Adult Stem Cells Treat Incontinence
Another human trial
for adult stem cells, this time derived from muscles, after successful animal studies. Hopefully, this will lead to an effective treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Also of note, it is stated in this report that the stem cells are 'pluripotent,' that is able to become all types of tissues, which all the embryonic stem cell boosters have long insisted only ES cells can provide. If this is true, it isn't the first form of adult stem cell found to be pluripotent.
I am also reminded of the, what else can I call them, lies that I have seen told repeatedly and with a straight face to some legislators by "scientists" about how adult stem cells are supposedly merely 'unipotent,' that is, only able to become muscle if a muscle stem cell, or blood if a blood stem cell. Such patently absurd misleading statements must end or there must be consequences.
(With regard to true pluripotency of these cells, I contacted a scientist I trust about these matters. He told me: "I checked out the main author, Chancellor, and he has a previous pub. where they used the muscle-derived stem cells to make nerves for the urinary bladder in rats. So... they've shown that they can get at least 2 of the 3 "primary germ layers" from these cells--muscle (mesoderm) and nerve (ectoderm). I don't know if they can get the third category (endoderm, i.e., digestive tract, liver, etc.)
Would be nice to see his data; maybe they truly are pluripotent. OR, they may be using the term the way it used to be: pluripotent makes several different kinds of cells.)
Bestiality and the Varied Attacks on Human Exceptionalism
Laws against bestiality shouldn't be controversial. But in Washington State, some oppose making it against the law to have sex with animals. Meanwhile, promoters of the legislation are failing to make the most important argument of all: Sex with animals unacceptably subverts standards of basic human dignity and is an affront to humankind's inestimable importance and intrinsic moral worth. I expand more fully on this point in the Daily Standard
Artificial Wombs are on Their Way
It seems that much progress is being made on creating an artificial womb
. This could be a very good thing, of course, as it could permit women to save endangered pregnancies. But it could also be the vehicle carrying biotechnologists from researching on cloned human embryos in Petri dishes into gestating clones to late embryo and fetal stages. In this regard, it is worth nothing that experiments have already been conducted by which human embryos were implanted in artificial wombs and developed for six days.
The uses of gestated but unborn clones could be many and varied, and potentially more useful than merely experimenting with stem cells: Drug testing in place of animals; harvesting cloned organs for transplantation; learning how to genetically engineer the human embryo; learning how to safely conduct reproductive cloning, among others.
Don't forget, such experiments are already explicitly legalized
in New Jersey, which legalized cloning, implanting, and gestation of human clones to the moment of birth.
Adult Stem Cell Heart Disease Breakthrough
It is growing increasingly hard for those who insist that therapeutic cloning is the ticket to treat human maladies to continue with that claim with a straight face. Here is an apparent successful treatment of heart disease
using the patient's own bone marrow stem cells. Imagine, one's own body becoming a source of fantastic medicine. And no human cloning, no destroying embryos, no treating nascent human life like a harvestable crop, and no slippery slope.
New Animal Liberationist Terrorist Threats
The Edinburgh Zoo has a new enclosure to house polar bears. But the Animal Liberation Front (AFL) has promised
to attack the zoo and shut it down in the same fashion with which liberationists attacked a UK guinea pig farm and coerced its closing. That included threats of violence, repeated vandalism, threats against friends of the farmers, threats against business associates, and finally, the coup de gras
that finished the job, grave robbing.
Every time these tactics succeed, it energizes the movement like warm ocean water does a hurricane. I have repeatedly called on animal liberationists to condemn such criminality. With one or two exceptions of responding posts to this blog, the overall silence has been deafening. In private e-mails, I am accused of caricaturing the movement. Don't judge us by the whackos, they say. But when I respond asking for an explicit condemnation, all I usually get are evasions or non responses. Much more notably, when PETA explicitly refuses to condemn violence, when Steven Best, the U.S. professor who is at the forefront of the movement explicitly condones grave robbing
and other tactics, and is banned from the UK
for being a terrorist sympathizer, it is hard but to conclude that most of the people who support animal liberation are pleased that the thuggery works. Animal liberation isn't about protecting animal welfare. It is about imposing its radical ideology upon the rest of us "by any means necessary."
