Dedicated readers of this site will be well aware of the fact that adult stem cells—cells taken from people, placentas, umbilical cords, etc.—have been used in a great variety of ways to effect cures in medicine in the past couple of decades, and have proven their value. Embryonic stem cells (those taken from unborn, developing human beings that have been killed), on the other hand, while receiving the bulk of the research money, have proven useless in curing ills. Readers will also recall that the most celebrated case allegedly establishing the value of embryonic stem cells, that of South Korean scientist Hwang Woo Suk, was proven to be a fraud.
The New York Times article on the subject reported it as follows:
Reconfirming the earlier findings by Hwang's school, Seoul National University, Mr. Lee said that Hwang had never cloned embryonic stem cells from patients. Mr. Hwang's now-discredited claim had raised hopes that doctors one day would grow genetically matching tissues from embryonic stem cells to repair damaged organs or treat diseases like Alzheimer's.
Hwang was indicted for fraud and embezzlement today in Seoul, along with five of his associates.
Given that the alleged evidence behind Hwang's findings has already been proven phony in the scientific realm, it is certainly correct to describe Hwang as a scientific fraud. The appropriate, full term, then, should be something along the lines of disgraced stem cell researcher Hwang.
Better yet, for further accuracy, he should best be described as disgraced embryonic stem cell researcher Hwang.
And how did the Times story describe him?
Disgraced cloning expert.
Um, excuse me, New York Times, but his disgrace was not over cloning, even though your story inaccurately claims, in its early paragraphs, that Hwang's research was about cloning stem cells. It was not. In fact, your story admits this, a few paragraphs down the page (in case anybody should get that far):
The scandal raised doubt about the feasibility and ethics of one of science's most cutting-edge research fields: cloning human embryos and then destroying them to extract stem cells.
So he's not a disgraced cloning expert.
He's a disgraced embryonic stem cell researcher.
Let's all try to remember that, OK?
Addendum: Alex Avery of the Center for Global Food Issues informs me that Woo Suk successfully (and verifiably) cloned dogs, creating Snuppy. So cloning was in fact his only certified success—which in fact strengthens the point I was making.
4 comments:
Well, he is a cloning expert: He and his team created the first cloned dog. I can see how you'd want to point out where his disgrace stems from, but the term is accurate (if nitpicky).
Hey, I made a punny.
I received a separate message about this and placed a notice of it in an addendum to the original post. It actually reinforces my point, as you'll see.
I guess "natural law" sometimes is just a vibe.
Here in California, we(?) authorized a major bond (billions) to further embryonic stem cell research, even though all other forms of non-human-life-destructive stem cell research (adult, umbilical cord) are so far much more promising, and the cannibalization of embryos has yielded zilch, or as we like to say here, nada.
Man can thumb his nose at that cosmic vibe, and we did, I think, for reasons I think more related to abortion than scientific progress.
Man plans, God laughs.
Now, I don't expect that embryonic stem cell research will prove to be fruitless, in fact the contrary: God has always let man have his way, to prove to him that his way, in defiance of natural law, is ugly.
I do not doubt that some day the rich developed world will harvest the bodies of the undeveloped world's undeveloped preborn.
We had our warning, and our divine guidance, now, when it mattered. Horrors await.
You thought global capitalism and exploitation were bad? That was just the first wave, man. Next we're going to eat somebody else's children.
The essential point to remember is that embryonic stem cell research has achieved exactly nothing, in the United States or elsewhere. To blame the U.S. religious right for the failures of researchers into embryonic stem cells worldwide is as sensible as blaming the religious right for the failure of alchemists to turn lead into gold. The researchers are solely responsible for the consequences of their dogged pursuit of something that doesn't work, when there is an easily available alternative that does.
Post a Comment