - that's what you are trying to tell me, isn't it? Who's thinking skills are in trouble? Certainly not mine. I know the difference between right and wrong. Do you?

Human life!

cmankey999 — Sun, 10 Dec 2006 11:49:17 -0600

University of Wisconsin researchers first isolated human embryonic stem cells in 1998, however their research began in 1991. 1991 to 2006 equals 15 years.

That would mean embryonic stem cell research began in 1998 since according to you they didn't even isolate stem cells until that date. That would be 8 years, not 16 . I guess if this is the extent of your critical thinking skills, you may be in trouble!

Wow - this is a heated post.

Rita Arens — Sun, 05 Nov 2006 11:14:38 -0600

Wow - this is a heated post. I've posted my views on stem-cell research here: http://surrenderdorothy.typepad.com/surrender_dorothy/2006/11/one_eggpro...

I live in Missouri and will be on the side of stem-cell research on Tuesday.

Surrender, Dorothy - When I was your age, we just let them ride in the back window.

My point was...

Amanda Shaffer — Sat, 04 Nov 2006 18:45:08 -0600

...that Embryonic Research is important because of the increased plasticity of the cells, and the potential to study the way the causal factors of leukemia.

There is no cause, or cure, for leukemia yet. When thousands of people each year are dying because of stem cell transplants that don't work, more research needs to be done. The pluripotent nature of ESC is universally regarded by the scientific community to be important to leukemia, lymphoma and other hematopoitic cancers. I can post several studies and reviews if you like.

Amanda Shaffer, Blogher Health and Wellness Contributing Editor

The Adventures of Cat Lady.

Thank you, Amanda, for that

Dana J. Tuszke — Sat, 04 Nov 2006 15:13:10 -0600

Thank you, Amanda, for that information.

It still doesn't justify destruction of human life. Do you have any links to any cures or treatments derived from specific embryonic stem cell research?

I respect your views...

Amanda Shaffer — Sat, 04 Nov 2006 14:31:34 -0600

But as someone who's been around hemopoetic cancer patients for all of her adult life, I feel obligated to weigh in.

Stem cell research is currently being researched and developed into cures for many, many diseases. Johns Hopkins, in particular, is on the forefront of many new treatment methodologies for leukemia that involve stem cells.

Embryonic stem cells are important to research because they have more "plasticity," if you will, than adult stem cells. Stem cells are incredibly important to leukemia patients as they are the basis for all of the cells in our body, most notably new bone marrow cells. Embryonic cells can differentiate into more types of tissue cells, meaning that they have the potential to be more advantageous to a cancer patient whose very basis of existence (blood cells, which are responsible for nourishing every organ system in the body, as well as fight off disease) is challenged.

Embryonic stem cell research is also important for the discovery of the root cause of several types of leukemia and lymphoma, which are still unknown. Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia, the type that I am most familiar with, does not have a known cause. In the last five years, a gene marker called the "Philadephia Chromosome" has been strongly correlated with the appearance of aggressive leukemia; but the relationship between that chromosome and the appearance of leukemia is still unknown. Examining embryonic stem cells to determine how the Philadelphia Chromosome affects cell differentiation later in life is necessary to determining the cause of Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia.

The Lance Armstrong Foundation recently supported a bill that supported embryonic stem cell research, with the caveat that the cells only be obtained from by-product embryoes from IVF procedures. I supported this bill, for all of the reasons above.

Here's a source:
http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/basics5.asp

Amanda Shaffer, Blogher Health and Wellness Contributing Editor

The Adventures of Cat Lady.

more specifics

robfactory — Thu, 02 Nov 2006 00:15:40 -0600

"some of your statement was a bit disturbing."
If you are going to make a statement like that, please give more info as to which statement you are referring too, please.

I'm sorry Rob, I wasn't even

Dana J. Tuszke — Wed, 01 Nov 2006 14:42:18 -0600

I'm sorry Rob, I wasn't even adressing your comment because some of your statement was a bit disturbing.

I didn't make any assumptions about you -- my comment was addressing the others who claim my research was inaccurate.

Thank you for your clarification on your viewpoints, however.

