White House Statement:
The previous Administration allowed the National Institutes of Health to fund human embryonic stem cell research on cell lines created before an arbitrary date, August 9, 2001, but prohibited research on cell lines created after that date. The Executive Order signed by President Obama today lifts this restriction, which has no basis in science and was not required by any law.Just to be clear: the Bush's NIH did fund ESC research on existing stem cells derived from embryos. My question: how much will Obama's NIH increase funding for ESC research?
Under the Obama Executive Order signed today, the Director of NIH is instructed to develop guidelines for the support and conduct of responsible, scientifically worthy human stem cell research, including human embryonic stem cell research, to the extent permitted by law. Doing this will involve gathering the necessary scientific data and published best practices. NIH will then post draft guidelines for public comment, and will carefully review of all the public responses. Within 120 days of the signing of the Executive Order, NIH will issue final guidance.
The second para from the WH is gobbledygook. Every. Single. Thing. Mentioned. In that paragraph. Was already being done under Bush's NIH. What does this gobbledygook mean? Will Obama's NIH step up funding for ESC research? They should not, b/c ESC research has been vastly less productive than ASC research(in fact, it's hard to argue that ESC research has produced anything other than knowledge that the human body rejects ESCs as foreign bodies, and creates fast growing tumors). The gobbledygook does not say Obama's NIH will increase funding directed at ESCs. Such seems, by virtue of the smoke and mirrors surrounding the announcement, to be implied. Yet, with Obama, one must trust nothing and verify everything. There is NOTHING here which is meaty enough to confirm anything. The gobbledygook says nothing - just as all of Barack's favorite statements say nothing.
Today, President Obama signed an Executive Order overturning the ban on expending federal funds on research on stem cells derived from embryos after Aug 9, 2001.
Medical breakthroughs are occurring with Adult Stem Cell (ASC) research. Private funding is rushing to ASCs. I fully support stem cell research with ASCs.
Medical breakthroughs are not occurring with Embryonic Stem Cell research, partially because ESCs create rapidly growing tumors, and largely because the body rejects the ESCs as foreign bodies.* Private funding is not rushing to ESC research.
Taxpayer subsidy for ESC now becomes a classic example of free market decision vs. smart person in a government decision.
In the greatest 2 minute 23 second video ever recorded, Milton Friedman asks Phil Donahue:Jeff Goldstein:
"Is it really true that political self interest is nobler somehow than economic self interest? You know, I think you're taking a lot of things for granted. And just tell me where in the world you find these angels who are going to organize society for us? I don't even trust you do that."
Most important I think is Friedman’s final salvo, because it cuts through all the faux nobility and solicitousness of “compassionate” leftism and gets to the heart of the matter: who among us presumes to take on the role of angel(s)-in-chief?Is Barack a virtuous political angel who is acting in the best interests of the American people?
The answer — left unstated — is that anyone who would volunteer for the position is by that very act of volunteering immediately disqualified as insufficiently humble for the task.
"Is it really true that political self interest is nobler somehow than economic self interest?"Does Barack truly believe expenditure of taxpayer dollars ought to be directed towards ESCs - as opposed to ASCs, or to nothing (i.e. let private funding move the research forward - as it's doing with ASCs, and w/ESCs from previously existing lines[of which there are decades worth of already existing supply]).
George W. Bush, in August 2001, gave the most serious Presidential speech ever given about [science and ethics], and [today] Obama did not. For Obama to pretend there is never a conflict between science and ethics is wrong.
Obama erected another straw man, i.e. that he [Obama] is standing firmly against those who would distort science. No one is [distorting science].
... scientist said recently, "If you haven't had qualms about Embryonic Science, you haven't thought about it enough." Obama appears as though he has not.
*according to Southern Brother - who has expertise - in the comments.