Coalition for Cures Not Cloning Defends Against Attack on Embryonic Stem Cell Research Ban

Embryonic Stem Cells. (A) shows hESCs. (B) shows neurons derived from hESCs. (Follow the Money – The Politics of Embryonic Stem Cell Research. Russo E, PLoS Biology Vol. 3/7/2005)

Embryonic Stem Cells. (A) shows hESCs. (B) shows neurons derived from hESCs. (Follow the Money – The Politics of Embryonic Stem Cell Research. Russo E, PLoS Biology Vol. 3/7/2005)

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. – The Coalition for Cures Not Cloning announces its formation, coalition membership, and details early efforts to oppose group planning to place an initiated measure on the South Dakota ballot in 2010 that would reverse the strongest ban in the nation on cloning and embryonic stem cell research.

WHAT: Coalition For Cures Not Cloning announces formation of coalition and announcement detailing opposition to measure allowing cloning

WHO
:   Chris Hupke, President, South Dakota Family Policy Council Action

Other Special Guests and Organizations

WHEN
:   Thursday, November 12, 2009

WHERE:
Sioux Falls Event (10:00 AM CST)

The Old Courthouse Museum
2nd Floor Conference Room
200 W 6th St
Sioux Falls, SD

Rapid City Press Conference (3:00 PM MST)

Holiday Inn Rushmore Plaza
505 N 5th Street
Rapid City, SD

Email/Call to RSVP and for AV coordination

Joel Arends
First Strike Strategies.com
605.254.2624

10 Responses to “Coalition for Cures Not Cloning Defends Against Attack on Embryonic Stem Cell Research Ban”

  1. Why banning embryonic stem cell research when there are now protocoles that allow production of hESC from the single cell of an embryo without harming it (Chung et al, cell stem cell, 2008), or even from the single cell of a 4 cell stage already dead embryo (Kei et al, Swiss Med Wkly, 2008)?
    Would it be more useful to implement the law so that these new protocoles could be the only one to be used for hESC derivation? In this way you could get new avenue for potential cures, and no ethical harm done…

  2. That's news to me. The only so-called method of extracting cells from human embryos without harming them actually turned out to be a hoax–a claim that it could be done without actually having done it.

    Besides, even if it could be supposedly done, we have no idea what damage losing a significant amount of genetic material at this stage could do to the human embryo once it begins to more fully develop.

    There is also the issue of whether such totipotent cells may actually in essence comprise a new and separate human being–again essentially meaning the destruction of a human life.

    Then there is also the problem of tumor generation in the recipient.

    Then there is also the problem of tissue rejection in the recipient.

    Meanwhile, adult stem cell therapy has NONE of these issues.

    Also, meanwhile, adult stem cell therapy has ALREADY resulted in over 70 successful therapies.

    I'm sorry, but the only reason to pursue this dark and illogical course of “research” is (a) hunger for research dollars and (b) too much comfort with the destruction of human life.

  3. Well actually production of hESC from the single cell of an embryo is not a hoax at all, since it has been confirmed by several independant teams worldwide, and results published in different peer reviewed papers (just type “hESC without embryo destruction” on google, or pubmed)…In addition, taking a single cell from an embryo has been routinely done in ART clinics for the past decade (for pre-implantation genetic diagnosis), and babies born after such operation are not less healthy than those born after in vitro fertilization without single cell removal (Basille et al., 2009).
    Oh, and by the way, when you take out one cell from an embryo, it does not result in genetic material loss, since each and every cell of an organism contain all the genetic information required to build a new organism!!! You should review your knowledge on this point…

    As you certainly know, hESC are not meant to be used directly for regenerative medicine, however hESC research has already provided us with hiPS, which can be patient matched, so with no rejection risk. And more studies with hESC and hiPS will probably help develop protocoles that limit tumor risks.

    Since, there is no need to destroy embryos anymore now, or use dead ones, while still carrying out hESC research, why would you still oppose it?

  4. Frankly, I don't believe you. And here's why.

    To make the claim that it has been demonstrated that embryonic stem cells can successfully be harvested from a human embryo without destroying that human embryo–and somehow the “mainstream” media has just managed to overlook telling the world about it with great fanfare and confetti–is akin to making the claim that we've been running cars efficiently on water for a decade…the media just somehow overlooked that.

    Additionally, the track record of ESC research proponents is so tainted by hype and obfuscation that there is practically no credibility left. That track record includes not only the all-hype-and-no-results promotion of ESC research for years (the kind that's made up of 10% science, 45% hope and 45% pure BS), but the very hoax I mentioned which came out around 2 years ago–the claim that it can be done…without actually having done it, we later find out.

    And I'll say it again: totipotent cells have the potential to become a separate human being, and if that is the case, then those cells taken from one human embryo–which may cause damage we may not know about until the human is fully developed–have the potential to become a separate human being…and if you destroy those in the process of research, you have again destroyed a human life.