First.

robfactory — Wed, 01 Nov 2006 14:14:51 -0600

I'm not a Democrat or Republican or Liberal. I'm someone who leans to my personal interests. Which ever party happens to view things the same way I do, is the one I'm with, but I like how you made an assumption based on the fact that I do agree with stem cell research.
The thing about this research is the endless possibilities. Through every advancement, there will always be casualties. Look at history, even look at religion. it's called "The Domino Effect." The thing about this is
1. Jesus gave himself to save us. (this applies if you are religious)
2. 1.5 million abortions happen in the US. (over 5 million if you count the rest of the world.)
3. These are fetuses that were bound to die, were by miscarriages or natural abortion.)
4. It's not as if the government is taking people's unborn babies at will and using them as lab rats.
5. This shouldn't be a religious nor political debate. It should be a scientific debate. Religion prohibits anything it cannot grasp. Politicians for the most part do what is popular.
6. Hitler/Nazis had many drawbacks and unfortunately used involuntary and innocent humans for their test; however, the party had so many technological and pharmaceutical advances, that they were easily 1-2 decades ahead of society.
Now, mind you. Some will go ahead and misconstrued that last comment. I'm not saying there should be a slaughter of the embryos. I'm just saying, if people are going to have abortions, might as well use the embryos for technological advances. Is it ethical? Why shouldn't it be?
Is it ethical to let people die, when a cure could be found ?
No it is not ethical.

you made this statement "Michael J. Fox insinuated that ESCR will produce cures for these diseases with his attack ads."
In this commercial is uses the words "search for hope, hope for cure." Please revisit the video and listen to it. In no way does he assume or state that there is a cure or will be.

"His ads are misleading because he does not say the word "embryonic".
MJF is up for any type of stem cell research that could benefit his cause. Whether it's regular stem cell or embryonic. He is making a general appeal to the public to let the research be done. As consumers, intellectuals, and people with a right to choose and educate ourselves. We have to research the subject, the means, and outcome.
Once again, since I've seen that people here like to read what they want to read, rather than the whole issue. THEY WILL NOT USE INVOLUNTARILY DONATED/PURCHASED embryos. Instead, they will come predominately through abortions and women who will donate for the sake of research. No, these scientists should not be punished for finding a cure for an ailment you, me or anyone reading this might get when we are older. They are not going into people's houses and gathering pregnant women against their wills. Nor are they twisting people's arms to donate.
It's funny, as america gets older, the more uptight it gets. It's sad, because we are the country that rebelled against, religious and political castigation. Yet, we always go back to a caveman mentality when we do not agree with something or fully understand it. Just like religion does.

You haven't refuted

Dana J. Tuszke — Tue, 31 Oct 2006 12:48:11 -0600

You haven't refuted anything. You've simply made it clear that when it gets hot in the kitchen you leave. I've made my point that embryos are human life. You're not willing to accept that. You merely hide behind excuses that embryos are cells. Whatever helps you sleep at night.

Meanwhile, those of us with repsect for life will continue to fight against ECSR, against abortion and we're sorry you can't do the same.

Believe it or not, you and I started out as an embryo, then became a fetus and then we were born. If I follow your logic, then we're all a bunch of cells walking the earth. In that case than there's no harm in killing cells in any form. Correct? So if you decided to kill me because you don't like my view points, you would get away with murder, because I'm just cells. That's all.

How's that for logic and facts, Shelley? The idiocy of your idea that embryos are cells makes me sad for the human race.

I have not destroyed my

Dana J. Tuszke — Tue, 31 Oct 2006 12:42:43 -0600

I have not destroyed my credibility. You've missed the entire moral point. Perhaps you'll need to go back and read the words.

The point being made is that Governor Jim Doyle claims to respect life while also calling for the destruction of life to further ECSR. Would he also try to further research by experimenting on live people, as Hitler did?

No one was calling anyone a Nazi or comparing them to Hitler. I'm simply making a point which you left leaning Dems seem not to realize. You only see what you want to see.

I just thought I'd jump in

Tanilan — Mon, 30 Oct 2006 12:06:36 -0600

I just thought I'd jump in right quick and tell you, this is one of those issues I sit on the fence about; and only because I have other things on my mind. But I do admire you, Dana, for taking a stand on the issue. I admire that you will not back down from your position and are ready to defend it.

Let me also respond to the fire scenario. I don't believe for one minute that it has anything to do with the issue, Dana is speaking of. In fact your scenario is a bit absurd, to say the least...in my opinion. And we are all entitled to one.

Much Love.