And don't think it is just the UK. The animal liberation movement is international. The most extreme actions are often taken in the UK first, and then they spread like a cancer here and elsewhere (but never to places like the Mideast where animals are treated far less humanely then in the West, but where the response to liberation lawlessness would be far less measured).
Jeffrey Rosen Predicts That Science, Technology, and Bioethics Will be Future Supreme Court Fodder
This extended piece
from the New York Times Magazine
is well worth the time it takes to read it. Jeffrey Rosen is not only fair (a real change of pace for the NYT), but he is right about some of the issues likely to be the source of bitter litigation in the future, ranging from the right to genetically engineer progeny, do reproductive cloning, and what life forms are patentable. But he misses a few micro and macro issues. The biggest issue he misses is the coming battle over whether there is a constitutional right to conduct scientific research, as some scientists and bioethicists claim. If so, the ability of society to regulate research will be all but destroyed. A second area of litigation, that he hints at, is the status of animals as alleged persons and, indeed, whether animals can be litigants. There are public interest law firms being created to push this very agenda, most notably by Rutgers School of Law animal liberationist professor, Gary Francione.
One of the Human Zoo “Animals” Is Not Having a Good Time
One of the people hired to be exhibited in the London Zoo posted a note on Secondhand Smoke. She is not having fun
and thinks putting people in zoos is a stupid idea. Yes, that's a polite way to put it. She can use e-mail so perhaps we could say that she isn't "just an animal," after all.
Futile Care Case out of the UK
is what the Leslie Burke verdict has wrought. Burke more or less won the right to life-sustaining care for the conscious and communicative in the UK. But the unconscious and uncommunicative were left high and dry by the decision, allowing doctors to decide whether they live or die.
The patient in this case is a devout Muslim and the family states he would want his life sustained based on deeply held religious beliefs. But doctors have decided that their
idea of what is dignified and in his best interests trump what were his own and are his family's. So, while he will receive tube-supplied food and water, he will be denied dialysis and has had a DNR imposed on his chart by court order.
The idea behind the decision is that the man is not going to get better. But this is a dangerous standard. It states that maintaining or extending life when that is what the patient wants is no longer an end purpose of medicine. A new standard is being imposed by bioethicists and courts.
This is also beginning to happen here and will occur with increasing frequency as more and more hospitals impose futile care protocols on their sickest patients.
A Good Column on Adult Stem Cells and Alternative Sources of Pluripotent Cells
Nigel Cameron is a friend of mine. He is erudite, intelligent, and has a great sense of humor. He is also right in this column
Adler/Smith: The Entire Debate
The entire debate
between myself and Professor Adler is available. I thank Prof. Adler for a good and forthright exchange. Whatever side you may take on Gonzales v. Ashcroft, there is much in this extended discussion for thought.
“Humans are Just Primates”
The London Zoo homo sapien exhibit, about which I blogged yesterday, is explicitly designed to induce our children to reject human exceptionalism. From this linked story
"Caged and barely clothed, eight men and women monkeyed around for the crowds Friday in an exhibit labeled "Humans" at the London Zoo.
"Warning: Humans in their Natural Environment" read the sign at the entrance to the exhibit, where the captives could be seen on a rock ledge in a bear enclosure, clad in bathing suits and pinned-on fig leaves. Some played with hula hoops, some waved.
Visitors stopped to point and laugh, and several children could be heard asking, "Why are there people in there?"
London Zoo spokeswoman Polly Wills says that's exactly the question the zoo wants to answer.
"Seeing people in a different environment, among other animals ... teaches members of the public that the human is just another primate," Wills said."
This is not benign. This is not funny. This is misanthropic.
Most people take human exceptionalism for granted. They can no longer afford to do so. The great philosophical question of the 21st Century is going to be whether we will knock humans off the pedestal of moral distinctiveness and instead define ourselves as just another animal in the forest. The stakes of the coming debate couldn't be more important: It is our exalted moral status that both bestow special rights upon us, while also imposing unique and solemn moral responsibilities--including the human duty not to abuse animals.
Humans Are Being Exhibited Like Animals in the London Zoo
The London Zoo
has opened a new exhibit. It is a herd of homo sapiens. The point of putting people in the zoo is allegedly to "demonstrate the basic nature of man as an animal and examine the impact that Homo sapiens have on the rest of the animal kingdom."
