|
Opinion-Embryonic
Stem-Cell Tests Off Limits For Government.
Don Nelson, President
Nevada LIFE
With
Chuck Muth, President Citizen Outreach
Reno Gazette Journal
August
3, 2006
President Bush's veto of
legislation to expand federal support of embryonic
stem-cell research has led some to propose state taxpayer
funding for that research in Nevada. This thinking is
wrong-headed, and it is one area where fiscal and social
conservatives can agree upon a policy position for
different reasons. With a wealth of misinformation
surrounding this issue, we hope this will help produce the
informed discussion a Gazette-Journal editorial has called
for and explain why it should not be pursued.
There are two kinds of
stem cell research: embryonic and adult. Embryonic stem
cells are procured by destroying embryos. Adult stem cells
come from a person's own body, placenta, umbilical cord
blood and other tissues, and do not involve destruction of
human life.
Supporters of embryonic
stem cell research often falsely claim that to oppose
embryonic stem-cell research is to oppose all stem-cell
research, and that opponents are anti-patient and
anti-science. But embryonic stem-cell research is but a
small part of stem-cell research, and opponents support
almost all stem-cell research.
There are more than 70
successes and more than 1,000 human trials. These include
treatments for heart damage, stroke, cancers, multiple
sclerosis, spinal cord injury, Parkinson's, liver damage,
sickle cell anemia and more. Not one of these successes
has come from embryonic stem-cell research (ESCR), and
there are no human trials. Yet ESCR supporters insist that
embryonic stem cells hold the most promise.
Readers also need to know
that there is no stem-cell research "ban" or
shortage of embryonic stem cells. Under President Bush's
policy, the federal government funds research using
embryonic stem cells growing in stem-cell lines obtained
prior to August 2001. Those lines are being used around
the world.
Many people have moral
objections to even this limited use of embryonic stem
cells. They believe it requires the destruction of human
beings and cheapens human dignity by using humans as raw
materials. But those are not the only concerns, and
pro-life supporters are not the only opponents. Many
limited-government fiscal conservatives who may not share
these moral objections, nevertheless believe this is an
inappropriate area for government involvement.
"By its very nature,
government politicizes everything it touches," writes
Michael D. Tanner, director of Health and Welfare Studies
at the Washington, D.C.-based Cato Institute.
"Science is no exception. Stem-cell research needs
neither government money nor politics. It is better to get
the government out and let the private sector continue its
good work. Those people calling for increased funding
could take out their checkbooks and support it. Those who
oppose embryonic stem-cell research would not be forced to
pay for it."
If there were a potential
cure to be found in embryonic stem-cell research, the
private sector would be all over it. So far there isn't
... and it's not.
The best thing government
can do for all of its citizens on this issue is to stay
out of it and not spend taxpayer dollars on something it
shouldn't be spending those dollars on, and that so many
Americans have such a strong moral objection to.
Don Nelson is president of
the pro-life Nevada LIFE. Chuck Muth is president of the
libertarian Citizen Outreach. |
