Click or Tap Icons to Share! Thank you!

Authored By  :
Published On :
Last Updated :



Continuing our discussion from part two, as we saw with abortion and the gay and lesbian agenda, the truth regarding what has happened with embryonic stem cell research during the two terms of the Bush Administration is actually quite different from what you may think. According to information which I have read, at the time that Mr. Bush reached his controversial compromise, some of the available stem cell lines were already becoming unviable. Stated in another way, scientists could no longer use them for stem cell research, and new stem cell lines had to be developed.

From the start, there was a conflict regarding what had been stated by the Bush Administration. For example, in September 2001, in a New York Times article, Tommy G. Thompson, who at the time was the Secretary of Health and Human Services, was quoted as saying, "They're diverse, they're robust, they're viable for research". Yet in that very same article, critics of the Bush compromise shot back with the following:

----- Begin Quote -----

"But that assertion is being questioned now that more has become known. National Institutes of Health officials, who are preparing a registry that will list the 64 lines and their biological characteristics, now acknowledge that some are in the very early stages of development, and may not prove useful even for basic science. Scientists have used mouse cells to feed the growth of the human stem cells, which is a standard laboratory technique but raises concerns about whether the cells will be suitable for transplanting into people. And because the cell lines are in private hands, intellectual property issues must be resolved before government-financed scientists can work with them."

----- End Quote -----

A month later, an Associated Press news article repeated the claims made by President Bush's critics, with this paragraph:

----- Begin Quote -----

"After weeks of deliberation, Bush announced in August that he would permit research only on stem cell lines that he said already existed. Critics said they believed Bush overstated the number of lines, or cell colonies, and said many of them would prove unsuitable for use by scientists."

----- End Quote -----

As I stated a moment ago, while some of you may be under the impression that George W. Bush fulfilled his pledge to those who voted for him, (such as America's Christian Right), and put a stop to embryonic stem cell research, this is certainly not true. No sooner had Bush announced his decision regarding embryonic stem cell research on American national television, and signed his executive order, that the pro embryonic stem cell research proponents in Congress, such as Senators Arlen Specter, Orrin G. Hatch, Edward M. Kennedy, John Kerry, Bill Frist, Tom Harkin, Hillary Rodham Clinton and Lamar Alexander began to discuss ways to expand on President Bush's executive order, and to try to find legal loopholes around it. And so, in an October 2001 article in the New York Times, we find these opening paragraphs which reveal their strategy:

----- Begin Quote -----

The White House is expressing initial opposition to Senate legislation that would explicitly allow limited, federally financed stem cell research for the first time.

The Senate Appropriations Committee planned to vote Thursday on a routine spending bill that includes the provision. A subcommittee of that panel approved the overall measure Wednesday.

The language, written by Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., would let President Bush follow through on his proposal to restrict the research to the 64 stem cell lines that he said already exist.

It also would permit him to go further, as long as the embryos used for the research otherwise would be destroyed and permission for their use had been granted by the people whose fertility treatments created them.

----- End Quote -----

In short, they were trying to nudge Bush even further in his position, so that he would be willing to open the door for federally financed embryonic stem cell research just a little more. Let's jump forward now three years to May of 2004. As you will see, the attempt by George W. Bush to limit US stem cell research to the sixty-four known stem cell lines which were available around the world at that time was an exercise in futility. A CNN news article, dated May the 19th, 2004, opens with these paragraphs:

----- Begin Quote -----

The world's first embryonic stem cell bank opened in Britain on Wednesday, breaking new ground in one of the most controversial areas of medical research.

The bank aims to store and supply stem cell lines -- strings of identical cells -- for research and possible treatment of conditions like diabetes, cancer and Parkinson's. Its store of cell lines is expected to number tens of thousands.

But opponents say such research involves the "wanton creation and destruction of human life'' and have condemned the bank as a storage site for dead babies.