There's a fine thread in all

robfactory — Sun, 29 Oct 2006 18:25:16 -0600

There's a fine thread in all of this. Sadly enough, I've worked in low income neighborhoods and I've seen parents who breed just to get more money out of the government. Consequently, their kids walk around barefooted, dirty, and unhealthy. Now mind you, my last example was that of a few, very few.
America was founded through violence and greed and though at times it should not be that way, at the end of the day most people take the fame and money and choose to look away.
As far as prison, prisoners get the death penalty all the time, only those who have a chance of getting better and contributing to society are the ones who get to live.
2ndly, I never said it was ok for women to purposely become pregnant and sell their embryos for money.
Ultimately, to further this study, they will need embryos and women are the only ones who can provide them. Every year, around 1.5 million women abort in the US alone. These aborted embryos can be used for a good cause.
Itâ€™s funny, because when you are sick, you want the medication to heel you. However, you do not neglect it. You take it and hope to feel better. Not thinking about the few who had to die (w/ consent and unfortunately without consent) to cure the millions such as yourself.
Now ethically; you spare a few embryos, who were bound to die for research to cure Parkinsonâ€™s, regenerate severed limbs, birth imperfections, or do you just put the embryos in a jar so it can look creepy in some doctorâ€™s office?
Itâ€™s the same element as, â€œIf you could save your brother in a burning house, but saving him meant you will not be able to save 3 lives, what would you do?â€
There are extremes to both arguments and I think there are ways were the embryos can be selected without the people breeding just to sell them. However, people like to receive compensations for â€œtheir involvementâ€ in matters and the government rewards those who lend a hand with money.

That's a valid view

media girl — Sun, 29 Oct 2006 14:49:05 -0600

It's a religious view, though, and not a compelling scientific one that mandates any clear decision in public policy, imho.

I don't consider a box of cake mix a birthday cake, and I don't consider a blob of cells to be a baby. There is far far more that is required before a baby is born.

However, I think the point is valid that if you're against ESCR, you must be against IVF. After all, that's how these embryos are created in the first place. Arguing that those embroyos should be destroyed rather than used for stem-cell research is hardly a pro-life position, yet that is exactly what happens without the research. Should not "life," as you call it, serve to potentially benefit human life rather than simply be discarded? Or should IVF be banned as well, so those embryos are never created in the first place?

--
media girl

Wow...I can't even believe

Terri987 — Sun, 29 Oct 2006 13:39:19 -0600

Wow...I can't even believe that last post!

How long before young women consider having abortions in order to sell the parts for money? They might even see it is as a noble deed if we follow that logic!

We are not a Machiavellian society that should pursue things with an "the ends justify the means" mentality. If we were, then torture would be legal as long as we got key information, we would neglect the terminally ill and disabled among us because they're not going to get better and why waste resources, we would execute all prisoners becuase we don't have the room for them in prisons anyway.....do you see where this is going?

Just because scientific infromation was gleaned from something does not justify, the oftentimes, blatant disregard for ethics and the people being experimented upon.

That is not what this nation is about or should be about.

Terri

Wheat Among Tares

Michael J. Fox and Embryonic Stem Cell Research

Dana J. Tuszke — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 11:18:12 -0500

Actor Michael J. Fox has a series of political campaign ads circulating television networks in which he tries to persuade Americans to vote for Democrats who support embryonic stem cell research.

Fox, 45, suffers from Parkinson's, a chronic disease of the central nervous system, causing muscular tremors and physical weakness. Michael J. Fox is causing disputes in Missouri where in his attack ad he states, "Senator Jim Talent opposes expanding stem cell research. Senator Talent even wanted to criminalize the science that gives us a chance for hope."

In a similar ad, Fox attacks Michael Steele, the Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate in Maryland. The irony of this campaign ad is that Steele's opponent, Ben Cardin, voted against stem cell research.

Conservative pundit Rush Limbaugh retaliated against Fox's campaign ads, causing a fury of attacks against him when claimed that Michael J. Fox may have exaggerated his condition. Fox was later interviewed by Katie Couric, in which he says he wasn't acting or off his medication.

Limbaugh defends his accusations on his website, stating: "They [Liberals, Fox, Couric] get personal, mocking every conservative illness, foible and failing (including my own) real, fake or forged, yet act outraged that we dare challencge one of them on politics..."

