On Sunday, there was a column in the Milwaukee Journal opposing a ban on aborted fetal tissue research.
I submitted a letter to the editor and it will be published tomorrow (or you can read it online today.)
And here is the Milwaukee Journal editorial board on the issue, stating moral concerns hold no sway in this brave new world we're living in.
In a blog post on the issue, the Milwaukee Journal states they will be publishing commentary from Medical College of Wisconsin researchers this week (MCW performs research with aborted body parts, as does UW-Madison).
Catholic doctors/medical professionals, please weigh in. The time is now.
In a blog post on the issue, the Milwaukee Journal states they will be publishing commentary from Medical College of Wisconsin researchers this week (MCW performs research with aborted body parts, as does UW-Madison).
Catholic doctors/medical professionals, please weigh in. The time is now.
5 comments:
Thank you, Virginia, for your letter to the editor. Excellent!
Let us all start with this to turn the tide:
Children are not kids.
We never refer to Jesus as a kid.
He is the Child Jesus.
As soon as we drop the use of kid, and replace it with child, we will start the upward course of respect for human beings in their younger years.
All children start preborn-we say unborn child, never unborn kid.
Please reflect on the Holy Child Jesus.
Please reflect on the importance of words.
Thank you.
This editorial is shameful on a number of levels, not the least of which being that it inaccurately portrays the science of stem cell research. Researchers CANNOT create either non-embryonic adult stem cells from fetal (embryonic) cells or embryonic stem cells from skin cells; EMBRYONIC stem cells ALWAYS come from EMBRYOS. Induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells, however, can be produced from skin cells or other somatic cells. The editorial simply gets this factually wrong, which undermines every one of the editorial's arguments. Such glaring inaccuracies mandate a clarification from the JS Editorial Board, if not an outright retraction.
Simply, the discipline of stem cell research is far broader than just the segment using embryo-derived stem cells. Not only are iPS cells a morally acceptable alternative to embryonic stem cells, they have been demonstrated in research to be medically superior. The bill in question would do nothing to thwart "adult" iPS cell research. Rather, it would encourage it by eliminating the medically inferior, morally reprehensible embryonic stem cell alternative from the state's research landscape. Finally, it would encourage research overall by signaling to researchers that legislators actually take the results of their hard work seriously enough to divert funding to from unproductive streams to productive ones.
Great info Joel!
Great work Virginia! I should have you as a blog contributor or something... oh, that's right, I do!
And one of the benefits of a contributor who is rather illiterate about how the internet works is that I won't be masterminding a takeover.
Shameful on another level:
Mr. Still's argument that fetal cell/tissue research should be kept 'legal' because....
....it IS currently legal.
(“A bill introduced in the Wisconsin Legislature would make it a crime for Wisconsin researchers to continue using those cells, even though they have done so legally, ethically and effectively for 50 years or more.”)
Post a Comment