----- End Quote -----

In April and June of that same year, 2004, certain members of the US Congress again tried to bend President Bush's arm, as can be seen by this news clip from the Associated Press. Notice again that Bush's critics are using the very same tactic as in earlier years, and are claiming that the stem cell lines that Bush made available to American researchers in his August 2001 executive order, were unviable:

----- Begin Quote -----

Fifty-eight senators are asking President Bush to relax federal restrictions on stem cell research, and several said Monday that the late President Reagan's Alzheimer's disease underscored a need to expand the research using human embryos.

The senators' letter to Bush was sent Friday, before Reagan died after a long struggle with Alzheimer's.

Bush signed an executive order in August 2001 limiting federal research funding for stem cell research to 78 embryonic stem cell lines then in existence.

But the letter complains that only 19 of those lines are now available to researchers and those available are contaminated with mouse feeder cells which makes their use for humans uncertain.

----- End Quote -----

Up until that point, President Bush appeared to be holding his ground, and the same article from the Associated Press stated in part:

----- Begin Quote -----

"The president remains committed to exploring the promise of stem cell research but at the same time continues to believe strongly that we should not cross a fundamental moral line by funding or encouraging the destruction of human embryos," Lisaius said.

"The president does not believe that life should be created for the sole purpose of destroying it. He does believe we can explore the promise and potential of stem cell research using the existing lines of stem cells."

----- End Quote -----

The very next month, in July 2004, in their efforts to keep up the pressure on President Bush, Senator Orrin G. Hatch, who as I noted earlier is a supporter of embryonic stem cell research, made the claim that the Senate had the necessary votes to end the filibuster surrounding embryonic stem cell research. An Associated Press news article stated in part:

----- Begin Quote -----

"Sen. Orrin Hatch, a Republican supporter of embryonic stem cell research, said Sunday there is wide support in the Senate to ease the Bush administration's restrictive policy."

"Hatch said supporters have more than the 60 votes needed to end a filibuster, but he's unsure whether Congress would act 'in this hot political atmosphere'."

----- End Quote -----

So as we have now seen, the minute that George W. Bush signed the executive order which put a stop to federal financing for embryonic stem cell research, some members of the US Congress began looking for ways to weaken, and to eventually nullify, the president's order. The next year, in 2005, the House of Representatives tried to pass a veto-proof bill which would expand federal funding for embryonic stem cell research; but they were unable to muster the required number of votes, and the bill passed by a vote of 238 to 194. Demonstrating their strong opposition to Mr. Bush's position on the issue, fifty Republicans supported the bill. But a year later, in July of 2006, the results were a little different. As was reported by the Associated Press and other news services, the U.S. Senate unanimously approved a bill to expand federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, while the same bill floundered in the House of Representatives by a vote of 273-154. An AP news article begins with these opening paragraphs:

----- Begin Quote -----

The Senate voted Tuesday after two days of emotional debate to expand federal funding of embryonic stem cell research, sending the measure to President Bush for a promised veto that would be the first of his presidency.

The bill passed 63-37, four votes short of the two-thirds majority that would be needed to override Bush's veto. The president left little doubt he would reject the bill despite late appeals on its behalf from fellow Republicans Nancy Reagan and Arnold Schwarzenegger.

"The simple answer is he thinks murder's wrong," said White House spokesman Tony Snow. "The president is not going to get on the slippery slope of taking something living and making it dead for the purposes of scientific research."

----- End Quote -----

As was expected, the very next day, President Bush vetoed the bill, and House Majority Leader, John Boehner, noted that the House of Representatives would reinforce the vetoed bill when it was returned to them. In his remarks concerning the veto, President Bush stated in part:

----- Begin Quote -----

"This bill would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others."

"Each of these children was still adopted while still an embryo and has been blessed with a chance to grow, to grow up in a loving family. These boys and girls are not spare parts."

"They remind us of what is lost when embryos are destroyed in the name of research. They remind us that we all begin our lives as a small collection of cells. And they remind us that in our zeal for new treatments and cures, America must never abandon our fundamental morals."

"As science brings us every closer to unlocking the secrets of human biology, it also offers temptations to manipulate human life and violate human dignity. Our conscience in history as a nation demand that we resist this temptation."