Michael J. Fox and Ben Cardin are misleading the public by playing on the hopes and fears of millions of Americans who are suffering from debilitating diseases like Multiple Sclerosis, Alzheimers and Dimentia, as well as Parkinson's Disease. The ad campaign is repulsive because it's dishonest in promising cures to these diseases, cures that are uncertain and yet to be discovered.

Instead of arguing the facts and admitting the truth behind Limbaugh's statements, Democrats attack the radio host calling him cruel and hateful and continue to distort his words and statements he makes on his radio show.

The Passion of the Christ star Jim Caviezal, along with actress Patricia Heaton (Everybody Loves Raymond) and Cardinal's pitcher Jeff Suppan, have appeared in advertisements countering the claims of Michael J. Fox. In the ad Caviezal, Heaton and Suppan tell Missouri voters the facts about embryonic stem cell research and then state "Don't be tricked, Don' be deceived, and Don't be fooled."

Michael J. Fox came into my living room through my television a few nights ago. He showed me how badly his Parkinson's disease causes him to tremor, so that maybe I'd feel sorry for him and vote Democrat, or maybe I'd feel guilty if I responded to his exploitation of his condition.

Dymphna's Road writes: "I'm shedding no tears for Michael J. Fox. He's been, whether he realizes it or not, hightly blessed. He's rich, he has a wife who is apparently content to be his wife and who stays out of the tabloids. He has two children I think, and even with Parkinsons he lives a life of luxury that the average American can only dream about it. I'm sorry he's sick but so are a lot of people and they aren't advocating slaughtering innocents."

In his ad he said "Wisconsin holds a special place in my heart, because it's where stem cell research was born." What really caught my attention is that Fox didn't say "embryonic stem cell research." He clearly and deliberately left out the word "embryonic." I feel this advertisement is very misleading.

Democrats are fighting to allow government funding of embryonic stem cell research which requires the destruction of human embryos. Human embryos are human beings at the earliest stages of development. This is a scientific fact.

As a resident of Wisconsin, I'm very aware that Governor Jim Doyle forced the state to spend money on embryonic stem cell research. This research has yet to help a single patient. Doyle is running for re-election and his opponent Mark Green backs stem cell research of adult stem cells, which does not destroy the life of a human being.

Adult stem cell research has found many treatments such as rebuilding livers damaged by otherwise irreversible cirrhosis, repairing spinal cord injuries using adult stem cells from nasal passages and sinus regions, reversing Type 1 diabetes in mice using adult spleen cells, putting Crohn's disease into remission and repairing heart attack damage using the patient's own blood stem cells, as well as many other treatments that have been discovered by using adult stem cells.

Embryonic stem cell research has produced nothing, not one single cure or treatment.

Fallen Rogue writes: "MJF is speaking from a place that my previous article was coming from; science. Yes, he accepts that we need to discuss these scientific issues socially, but we need to talk about them and if we decide as a nation that the further of scientific thought is a priority then we need to step up and honor that and not hide behind the false truths of some policy makers. I, personally, don't believe some even have a clue as to the science involved in certain forms of stem cell research."

True, many Americans do not know the science involved with embryonic stem cell research, or adult stem cell research for that matter. Because so many people are uninformed, it is very important for politicians to be truthful with their ad campaigns, rather than try to trick the intelligence of their voters. Aren't we all getting tired of attack ads that candidates are displaying, desperately trying to sway us their direction in the Election Day zero hour?

Viva La Blog writes: "I like Michael J. Fox. He is what I call a John Wayne type of actor. Instead of becoming the part like many great actors, the part becomes him. In the movies, Teen Wolf and Back to the Future, Fox acted as himself. This is not to say Fox is not a good actor, he is just a different type of actor. But like so many of those in Hollywood, he has gotten mixed up in politics and then believes because he is a victim no one will challenge his motives. Note to Fox: being a victim does not insulate you from the right of others to question your motives."

Yes, Michael J. Fox is a victim of Parkinson's disease. Yes, I am sorry he suffers from this condition. I can't say that I understand what he goes through every day. What I do know is that suffering from an illness with no known cure is devasting. My grandfather had Alzheimer's and my family watched him deteriorate every single day of his last years of life. But never did we hope and pray for a cure that was discovered through the destruction of human lives.

Contributing Editor Dana J. Tuszke also blogs at The Dana Files and Watch Blog.