    And even if all these problems could be surmounted, there are still the problems of tissue rejection and tumor generation–practical considerations not faced by adult stem cell therapy which has already produced dozens of successful therapies.

    With all these problems, why do you so zealously pursue this unfruitful line of research? Money? You're making a living off the pursuit of this destruction of innocent human life, aren't you?

  5. The claim about hESC production without harming embryos is actually supported by peer reviewed papers, and was reproduced by different teams, as I mentionned. So I don't ask you to believe me, it is already happening in the lab, albeit technically demanding. Read the papers if you want to convince yourself. By the way the protocols were published in 2008, not 2 years ago…

    In the case of single cell removal to produce an hESC line, since it is done in the same conditions as for pre-implantation genetic diagnosis, then you should also oppose this technology that has nevertheless already allowed couples with genetic disease to give birth to healthy and normal babies…
    Anyway, the other protocole available allow hESC production from dead embryos…so no ethical restrictions there to oppose hESCR.

    Tissue rejection has already been given an answer by hESCR thanks to the development of hiPS. Issues surrounding tumor risks are currently being addressed.

    Yes, good question: why so many scientist worldwide are keeping working on hESC? Why are huge pharma companies putting so much money in it (Pfizer, Sanofi…) as well as smaller start-up? Gvt wasting money, I would understand, but big good capitalist companies why?

    Well simply because they all believe that considering the big achievements done in only 10 years of hESCR is it worth investing in it and once cures will be available everybody will want to benefit from it.

    Oh, and finally, you should be cautious in the future when you will use new commercial drugs: nowaday many of them are screened on human tissues generated from hESC…So beware not to cure yourself with something whose inocuity and usefulness was found thanks to hESC.

  6. I took a look at some of that information published in 2008 and it appears to be based on the same sham reports from 2007; a lot of talk with, as usual, still nothing actually done.

    Also, unless the “mainstream” media is asleep at the wheel here, too, I've heard nothing of problems with tissue rejection (other than the usual immunosuppressant therapy) being solved, and you admit that the tumor problem is still in the same hypothetical realm as the rest of this fruitless quest.

    The capitalist companies waste money on this for the same reasons the government wants to waste money on it: lack of respect for human life, and hunger for government grants and stock boosts. (http://legacy.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/2006…)

    And you can rest assured I will be watchful for products and services devised from the destruction of innocent human life. While that's obviously a cheap commodity for some people, the rest of us still recognize the sanctity of human life.

  7. Dear bob,

    I completely respect your opinion, when you say that hESCR should be ban when it lead to embryo destruction, because based on religious beliefs you think an embryo is a living thing that should not be destroyed.

    However, scientists, who are not nazi monsters and might even have some morals have tried their best to adress the ethical issue of embryo destruction, given the huge interest of hESC. Now they have come with different protocoles, that either do not harm the embryo (and the 2008 report in Cell Stem Cell “hESC generated without embryo destruction” actually provide new evidences for it), or even use dead embryos (also a 2008 report with new facts).
    What can you have against the use of dead embryos to save lives? Why aren't you throwing all your weight behind the use of these new protocoles instead of just blindingly condemning hESCR? This is something I really can not understand.

  8. Many times over the course of the years I have addressed this topic I have explained the sanctity of human life, the dangers of turning human life into a commodity, the Nazi-like ghoulishness of eagerly using human life without its consent for medical experimentation, and the utter hypocrisy of pursuing this dangerous and unproductive line of research while another already exists that is ALREADY producing results.

    The fact that you claim that you just don't get any of that speaks very, very ill of your soul. I hope that changes before it's eternally too late for you.

  9. Dear bob,

    I completely respect your opinion, when you say that hESCR should be ban when it lead to embryo destruction, because based on religious beliefs you think an embryo is a living thing that should not be destroyed.

    However, scientists, who are not nazi monsters and might even have some morals have tried their best to adress the ethical issue of embryo destruction, given the huge interest of hESC. Now they have come with different protocoles, that either do not harm the embryo (and the 2008 report in Cell Stem Cell “hESC generated without embryo destruction” actually provide new evidences for it), or even use dead embryos (also a 2008 report with new facts).
    What can you have against the use of dead embryos to save lives? Why aren't you throwing all your weight behind the use of these new protocoles instead of just blindingly condemning hESCR? This is something I really can not understand.

  10. Many times over the course of the years I have addressed this topic I have explained the sanctity of human life, the dangers of turning human life into a commodity, the Nazi-like ghoulishness of eagerly using human life without its consent for medical experimentation, and the utter hypocrisy of pursuing this dangerous and unproductive line of research while another already exists that is ALREADY producing results.

    The fact that you claim that you just don't get any of that speaks very, very ill of your soul. I hope that changes before it's eternally too late for you.