Cell Research & Cloning
& Breast Cancer
Benefits of Stem Cells to Human Patients-Adult
Stem Cells v. Embryonic Stem Cells (Do No Harm)
Despite Veto, There is Hope for Sufferers
in Adult Stem Cell Research and Other Alternatives to
Embryonic Stem Cells
Nevada LIFE's Position On Stem Cell Research &
President Bush's Policy
Debate Is On "Embryonic Stem Cell Research" Not "Stem
Stem Cell Research And Cloning Myths
furious debate and “political science” surrounding
embryonic stem cell research (ESCR) and cloning has
generated several myths which has led to confusion about
ESCR and cloning. If
the nation is going to have a serious debate about
embryonic stem cell research, it must be done with clarity
and truthfulness. Here
are some myths about embryonic stem cell research and
# 1 President Bush created new restrictions to federal
funding of Embryonic Stem Cell Research (ESCR).
Bush did not restrict human ESCR funding.
He liberalized it.
Prior to August 9, 2001 it was illegal to use
federal funds for research requiring the destruction of
human embryos. President
Bush’s policy provides federal funding for research on
embryonic stem cell lines in existence before August 2001.
Last year over $200 million was spent for stem cell
research, of which about $190 million was allotted for
research on adult stem cells and nearly $25 million for
research on embryonic stem cell lines that existed prior
to August 9, 2001. There
is no ban on private or state funded ESCR.
ESCR is not illegal in the United States.
Only federal funding on embryos destroyed after
2001 is banned.
#2 ESCR and cloning are illegal in the United States.
funding of ESCR using embryos destroyed after August 9,
2001 is prohibited. Several
states have moved in to provide money for ESCR and
nothing the government can do to stop state, local and
private organizations from funding or engaging in ESCR and
cloning. In fact, there are no limits on fetal
farming, or human and animal hybrids.
#3 All stem cells come from the same place.
All stem cells are embryonic.
advocates blur the distinctions between the types of stem
cell research to make it appear that all stem cell
research is the same, that it all has the same moral
significance and that ESCR opponents are anti-stem cell
cell research can generally be divided into two types,
embryonic stem cell research and “adult”
(non-embryonic stem cell research-ASCR).
The moral difference is the source of the stem
stem cells (ASCs) are
cells that are derived from the patient’s own body,
or from umbilical cord blood, placental tissues,
amniotic fluid and other tissues as well as cadavers.
They are found all over the human body, and new
research shows that they can be transformed into any
other kind of cells.
stem cells (ESCs)
are derived from human embryos-human beings in the
embryonic stage of development.
There is no other way to obtain embryonic stem
cells than to destroy the life of an embryonic human
# 4 ESCR has
shown the most promise in developing treatments and cures.
billions of private investment dollars and years of
promises about cures, ESCR has not treated
any human beings and there are no human trials. ESCR
in animal studies has caused teratomas and has proved to
be too dangerous for human trials.
Private investment has deserted ESCR for ASCR
helping and curing thousands of people, there are
over 80 ASCR cures or treatments including sickle cell
anemia, and over 300 human trials on the way.
Bio-tech companies engaged in ESCR are broke and
looking for the taxpayer to bail them out.
pp 21-27 of Dr. David Prentice’s Powerpoint presentation
testimony to Congress regarding the current applications
and clinical trials regarding ESCR and ASCR at http://www.cloninginformation.org/congressional_testimony/prentice_2005-01-03.pdf.
#5. Opponents of Embryonic Stem Cell Research (ESCR)
oppose all stem cell research.
Nevada LIFE and other opponents of ESCR like the
Catholic Bishops and other right to life groups are strong
supporters of almost all stem cell research.
These supporters of stem cell research only oppose
that small part of stem cell research that creates and
destroys human life.
A person can
be a strong supporter of stem cell research and oppose
embryonic stem cell research at the same time.
#6, There aren’t enough existing embryonic stem cell
lines for research and they are in poor condition.
Kass PhD is the chairman of the President’s Council on
Kass says there is no shortage of embryonic stem cells.
“…22 lines of eligible stem cells are
available, up from just one line in the summer of 2002,
with more coming -- enough lines for years of essential
basic research that must precede any future therapy.
Nearly 500 shipments of cells have already been made to
researchers; 3,500 more sit ready for delivery upon
request. There is no shortage of embryonic stem cells.” (Washington
Post, October 8, 2004; Page A35).
Nevada LIFE does not support the use of these
embryonic stem cells, but we support the funding
restrictions on any new killing of human embryos for
#7 ESCR Opponents Are Extremists.
by International Communications Research posed the
question “should scientists be allowed to use human
cloning to create a supply of human embryos to be
destroyed in medical research?
13.3% said Yes:
79.8% said no.
Wilson Research Strategies, Inc. asked respondents
“which of the following comes closest to your view?”
in regards to human cloning and embryonic stem cell
research. 24% said cloning to create human embryos for
stem cell research,
which would kill the embryos,
should be allowed and only cloning for reproduction should
be banned. 69%
said all human cloning should be banned.
74 percent of Americans said that they support
using tax dollars to pay for the kind of stem cell
research that does not require the killing of human
embryos, while only 20 percent opposed.
A majority of Americans support a ban on both
reproductive and research cloning. Many countries and
international organizations, including the U.N, Germany,
Switzerland, the European Parliament, and others, have
banned all human cloning.