Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, January 25, 2008
Paul Greenberg :: Townhall.com Columnist
Dr. Frankenstein Plods On
by Paul Greenberg
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


It was heralded as not just a scientific but an ethical breakthrough:

Scientists in this country and Japan had found a new way to produce what are in effect embryonic stem cells - but without having to destroy human embryos to do so.

Great news! At last an ethical dilemma was solved. Here is a way to obtain embryonic stem cells without destroying human life. Call it a happy ending all around.

George Daly, associate director of Boston Children's Hospital stem cell program, called the discovery "just a spectacular, spectacular advance. It will change everyone's thinking about the field."

You may remember Ian Wilmut, the Scottish researcher who helped clone Dolly the sheep years ago. He was at least as enthusiastic. He announced he would abandon his efforts to clone - and then destroy - human embryos in order to produce stem cells, and would switch to the new, less politically and ethically troublesome method.

"It's a win-win for everyone involved," said the Rev. Thomas Berg of the Westchester Institute, a Roman Catholic think tank. "We have a way to move forward," he said, which "brings the kind of painful national debate over this controversial research to very much a peaceful and promising resolution."

Really? Anyone of even passing familiarity with the endless demands of human ambition for fame and/or fortune - the Greeks called it Hubris - will not be surprised to learn that the latest discovery has scarcely discouraged those eager to experiment with human embryos.

Scientists will now come up with all kinds of new reasons or at least rationalizations for the continued use of human embryos and the stem cell lines derived from them. Federal funding for such experimentation may be forbidden, but by now the total investment in embryonic stem cell research probably runs into the billions of dollars. Who would want to risk losing all that? Only those with a remaining sense of moral restraint in an age not known for it.

The solely scientific case for or against continuing to experiment with human embryos is complicated in a way the ethical question isn't. The temptation to create human life artificially goes back to Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein."

To say the least. Man's first temptation in the Garden comes when the serpent assures Adam and Eve that they need only eat the forbidden fruit, and "ye shall be as gods." In this case, by creating and destroying human life in a laboratory - for a good purpose, of course. There's always a good purpose. For there is no evil man cannot justify, especially if we were set on it all along.

Within weeks of this groundbreaking discovery, scientists at the Whitehead Institute in Cambridge, Mass., announced that they'd used these new, reprogrammed cells to cure sickle-cell anemia - in mice, anyway.

But such developments aren't likely to have much effect on those determined to experiment on human embryos. Scientific achievement, fame and fortune, the chance to make good by doing good, or just the urge to satisfy human curiosity, will continue to spur the race to the top of this particularly greasy pole.

Those who oppose cloning human embryos in order to destroy them for purposes of scientific research will still be called anti-science, or be accused of being callous to the plight of patients who might be cured by the results of such research. But, to quote James Thomson, a leading researcher in the field, "If human embryonic stem cell research does not make you at least a little uncomfortable, you have not thought about it enough."

Some of the same arguments once used against experimentation with embryonic stem cells - for example, that it might result in deformations - are now being rolled out against the new, artificially created ones.

To quote a group of distinguished stem cell researchers, including the Japanese scientist who helped produce this new kind of stem cell, "We hold that research into all avenues of human stem-cell research must proceed together."

The debate over the uses and abuses of embryonic stem cells will doubtless get even more involved, but it's not about to conclude. For every Thou Shalt Not, there will always be those who, like the serpent, whisper: Thou Shalt!

Like stem cells, maybe that's part of human nature, too.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
So this scientist told God he solved the
puzzle & figured out how God had created man from the dust of the earth.
God was impressed.
Scientist said if God had a few minutes he'd show him.
God said He had the time.
Scientist went out back to get some dirt.
God said, "Noo fair. You get your own dirt."

Potential Cures
I have read a few articles in Popular Science, or was is Omni, or Discover--humm--regardless, a few individuals suffering from terminal heart disease were injected with healthy cells, and are healthy again.

With this attitude, we never would have had aspirin, smallpox, polio, and numerous other vaccines. How about blood pressure meds? The list is huge.

Think before you reject the potential benefits, just as you think and accept potential life of a fetus.

aspacia
I have not heard or read anything about the study you cite. Could you possibly provide a link?

BTW--I am an MD and receive daily, even hourly, medical news updates and continuing education opportunities. And I have yet to hear one word of the startling research you cite. Please provide a link or a reference I can read for myself.

Lemonade out of lemons
Ironically, the researchers probably would not have been able to verify the pseudo-embryonic stem cells without having the old stem cells to compare. I'm sure that this will be one of the excuses used by the Frankensteins among us that are mentioned in this article. "If it weren't for our work, you would not have been able to do yours. Our work may bring other things to light. We should continue it."

