[ExI] LA Times: 'Hope' makes a case for stem cell research

[Michael LaTorra]

Hi Spike,
Perhaps, perhaps...

Perhaps private research will turn up a viable stem cell therapy. However, I
do not believe it would be correct to characterize their budgets as
"unlimited." In fact, some private money was probably scarred away for fear
by investors that the Bush Administration would hamper the approval process
for stem cell therapies. Just look at how they retarded the approval process
for new birth control meds.

Perhaps, as you suggest, stem cell therapies will turn out to be a blind
alley. If so, would it not make more sense to have found that out 8 years
sooner?

Finally, while you may take my criticism as "blind desire to blame Bush for
something" I can assure you it is nothing of the sort. I gave Bush every
chance to do well. I never wrote one word against him for the first 5 years
of his administration. But the time is growing late, his final term is
almost over, and his record is appalling: budget-busting deficit spending,
advocating the teaching of creationism/intelligent design in American public
schools, squandering the sympathy the USA garnered after the attacks of
September 11 2001 by pursuing an aggressive war in Iraq and then utterly
bungling that military misadventure.

The only remaining unanswered question about Bush, in my view, is whether
his stupidity exceeded his incompetence or vice versa.

Sad. Very sad.

Regards,
Mike LaTorra

On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 7:36 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

> Michael LaTorra
>        Subject: Re: [ExI] LA Times: 'Hope' makes a case for stem cell
> research
>
>
>         The point is that 8 years of research did not happen at the pace it
> could or should have because of the ideological blindness of President Bush
> and his allies.
>
> ...
>
>        Regards,
>        Mike LaTorra
>
>
> On the contrary Mike.  Bush's opposition to stem cell research funded by
> the
> government has encouraged private research, with their unrestricted
> budgets,
> motivated by profit, to find sources of stem cells that do not depend on
> embryos.  This will save the lives of those who refuse to accept stem cell
> therapy if those cells came from embryos.  If we master non-embryonic stem
> cell technology, then anyone can use their own stem cells to treat
> themselves, free of problems such as immune system reactions and any
> possible ethical opposition.  Stems cells from one's own body make better
> therapy material than stem cells from someone else's embryo.  Embryonic
> stem
> cell research might well have been a blind alley; it looks to me as though
> it is.
>
> But why don't we ever hear that spin?  I see comments such as "eight years
> have been lost" as science that is tainted by the blind desire to blame
> Bush
> for something.
>
> Perhaps eight years have been gained that would otherwise have been lost.
>
> spike
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20080523/5a819cb3/attachment.html>