"America was founded on the principle that we are all created equal and endowed by our creator with the right to life . . . We can advance the cause of science while upholding this founding promise. We can harness the promise of technology without becoming slaves to technology. And we can ensure that science serves the cause of humanity, instead of the other way around."

"Once [the line is] crossed, we would find it impossible to turn back."

----- End Quote -----

Of course, as in previous cases, certain Congressmen made clear their intention to continue the fight, until federal funding restrictions were removed from embryonic stem cell research endeavors. In particular, Senator Orrin Hatch said that the president's veto "sets back embryonic stem cell research another year or so"; and Bill Frisk, the Senate Majority Leader, also stated:

----- Begin Quote -----

"I am pro-life, but I disagree with the president's decision to veto the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act . . . Given the potential of this research and the limitations of the existing lines eligible for federally funded research, I think additional lines should be made available."

----- End Quote -----

The Bush Administration did suffer one defeat at that time, when another bill they tried to push through Congress, which would have encouraged stem cell research from sources other than embryos, was defeated by the House of Representatives. However, there was another success for President Bush. Both the House of Representatives, and the US Senate unanimously approved a bill to ban "fetal farming". This is the practice of raising, and aborting, fetuses for scientific research, such as are used with embryonic stem cell research. Bush, of course, signed the bill into law.

What I personally find strange about these issues, is that there are certain Republicans who one might think run with the typical conservative herd, by the mere fact that they are Republicans, (and indeed, they do paint themselves as conservative before the public eye), but then you discover that they aren't quite as conservative as you were led to believe.

A case in point is California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. While Schwarzenegger is indeed a Republican, he not only supported the bill to expand federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, but he in fact wrote to Bush and asked him not to veto Bill H.R. 810. Of course, with two liberal Jewesses, as well as a liberal Roman Catholic in Congress, not to mention Schwarzenegger's own career as an actor who readily accepted a number of liberal acting roles, plus the very liberal nature of Hollywood -- which I personally refer to as Unholywood -- and all of the other liberal causes that come out of California, it should really come as no surprise that Schwarzenegger would adopt this position. In comparing current developments in the New England states and the state of California, one has to wonder if they might not be having this private war to determine who can be the most liberal.

Another example where we find a Republican who is apparently not so conservative, is Nancy Reagan, the wife of former US President, Ronald Reagan. She likewise has supported the efforts to expand embryonic stem cell research in the United States. While I can certainly understand how the former First Lady has been affected by the plight, and death, of her late husband, nevertheless, as President Bush stated, there are certain moral bounds which we must never cross as Christians.

With this latest attack against his executive order, Mr. Bush was once again forced to declare his position to the American public. Thus, in addition to the previous comments, the White House spokesman, Tony Snow, also stated "The president is not opposed to stem cell research, he's all for it". Roy Blunt, the House Majority Whip, clarified the President's statement when he added "We must draw the ethical line at research that destroys human life". In other words, George W. Bush supports stem cell research, only when it does not involve the use of live human embryos. As you will see shortly, there are other less controversial methods now available, which avoid these hotly-debated moral issues, and they don't rely upon using human embryos at all.

About a month after President Bush vetoed the aforementioned bill, the American press revealed that a new technique had been developed, whereby stem cells could be harvested without destroying the days-old embryo. Through a scientific process referred to as "preimplantation genetic diagnosis", doctors at Advanced Cell Technology, and elsewhere, can remove a cell called a "blastomere"; that is, one of the eight cells from a two-day-old embryo, in order to check it for possible genetic defects. According to reports, this doesn't affect the health of the remaining seven cells. However, as was duly noted by the Bush Administration, and other critics of the technique, the very fact that the process involves using human embryos, still calls into question the morality of the practice. One typical reaction came from Brian Hart, who is a spokesman for Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas. He stated “You are creating a twin and then killing that twin". Of course, the Liberal Left was again quick to criticize the Bush Administration's new objections. Senator Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts remarked:

----- Begin Quote -----

“It’s tragic that the current Republican Congress continues to rubber stamp the restrictions that deny federal funding for scientists engaged in medical research that could save or improve countless lives."

