"How Come He Gets to Choose Who Lives and Dies?"
In some races around the country, Huffington Post notes, such as the Governor's race in Wisconsin, the Senate race in Missouri, and in the race in upstate New York where this ad is now running embryonic stem cell research is being used as a key differentiator between candidates. It will be very interesting to see if the huge number of disease advocacy organizations who supported embryonic stem cell research turn that support into votes next month!Art Caplan
contribute a comment
Comments have been closed for this post.
comments
Where are the daisies?
Which "stem cells"?
"Decide who lives and who dies." Not unless he's going around breaking necks and inducing autoimmune attacks on insulin and the cells that make it.
- by Beverly on Oct 14, 2006 at 11:58 AM | link
This is a copy of the email I'm sending this organization:
I tried to call but your line was busy.
Does your organization even care that your add is blatantly misleading?
Your ad represents refusal to fund embryonic stem cell research as opposition to *all* stem cell research. This is on a par with representing MADD as "opposed to allowing people to operate automobiles" while omitting the fact that MADD only objects to people operating automobiles while drunk. Did your organization do this knowingly, or were you tricked into it?
If you go to Do No Harm, you can learn about over 70 currently available treatments with *adult* stem cells. Adult stem cell treatments are curing leukemia, helping the lame to walk, helping the blind to see, and healing damaged hearts. Whereas embryonic stem cells have produced nothing but spasticity, tumors, and dead mice.
http://www.stemcellresearch.org/
It's wrong to put lies in a child's mouth. If your organization has any decency at all, it will not only pull that ad, but will issue an apology and a retraction.
In the mean time, I am going to send a donation to Congressman Walsh, earmarked for countering the falsehood of your ad.
Christina Dunigan
Sokcho, South Korea
- by Christina on Oct 14, 2006 at 1:39 PM | link
This ad was being shown in the audience on a laptop at the Tuesday's meeting of the California stem cell agency in Los Angeles. We were told that it is being used in a handful of House races, presumably ones where stem cell issues have been identified as important. As for voter mobilization efforts, they seem to be well underway. See the website stemcellbattles.com. Specifically, the following:
http://www.stemcellbattles.com/Archive%20234_10-6-06%20 NOTHING%20MORE%20IMPORTANT%20THAN%20OCTOBER%20FOR%20NOVEMBER.htm
and
http://www.stemcellbattles.com/URGENT%20-%20Help%20protect%20stem%20cell%20research%20in%20November%20elections.htm
- by David Jensen on Oct 14, 2006 at 4:58 PM | link
I am sooooo sick of hearing the argument that if you aren't a doctor, or a scientist, you are not smart enough or qualified enough to say that it is unethical to destroy a human embryo for harvestable biological material. It is such hogwash! Scientists are just that: scientists, not philosophers not ethicists, not lawmakers. To suggest that we leave the decision of what is moral scientific research up to the scientists is like leaving what constitutes ethical business practices up to coporate CEOs.
- by Rebecca Taylor on Oct 15, 2006 at 9:06 PM | link
I hope some nice scientist proposes chopping up people with alzheimers. I wouldn't stand in the way of that, if it'd save lives. Would Walsh stand in the way? Why? He's not a doctor, is he?
- by Thomas on Oct 17, 2006 at 3:41 AM | link
Perfect read!!
Steven Burda
===========================
steven.burda.mba @gmail.com
===========================
Temple University, BBA, 2003
St. Joseph's University, MBA, 2006
Villanova University, Post-MBA, 2007
===========================
Philadelphia, PA
www.linkedin.com/in/burda
- by Steven Burda, MBA on Oct 29, 2006 at 3:01 PM | link
Although celebrities and other patients and advocates have a right and should be involved in the political fray, the fact that Michael J. Fox admitted to George Stephanapolis that he had not read the actual proposed law he was supporting in Missouri, and the fact that George and other pundits let the fact go unnoticed is beyond troubling. This lack of rationalism and reason for those in favor of the science is beyond ludicrous...
- by Debra Greenfield on Oct 30, 2006 at 12:41 PM | link