BlogHer - Michael J. Fox, Stem Cell Research, Ethics and Politics - Comments

Misconceptions

fxmartini — Fri, 01 Dec 2006 18:11:19 -0600

"I am deeply troubled that people have been able to equate stem cell research with an endorsement of human cloning (which is actually specifically banned in the amendment), the fear of creating the Frankenstein monster (who I understand is making appearances in support of the ban). "

Unfortunately the misconceptions about stem cell research don't stop there. My daughter Alex was diagnosed with Acute Mylogenous Leukemia (AML) and underwent two Stem Cell Transplants (from Unbilical Cord Blood), the first in 1999 and the second in 2003. You'd be surprised how many people think that Cord Blood Transplants and Embryonic Stem Cell Research are one and the same. The truth is that they are two totally different things. The Cord Blood used in a Cord Blood Transplant is taken from the placenta and umbilical cord after birth, so the Mother and baby are not involved in the process at all.

I've been involved in lobbying for increased funding for a national Cord Blood Bank over the last few years and many times I've spoken with people who are against it, because they think it's connected to embryonic stem cell research. Now personally I support embryonic stem cell research (especially when it involves using discarded embryos from fertility clinics) but I understand that not everyone shares my view. But even if you are completely against embryonic stem cell research, you should have no problem with supporting the establishment of a National Cord Blood Bank.

So far Congress has authorized the spending of $15 million/year for each of the next four years plus an additional $19 million was appropriated recently. This is a good start, but it will take a lot more money to realize the dream of a National Cord Blood Bank. I would encourage everyone to contact their representatives to express support for funding a National Cord Blood Bank, especially those of you who are represented by conservative Republicans! 8-)

For those of you about to have a baby please look into the possibility of donating your baby's Cord Blood to a public Cord Blood Bank. The Cancer Info page on my website has information on Cord Blood donation and links to public Cord Blood banks. As for the rest of you please spread the news about Cord Blood donations.

Take care...

-- Todd Martini

P.S. If anyone is interested MSNBC recently posted a great article about the establishment of a National Cord Blood Bank:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15285941/

Todd Martini
Martini with a Twist
http://www.martiniwithatwist.com

It is exploitation. Plain

Dana J. Tuszke — Thu, 30 Nov 2006 00:50:04 -0600

It is exploitation. Plain and simple. I cannot apologize for my convictions. Destroying embryos in the name of research is immoral. Those who don't agree with me simply don't share my morals and while I understand the right to other view points, you cannot expect me to agree nor to apologize for my disagreement.

Thoughts from a Missouri

Rita Arens — Sun, 05 Nov 2006 11:11:44 -0600

Thoughts from a Missouri voter on stem-cell research (pro) are here:

http://surrenderdorothy.typepad.com/surrender_dorothy/2006/11/one_eggpro...

Get out and vote!

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

Those crime stats are

Mamalogues — Tue, 31 Oct 2006 21:54:30 -0600

Those crime stats are suspiciously bunk. Outdated census records used (when compared to updated crime stats totally inflates the rate)? Only the tiny population within the city limits considered? A study released at the same time Morgan Quitno decides to sell it online? Bunk, bunkbunkbunk, buuuunk.

Dana
Mamalogues.com
In the St. Louis Post-Dispatch
Pop Mama
Since Eve

And if we don't vote for it

shelleyp — Tue, 31 Oct 2006 17:08:35 -0600

State senator Bartle and Rep Lempke have already made a statement about pushing through legislation next year to criminalize embryonic stem cell research, which means if this effort leads to a cure in another state for a disease you or your family suffers, you won't be able to legally travel to the external location for treatment.

No one is interested in creating a Dolly human, and federal law prohibits work on an embryo over 14 days of age.

I don't think any bill protecting this reesearch will be 'well written enough' for Missourians who think this whole thing is a sin.

I do know that between this and the 'crime ranking', our state doesn't look very attractive to most people on the outside.

However...

Mamalogues — Tue, 31 Oct 2006 14:49:28 -0600

I'm a life-long St. Louisan. The language in the amendment changes the definition of cloning to say that cloning only occurs when the cloned embryo is implanted in the uterus. Thus, it's not cloning that the amendment prohibits, but the implantation thereof. I believe that this is the beef most opponents have concerning this proposed amendment. Honestly, the whole initiative was just poorly written.

Dana
Mamalogues.com
In the St. Louis Post-Dispatch
Pop Mama
Since Eve

People are afraid of what

robfactory — Sun, 29 Oct 2006 00:29:41 -0500

People are afraid of what they do not know. Especially, in America now days (middle east conflict, government, etc...) Cloning and stem cell research are completely different, but politicians who join both of them are just doing what the conservative voters are asking him/her to do. Instead of raising awareness and explaining to people the difference.
The thing that people are not seeing is that the effects of a positive study. This can open a world of endless possibilities.

Personal Experience

Kalyn Denny — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 23:23:35 -0500

My father has had Parkinson's disease for more than 20 years, and the fact is that there is no way to predictably control the symptoms with medication. He's simply unable to determine with certainty what his symptoms will be or how much medication he should take on a given day. That's one of the things that makes the disease so devastating. Some days my dad is pretty high functioning (for an almost 81 year old man with a debilitating disease.) Other days he can barely feed himself. Rush Limbaugh must have never been close to anyone who suffers from this disease or he would never have made the claims that he did, in my opinion.

Watching my dad deal with his Parkinsons with dignity and courage has been one of the most difficult, but also most inspiring experiences I've had in my life. I'll always admire how he has handled it, but I wish every day that there was something that could be done so he didn't have to live the last years of his life with such difficulty.

