Comments on: Oh Brother, More Stuff on Stem Cells

By: Burying the Truth | Science @ Ales Rarus

Burying the Truth | Science @ Ales Rarus — Mon, 02 Oct 2006 15:21:21 +0000

[...] Once again, I feel compelled to tell you all about a serious mistake in logic and ethics that one of my favorite bands, Brother, has made. You may recall that I have thrice (here, here, and here) pointed to their "Concert for Cures" tour. Well, they now have a whole page dedicated to it, and it's full of misconceptions and misinformation. Let's flood them with corrections. [...]

By: Ales Rarus - A Rare Bird, A Strange Duck, One Funky Blog » Sacrilege and Medical Science

Tue, 14 Feb 2006 15:28:22 +0000

[...] Sacrilege and Medical Science By Funky Dung Fabian of Report from Greater Tokyo has responded to Jerry's stem cell primer. "On the medical science issue, once upon a time, it was considered sacriligious to cut open a human corpse. Early doctors' methods were notoriously unreliable, and early post-mortems were unlikely to either find the exact cause of death or provide immediately useful data for medical research. [...]

By: Alan Grey

Alan Grey — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

FYI,
Nature News has released information that scientists can now get undifferentiated stem cells from unfertilized eggs.

Removing completely the need for ESC

By: Jerry Nora

Jerry Nora — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

Hi h2. I'm glad that you liked the primer.

I want to emphasize that I too consider embryonic research to be utterly wrong. However, many people (including myself in other venues and on this blog)have hammered this home. The fact is, though, is that people fall into an "ends justify the means" mindset with a bunch of very ill people saying that the need embryonic research. Since embryos don't write many memoirs or vote, it is easy to ignore these humans' rights.

I like to short-circuit these argumenta ad misericordiam (arguments towards mercy) by showing that embryonic research has a lot of smoke and mirrors behind it. People think with their hearts often more than their heads, alas.

This has a parallel to slavery. William Wilberforce helped turn the tide against slavery in England by appealing to self-interest in showing that slavery is counterproductive. Ideally, more principled reasons for respecting the life and freedom of humans should suffice, but we should also try to respect where people are coming from if we seek to change their minds and their hearts.

Pro-lifers like Feminists for Life or the Caring Foundation are taking a page from Wilberforce by showing just how damaging abortion is to women, and it is has some marked success.

BTW, the University of Pittsburgh, I seem to recall, has some very promising work on beta-cell replacement for Type I diabetics. I'll keep my eyes peeled and post any relevant information that I may see, if you want.

By: Fabian

Fabian — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

http://blog.lajzar.co.uk/arc20040901.html#BlogID92

I have linked to your post.

By: h2

h2 — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

If you want someone who's truly sympathetic to Tessa (from Jerry's mini-primer on stem cells), you need look no further than me. As an insulin dependent diabetic, I share much of her perspective.

Still, that doesn't justify the idea of harvesting embryos to serve our healthcare needs. Logic like Jerry's may be helpful in steering some people away from false hope and the wrongheaded steps that follow. In so doing, perhaps we can do away with that misconception, but hopefully we can remember also that the misuse of embryonic stem cells would still be wrong even if it were the most effective means to an end.

Appreciate the good info.

By: h2

h2 — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

Thanks — that'd be great; I didn't really know about Pittsburgh's work in that area, so it's always good to know.