We should not continue it. We made lemonade out of lemons. That's all. I'm sure that a good portion of our current medical knowledge stems from the experiments that the Germans did to inmates in their labor camps. That does not excuse those experiments.

And to those who complain that certain companies may lose big bucks that were invested in embryonic stem-cell research, I say that they should never have crossed that moral line in the first place. They will reap what they sowed.

Nos Nevets
Funny joke with a good point. It is interesting that of all the inventions that mankind has brought to light, none have been creations from nothing. As Mary Shelly depicted in Frankenstein, the best that we can do is imitate God. We will never be God, no matter how hard we try.

The reason
they're trying to get our tax money for embryonic stem cell research is that the money people are not investing in it. There has not been any success in this, as there was with adult stem cells and umbilical stem cells. Even MJ Fox, the poster boy for embryonic research has his money invested in another process which does show promise in curing MJ's condition. Don't let them get our money for this.

difficult column
I have to appreciate the difficulty of the task that Greenberg set for himself. He had to write the column in a way that made trying to find cures for painful debillitating diseases come off as self-centered and inexplicable.

Someone reading "Scientific achievement, fame and fortune, the chance to make good by doing good, or just the urge to satisfy human curiosity, will continue to spur the race to the top of this particularly greasy pole" might lose track of the fact that what we are really discussing is pursuing the paths which are most likely to speed a cure for a variety of serious illnesses.

Fortunately for him there are no ethical issues involved in not following the most promising leads for curing deadly diseases. So not doing the research that might prevent suffering is win-win.

Aspacia? Potential Cures? they aren't!!
These so-called meds which are touted as cures ONLY MASK symptoms, minimize the 'EFFECT' and ignore the CAUSE. That is now (because of science) called a CURE?

Ever hear the expression, "Physician Heal Thyself"

Disease is for the most part CAUSED by improper diet, lifestyle and lack of exercise. Another great saying does wonders to highlight this, "The wages of SIN is Death"....

Sin or the sin nature as far as I am concerned is "the SELF-CENTERDNESS" of humanking...and how various energies or temptations for centuries identified as "the seven deadly sins" prompt and direct "undisciplined" behavior. The top of that list is Sloth (laziness - often masked as OH I'm too busy). Gluttony (overeating) Envy and Jealousy...which CAUSES the coveteous nature which itself prompts many STRESSFUL behaviors....So with gluttony, sloth, stress to name a few....we have the causative nature of MOST disease......Name them...Diabetes, Heart Disease, Lung Disease, Cancers (the body feeding on istself and being fed by improper diet)...and on and on ad infinitim...NONE of the DRUGS the so-called medical establishment advocates CURES or actually even addresses ANY of them. And the many multi-tillion dollar funded research organizations hundreds of trillion dollars have not found ONE solid cure. Even polio, malaria, and the like are making come backs. And the anti-biotics are fast becoming useless as various germs and virus are mutating making them worthless. Yep keep touting the manipulation of mankind. Praise the ego (self) the root cause of it all.

And Now For Our Next Feat...
Don't relax just yet, Bible-thumpers: the headline on my morning paper reads "Scientists Poised to Create Life". Once again we will be in for the treat of hearing folks who dropped out of high school (or, referring to those with higher education, have 1 semester of community college) explain to us why science is junk.

justme
ever heard of small pox?


as far as polio making a come back, please reference your source on that.

lilly
"Once again we will be in for the treat of hearing folks who dropped out of high school (or, referring to those with higher education, have 1 semester of community college) explain to us why science is junk."

The above comment is overgeneralized, demostrably false, and based more on your negative presuppostions than on fact. In short, it is bigoted, and that makes you a bigot.

Aspacia,
A fetus is not alive? You must have been taught out of some bizarre biology books!!!

Creating a synthetic genome
Here's a link to the AP story about scientists at the Venter Institute in Maryland who have created an artificial genetic structure of a Mycoplama bacterium.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5j-Rryw9XT9Cb4kwl2i4qi7xI PGhQD8UCGVA00

For a more technical account see the Venter Institute's own page on their work at:

http://www.jcvi.org/cms/research/projects/chemical-synthesi s-of-the-mycoplasma-genitalium-genome/overview/

When--not if--they get the genome transplated into a cell, which then reproduces, these folks will have taken a huge step forward toward artificial life forms.

There's a lot for all of us to think about, and simply repeating the old "man wasn't meant to do this" line just doesn't contribute anything. The people who've done this aren't raving Dr. Frankensteins; they're corporate, and are trying to solve problems, while making a profit, and how can a conservative object to that, I ask you?

Gestell
Interesting and reasonable post. It doesn't address Mr. Greenberg's point, though. The point is that it is dangerous to think that it is okay to destroy human life as a means toward any end--good or bad--for profit or not.