Kalyn Denny
Kalyn's Kitchen

Negative Campaign

Marianne Richmond — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 20:58:01 -0500

It is a great way to lose....and it is so unnecessary. Jim Talent and Claire MacCaskill represent a real on choice on big issues and just communicating what she is for while highlighting what he is against would have been sufficient I think....voters are smarter than they are being given credit for and in as much as Talent is the incumbent, getting people to want to votw wukk be important.

Marianne Richmond
resonancepartnership

Self-Imposed ban

Marianne Richmond — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 20:50:55 -0500

Glad you lifted your ban...its an issue worthy of a lift.
Thanks for commenting!
Marianne

Marianne Richmond
resonancepartnership

Another Missouri

shelleyp — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 19:43:11 -0500

I live a block down from the Archbishop's offices, and that's all there is in my neighborhood: say no. Most of this is so unthinking and nothing more than blind following of a flawed religious belief.

I actually like McCaskill for a couple of other reasons, but I will admit, the negative campaigning has been discouraging. I went out to the Missouri Democratic web site to volunteer to drive people on election day, and all I saw were anti-Talent spots. Nothing on the positive contribution of the Dems running for office in the state. I wrote them an email, told them that's a great way to lose races.

Exactly

kperfetto — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 18:17:56 -0500

I am deeply troubled that people have been able to equate stem cell research with an endorsement of human cloning (which is actually specifically banned in the amendment), the fear of creating the Frankenstein monster (who I understand is making appearances in support of the ban). To my neighbors and all other Missouri voters I say, please go read the amendment; don't rely on interpretation. I would say the same to anyone casting a vote anywhere; and anyone voicing an opinion. Get the facts, read the source, and then make up your mind.

I live in Missouri and I, too, am deeply troubled by the sheer number of "say no to cloning" signs I've seen popping up on my neighbors' lawns (I made a macabre joke about it to my mom today that I shall not repeat here). If there's anything that would make me lift my self-imposed ban on talking politics online, this would be it. It shocks me to the core to think that anyone would think that a vote for stem cell research is a vote for cloning.

Five Dollar Camera

Michael J. Fox, Stem Cell Research, Ethics and Politics

Marianne Richmond — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 17:57:54 -0500

Michael J. Fox, Stem Cell Research, Ethics and PoliticsI would like to add my point of view for what it is worth on several, though not all of the issues being discussed on Blogher and elsewhere. I am from Missouri and Claire McCaskill has made the Michael J Fox spot a cornerstone of her campaign. She has made stem cell research a key issue of her campaign.

First of all, my context. I support stem cell research and will be voting "YES."

Having said that, I drive down my street every day and look at sign after sign on the lawns of my otherwise kind and seemingly intelligent neighbors that say "Vote No Sponsored by the Missouri Coalition to Ban Human Cloning."

Regarding the Talent -MaCaskill campaign I have to say that the two of them are producing some of the most negative and offensive ads that I think I have ever seen...they are misleading,
their tone is offensive, they insinuate as much as they substantiate, and they are targeting fears in the worst manner; quite frankly, if the issues were not so important my inclination would be to not vote for either one of them. I actually fear that people will not vote because of this.

Regarding Michael J Fox, well I think people that are against stem cell research should see the devastation of Parkinsons that he personifies in the ad; some of us have seen it in loved ones and friends. Whether he was on his meds or off his meds for the TV spot is irrelevant to the issue of stem cell research.

THAT is Parkinsons and he is no longer able to continue living the life he was leading before Parkinson; if medical research was able to provide a treatment that CONTROLS his Symptoms well hooray for research and science. THAT is what we are talking about.

However, if he was not taking his meds while the spot was filmed, he SHOULD have said so; if there are meds that he is taking that control his symptoms that might have illustrated the progress that comes from medical research and perhaps strengthen his point. That would put him on the right side of full disclosure. Not that he spoke any words about his condition, but the intent of his appearance was to force viewers to witness his condition.

So, if he did not disclose that he was not taking his ususal medications that would diminish a very powerful and compelling message. That would be misleading. Rush Limbaugh said Fox was misleading, and accused him of acting or being off his meds. He later apologized and then retracted his apology and said he stood by his original accusations.

But, Michael J Fox says he was on his medications and I believe him. I have a relative with Parkinsons and I have seen the range of his symptom; but controlling symptoms don't change the progress of the disease. Only more research will do that.

In Fox's own words,"At this point now, if I didn't take medication I wouldn't be able to speak."
He also said, "The irony is that I was too medicated, I was dyskinesic. Because the thing about, the thing about being sympotmatic is that it is not comfortable; its like bing hit with a hammer."

So, my point is this" That it is surprising when I read things like Dana's words , "Michael J. Fox came into my living room through my television
a few nights ago. He showed me how badly his Parkinsonâ€™s disease causes
him to tremor, so that maybe Iâ€™d feel sorry for him and vote Democrat,
or maybe Iâ€™d feel guilty if I responded to his exploitation of his
condition."

Surprising because Dana sees it as exploitation and I see it as someone who cares about stem cell research for the most personal of reasons; and that his appearance with his symtoms painfully obvious puts us as close as we can get to experiencing what this disease looks and feels like.

The way that the issue of stem cell research has been painted to be about other various moral hot buttons, cloning, right to life, is exploitive.

My son told me that some of the St. Louis Cardinals were in ads advocating "Vote No" on the stem cell amendenment. The New York Times coverage of this called it "Pitching and Politics."
This I see as an example of celebrities contributing to the exploitation of an issue.

Marianne Richmond also blogs at Resonance Partnership and Conversational Media Group.

Technorati Tags: Blogher, Michael J Fox, stem cell research, McCaskill, Jim Talent, cloning, Limbaugh, Marianne Richmond, Missouri