Comments on: Stem Cell Opponents To Air Celebrity Ad

To Rebut Ad Featuring Michael J. Fox, World Series Pitcher Speaks Out Against Missouri Amendment

[malk_69]

"Embryonic stem cells come from an embryo -- the mass of cells in the earliest stage of human development that, if implanted in a woman's womb, will eventually grow into a fetus. When the embryo is between three and five days old, it contains stem cells, which are busily working to create the various organs and tissues that will make up the fetus."

This is something that bothers me greatly.

Another thing to consider, as is the way with most "foot in the door" methods to science...once that door is open, all hell could and will break loose. Today it will be (according to the Ammendment) that women can only "donate" their eggs. Tomorrow they will be selling them. How ethical is it to sell the potential to life?

I think we're messing with God's plan here. I for one am not about to step on God's toes.

[squiz2]

I don't know if anyone posted this yet, but you can go to www.sos.mo.gov/elections/2006ballot for the full text of this and the other amendments on the ballot.

[michey22]

With this amendment, the devil is hiding in the details. While the amendment appears to ban cloning to any person uneducated in the scientific details, it actually does write into the constitution the right to clone, via somatic cell nuclear transfer, human embryos. Somatic cell nuclear transfer is the process by which the DNA from a body cell, such as a skin cell (rather than an egg or sperm) is extracted from one person and transfered into a fertilized egg that has had its own DNA taken out of it. Thus, the new blastocyst is a human clone - a copy - of the first person. If this blastocyst, which is clearly a human life by all scientific standards, is implanted into a woman, it will grow into a fetus, then a baby, then a child, then a teenager, and then an adult - all a progression of the same life. The amendment bans the implantation of this blastocyst, as nobody really wants human clones walking around. But, it allows human cloning - there is no question. And, further, these blastocyts may indeed be destroyed and used for research, as Provision #2 only bans the production of blastocysts via fertilization (but not SCNT)for the purpose of stem cell research. The devil is in the details, and this is truly devilish in the level of deceit, trickery, and disdain for the public's moral and ethical conscience. No one should vote for this amendment unless they truly understand it. I have a PhD in Immunology from Tufts University and it took me a few minutes.

[cbsirene]

Kuddos to Michael J. Fox for having the guts to vocie his opinion and fight for a cause that hopefully will save his life and others afflicted wby this terrible disease.

Shane on those other celebrity who have been enlisted to combat Michael's notoriety and have no moral decency left that they prostitue themselves for a party line that is afraid of the potential breakthroguh of medical science.

The ad says: "Amendment 2 claims it bans human cloning, but in the 2,000 words you don't read, it makes cloning a constitutional right. Don't be deceived." The amendment reads: %u201CNo person may clone or attempt to clone a human being."In the ad, we are told "Beware of loopholes" and that "Low income women will be seduced by big checks.%u201D The amendment: Provision #2: "No human blastocyst may be produced by fertilization solely for the purpose of stem cell research." And #4: "No person may, for valuable consideration, purchase or sell human blastocysts or eggs for stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures." Stored away in laboratory fridges all over our great country are fertilized eggs. When infertility couples have their eggs harvested, they don't get just one. The eggs are then fertilized and observed for a few days. It's not uncommon to produce 10 little blastocysts per IVF cycle. How many of the eggs are used? A few. What happens to the ones that are not used? Most are destroyed. The parents don't want the leftovers after a successful pregnancy, and the clinic runs out of space - so they're destroyed. What would be done with them? Well, the blastocysts could then be used to grow the cells that might cure diabetes, or - essentially to grow a healthy replacement for any diseased organ. Cloning should be forbidden. There shouldn't be a financial incentive to donating eggs. But blastocysts that would BE DESTROYED ANYWAY should be allowed to cure disease.

[jewjewjew1]

After reading the amendment (and I'm no lawyer), I fail to see how: "Amendment 2 claims it bans human cloning, but in the 2,000 words you don't read, it makes cloning a constitutional right. Don't be deceived." Especially since the third paragraph clearly states: "(1) No person may clone or attempt to clone a human being." Doesn't it reflect poorly on our political system when two people read the same bill and come to opposite conclusions on what it means?

[jewjewjew1]

After reading the amendment (and I'm no lawyer), I fail to see how: "Amendment 2 claims it bans human cloning, but in the 2,000 words you don't read, it makes cloning a constitutional right. Don't be deceived." Especially since the third paragraph clearly states: "(1) No person may clone or attempt to clone a human being." Doesn't it reflect poorly on our political system when two people read the same bill and come to opposite conclusions on what it means?

[troothdoc]

The article ends with the statement, "Republican incumbent James Talent, who opposes stem-cell research." Is the author SURE that is the case, or does Talent merely oppose the "government funding of" "fetal" stem-cell research??

Might that not be an important distinction?

[connapa]

I would like to know what kind of academic credentials ANY of these people have ( 2 jocks and multiple actors)? Do any of them have PhD's in ANY scientific field- or even in Philosophy (little alone theology) to make them qualified to object?
Mr. Fox, as an actual sufferer of Parkinson's, at least has the benefit of both personal experience with the disease, as well as having done his own research into his own disease, to know what he's talking about.
These others know nothing and are just being paid to tout the party line.
Unfortunately, based on the First Amendment, these people have the benefit of free speech- there's no qualification that what anyone of them says is accurate, or scientifically proven (unless you're trying to sell something- in which case its considererd false advertising.)

[fcadden]

Jeez. I wish they'd seduce *me* with a big check for *my* eggs. I don't see why it's such a big deal, but then again I never understand why a lot of politics are.

[ademeyer]

I would donate my eggs to research if it would help save Michael J. Fox.

Eggs are not "babies" Patricia. Glad we are having this debate, though. Good to get the facts out in the open.