The scientists at the Venter Institute have created an *artificial* genetic structure, which is a step toward creating *artificial* life forms. That sounds very similar to creating the artificial embryonic stem cells mentioned in the article. That is a good thing.

If you were to argue for continuing to use human embryos for experimentation, then you and I would disagree.

lilly
People with common sense read the article, not the headline. And I know a few people with little education and a lot of common sense.

Sword of Light
"I know a few people with little education and a lot of common sense."

So do I. I also know a lot of people who have a lot of education and ZERO common sense (interestingly enough, most of them are liberals).

Fortunately, some people have both education and common sense. My wife and I are both conservative evangelical Christians. I have an accredited master's degree, and my wife has a PhD. Lilly probably wouldn't want to talk to us, because we'd shatter her stereotypes.

reply to Sword of Light
What bothered me about the column was that Mr. Greenberg simply ascribed the worst possible motives to the scientists--that they're like Dr. Frankentstein, arrogant, etc. That seems to me extremely simplistic.

I think you're overlooking a very important issue, however. If the scientists do indeed create artificial life, then another traditional concept of what God is--i.e., the sole creator--has to be modified or abandoned. I think this is as big a problem for traditional Christians as any of the big scientific discoveries that have threatened the faith of Christians for the past 500 years.

As for embryonic stem cells, it seems they will not have to be used, after all, although I do disagree with you about their use. Consider:

1. embryonic stem cells are the result of in vitro fertilization; they are not taken from eggs fertilized in women's bodies.

2. embryonic stem cells are taken from the blastocyst, which at the time consists of about 150 cells.

Those who oppose the use of embryonic stem cells think that the blastocyst should be protected bcause it is a human being. I completely agree that it is a human being genetically--and no scientist would dispute that--the argument comes about its moral and legal status. Those of us who support embryonic stem cells simply find no plausible reason to equate the blatocyst with a human foetus; it has the genetic capability of developing further, but it is not a human foetus at the time (typically 4-5 days after fertilization) when the cells are extracted.

Lilly, Lilly Lilly!
Continue to not ever let the facts get in the way of an opportunity to insult someone. I would venture to say that the majority of the conservative bloggers on TH have a college or advanced degree. Your bigotry is not a beautiful sight to behold. What are your qualifications to critique exactly? A great percentage of the scientific advances in the last five hundred years have been made by Christian scientists, who are truly awed by God's creqtion, and because of their core beliefs, desire to help fellow human beings. You will never convince me nor many others (who do have the education to view this rationally rather than emotionally) that human beings are in a constant state of development, from the time that the genetic material is compete until the time of death.
I also don't understand why if embryonic stem cell research is so necessary and so promising, private pharmaceutical companies aren't competing with each other to be first to get results. Why is there such a huge demand for government money?

for Gestell:
Gestell asks: "The people who've done this aren't raving Dr. Frankensteins; they're corporate, and are trying to solve problems, while making a profit, and how can a conservative object to that, I ask you?"

For the same reason that social conservatives have objected to such other profit-making ventures as pornography, brothels, and online gambling websites:

Because they regard some forms of profit-making activity as immoral.

Pornography is a multibillion dollar business. Social conservatives would have it shut down entirely if they could.

reply to SteveL
Of course you're correct. However, social conservatives thus contradict themselves when they claim to support the free market. What they should say is "We support the free market except for (fill in the blanks)."

Gestell
Do you think the free market should determine whether we practice genocide in this country?

Morality
I do not believe that all embryonic stem cell research is immoral. What IS immoral is the life-destroying lies embryonic researchers spread every time they speak or write about adult stem cells, which,in their money-grubbing world, cannot do as much as embryonics promise.

Four years ago I founded an adult stem cell company named TheraVitae, the first company in the world to save and improve the lives of dying heart patients. To be more specific, TheraVitae has done what the politically-correct embryonic con-men say is not being done! For example, Harvard, who wrote "Stem Cells Offer Promise---Only Promise--for Heart Disease" and the New England Journal of "medicine" wrote along with their Associated Press colluders "Adult stem cells little or no help to heart repair." That was at the same time that 200 hopelessy-ill lives were being improved by TheraVitae and 2000 other heart patients had already been helped with adult stem cells on four continents, but NOT north of the Rio Grande. "We must lie and you must die, but we shall profiteer."

Why is everything any embryology fanatic writes a lie? And why should anyone support a science fiction which requires lies to suck tax dollars out of the people they have conned?

The answer is: MONEY. For who would cheer embryonic stem cells if they knew the truth; i.e. that adult stem cells TODAY can improve the lives of more sick people suffering from more "incurable" diseases than embryonics will be able to help over the next decade!

Don Margolis
Retired Founder
TheraVitae

Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.