----- End Quote -----

In June of 2007, the American mass media again revealed that Japanese scientists had found a way to create embryonic stem cells from the skin cells of mice. If it is true, and if it is a viable process which can also be conducted with human skin cells, this could possibly, and eventually, be a way to circumvent the moral issues which are directly connected to the practice of creating, and destroying, human embryos, in order to harvest embryonic stem cells. Just using that word "harvest" makes it sound so cold and calculating, but that is exactly what it is. As I have noted before, it basically amounts to destroying one life in order to attempt to save another.

Prior to the above announcement, the only way that scientists had found to convert adult cells into embryonic stem cells, was by using a controversial procedure referred to in medical circles as "therapeutic cloning". This procedure involves a process known as "nuclear transfer", whereby scientists must insert the nucleus of an adult cell into a female egg, whose own nucleus has been removed. Through a process which is not yet completely understood, the donor egg then reprograms the nucleus back into an embryonic state. As good as it sounds, to date, no one has yet succeeded in doing it. Furthermore, the fact that it still involves the use of human eggs, makes it a morally-questionable practice.

On the other hand, the new technique pioneered by Japanese scientists, (and reportedly reproduced by an American team), does not involve human eggs. Instead, they used a skin cell, into which were inserted four genes. From tests conducted thus far, it appears as if this new process offers the same results as nuclear transfer; however, the real challenge is to see if can be adapted to human skin cells, and not just to mice cells. However, this new procedure is not completely without its risks and challenges. For example, the mice had to be interbred, (which obviously cannot be done with human beings); the skin cells had to be infected with a virus; and lastly, twenty per cent of the experimental mice died from skin cancer. Again, this is a totally unacceptable risk for human beings. In short, this technique is still rather far from being doable, or even morally acceptable, to a lot of people.

Not quite six months after the Japanese announced their new discovery, Roger Highfield of the Telegraph in Great Britain reported that Professor Ian Wilmut, (whose research team had created world-famous Dolly the sheep in 1996 at the Roslin Institute, near Edinburgh), was abandoning the processes of "therapeutic cloning" and "nuclear transfer". Instead, the professor had now become very excited about redirecting his attention to the new method, now being referred to as direct reprogramming, or "de-differentiation". Ironically, in the same week that Professor Wilmut made his announcement, the science journal "Nature" revealed that a team in Oregon had successfully used "therapeutic cloning" to create primate embryos. However, even the scientist in charge of the team, Doctor Shoukhrat Mitalipov, readily admitted that the method known as "therapeutic cloning" is wasteful, (it requires literally hundreds of eggs to create just two new stem cell lines), inefficient, and not very cost-effective. I would add to his remarks that it is also still morally repugnant to Bible-believing Christians.

What also has scientists excited about "de-differentiation", is the fact that there are rumors that Dr. Yamanaka and his team have also been successful with human skin cells, but simply have chosen not to reveal it yet. This rumor, as well as the fact that "de-differentiation" does not involve the use of human embryos in any form whatsoever, has some people very interested in this new technique, and some of them are already becoming convinced that "de-differentiation" will be the wave of the future, insofar as stem cell research is concerned.

Now, one would think that in light of these more acceptable developments revolving around "de-differentiation", a lot of American scientists would be quick to hop on the band wagon, and embrace it. To my dismay, in January of this same year, (2008), the American mass media reported that despite the the moral complications which are associated with embryonic stem cell research, some scientists are still playing "God"; and a team in California has accomplished what others have been unable, or unwilling, to achieve; that is, they have used the somatic nuclear transfer procedure to create five- day-old embryos, for the purpose of extracting their stem cells for medical research. I find that unbelievable. Why in the world would they continue with a morally-unacceptable, wasteful, inefficient procedure, when something better has appeared on the horizon, which seems to offer more promise, and without the emotional baggage?

According to a report from MSNBC, a private company located in La Jolla, California, called Stemagen, has accomplished the feat. Of course, a lot of doubt has surrounded this news, due to the fact that about two years prior to this report, it was also announced that a Korean team led by Dr. Hwang woo-suk at Seoul National University, had achieved the very same task. As you may recall, no one was able to replicate their work, and eventually, to his own shame, and the shame of the entire Korean nation, Dr. Hwang woo-suk confessed that everything had been fabricated, and that there were no cloned human embryos. In the end, Dr. Hwang woo-suk resigned from his university position in disgrace. Well, I don't know what has happened to the work at Stemagen since that time, but according to the MSNBC news report:

----- Begin Quote -----

There are enough checks and balances reported in the paper - and a keen awareness by the authors of the fraud perpetrated by the South Korean group - to believe that they are really the first to achieve the cloning of human embryos in a verified, peer-reviewed process.

----- End Quote -----

As the article asks, if they really did do this, as seems to be the case, now what? Where do we go from here? My answer would have to be nowhere. Desist in this immoral activity at once, and respect the dignity of human life, as intended by our Creator. As to why these scientists still chose such a controversial method over "de-differentiation", the article offers an answer -- an unacceptable one in my view -- with the following:

----- Begin Quote -----

With the appearance of some new scientific tricks to get adult cells to act more embryo-like, scientists, the president and a host of pundits declared the end of the long stem cell research battle. Not so fast. Not everyone thinks reprogramming adult cells to make them act like embryos is going to work. If you want to build your own repair kit to fix damaged heart muscle, torn nerves, severed spinal cords or worn-out joints, then cloning from your own healthy cells still strikes many as the way to go.

The California company is among those who see human cloning as the best source of stem cell repair kits.

----- End Quote -----

While the article is supportive of this reprehensible form of of research, it does readily admit that there are still some huge obstacles to overcome, such as the following:

----- Begin Quote -----

There is, however, a huge boulder in the path of companies like Stemagen who are betting on cloning to get them to the holy grail of stem cells that can be turned into curative cells. Where to get the eggs needed to make human embryonic clones?

In the paper announcing the breakthrough, the authors note that they got three out of 25 attempts at clones to turn into human clone embryos. That is a success rate of about 10 percent. Even if that success rate improves in the future, it still means that six or more eggs are going to be required for a researcher to make a stem cell from a clone made from the DNA of one of your own cells.

Where will hundreds of thousands of eggs come from when hundreds of thousands seek cures? Will we pay poor women to create them? Egg-farming, using powerful drugs with serious risks, may not be the most humane way to ask a poor woman to earn a living.

----- End Quote -----

One important question that we need to ask ourselves is this: Is there any truth to the wonderful promises which have been made regarding utilizing embryonic stem cell research to find medical cures for such life-threatening diseases as diabetes, cancer, Alzheimer's disease, Motor Neuron disease, etc.? And, even if there is, do they really validate the destruction of living human embryos, in order to achieve these results? The answer to both of these questions at this current time is a clear, resounding "No!". Our answer can be summed up in the following paragraph taken from a November 2004 article in the Agape Press:

----- Begin Quote -----

"In more than 20 years of research, he notes, not one malady or disease has been successfully treated or cured with embryonic stem cells, while more than 50 medical problems are already being treated successfully with adult stem cells."

----- End Quote -----

Now, some critics may complain that I have not asked a fair question. "Of course there are no cures just yet", they may retort. "It will take us years to reach a stage where we can even begin to develop these technologies". But you see, my question has perfect merit, when you understand the point I am making here. Please carefully notice that the previous paragraph makes two distinct statements. The last one is that the non-controversial method of using adult stem cells has in fact already provided treatments for fifty different medical problems, while embryonic stem cell research has provided not a single one. This claim is also backed up by information one can find on the Wikipedia website. It states in part:

----- Begin Quote -----

"Adult stem cells and cord blood stems cells have thus far been the only stem cells used to successfully treat any diseases. Diseases treated by these non-embryonic stem cells include a number of blood and immune-system related genetic diseases, cancers, and disorders; juvenile diabetes; Parkinson's; blindness and spinal cord injuries."

----- End Quote -----

Please go to part four for the conclusion of this series.

⇒ Go To The Next Part . . .

Click or Tap Icons to Share! Thank you!

---

---

Please avail yourself of other areas of the Bill's Bible Basics website. There are many treasures for you to discover.