This is what children are now being taught: That we are just animals. This is true biologically, but that is not the point of the message being sent. And it ignores the truth that we have stepped beyond nature to become conscious, moral beings, the only ones in the known universe. The increasing attempts to knock us off the pedestal of "exceptionalism," are terribly misguided. If we perceive ourselves as mere animals, that is indeed how we will act.
London Times Editorial Against Grave Robbing Animal Liberationist Fanatics
There is great harm being done to human welfare by the the animal rights extremists, as the London Times
Betrayal of the Voters! Proposition 71 Bait and Switch
It will pay for itself, supporters of Proposition 71 told voters. State residents will pay less for health care. Day after day it was one pie-in-the-sky promise after another. But now, the California Council on Science and Technology, has recommended
that the state receive zero dollars
in royalties from the billions it will borrow
to fund this corporate welfare boondoggle. It might chill private investments, don't you know. Not coincidentally, the Council is a state-funded body made up of private university and private sector firms--the very interests that will be lining up at the pork barrel once Proposition 71 grant money begins to flow!
What is chilling private investments is the low likelihood of success of turning cloned human embryos into efficacious medical treatments any time soon. What is chilling private investments is that embryonic stem cells cause tumors and can't be used in humans. What is chilling private investments is the roaring success of adult stem cell research, which is already treating 65 human maladies. Indeed, the lack of private investments is why Big Biotech and their allies at "patents R us" university research centers sold this swamp land of a law to California voters with a $25 million war chest in the first place.
The arrogance of it all! The question is whether the people will put up with this too as Proposition 71 backers keep yelling, CURES! CURES! CURES!
The Adler/Smith Debate on Assisted Suicide Continues
Should the United States Supreme Court uphold the right of the federal government to prohibit the use of federally controlled substances in assisted suicide, even where it is legal, such as in Oregon? Or, once a state legalizes assisted suicide, in the name of federalism, must the federal government acquiesce to the state law? We debate: You decide
Animal Liberationists Grave Robbers Drive Farmers Out of Business
This is a terrible story
: A farm family in the UK has been targeted for death threats, vandalism, intimidation, and similar attacks against residents of their town for the last several years by animal liberationists. Their great sin? They raised guinea pigs for use in medical research. Now, the liberationists have finally driven them out of business by robbing the grave
of a beloved family member. The farmers went out of business in the hope that the liberationists will give the body back.
This shameful episode deserves the strongest condemnation. If it can happen there, it can happen here. And no one who makes proper and humane use of animals is safe.
My Debate With Jonathan Adler About Pending Supreme Court Case Involving Oregon’s Assisted Suicide Law
A few months ago, the National Review's
Jonathan Adler and I debated the upcoming Supreme Court case, Gonzales v. Oregon
. The case will determine whether the federal government must permit federally controlled substances to be used in assisted suicide in Oregon, or whether it can pursue its own federal public policy on the issue with regard to the regulation of narcotics under the Controlled Substances Act. Adler believes that Oregon should win because federalism leaves the regulation of medical practice to the states. I counter that both the states and feds can have distinct public policies about the matter and that the states do not have the right to impose their views on the regulation of federal law.
It is important to note that this exchange took place before the Supreme Court decided Gonzales v. Raich
, which permitted the feds open latitude to enforce federal anti-marijuana laws even in states that permit medical marijuana, and even if the marijuana was grown at home. If anything, the Raich
decision strengthens my position. ( My take
as it might impact Gonzales v. Oregon
is reprinted here.)
The debate will be published one exchange at a time all this week at this link
Check Out the International Task Force on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide
The International Task Force on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide is a splendid organization dedicated to educating the public about the dangers of euthanasia and assisted suicide. I am honored to be affiliated with the Task Force as an attorney and consultant. Indeed, it was Rita Marker's book Deadly Compassion
that convinced to enter the work in which I am now engaged. (Rita is the head of the Task Force.)
I mention this because periodically, the Task Force publishes the "Update," a newsletter filled with the latest news on assisted suicide, euthanasia, futile care theory, food and fluids cases, and the like. The Update is an invaluable resource for anyone interested in these important issues. Here is the link
to the just released current issue. And here is the link
to the Task Force's WEB site. It's well worth the mouse click.
Skin Cells May Become Stem Cells Says Washington Post
is another of many recent research advances demonstrating the astonishing potential of adult stem cells. This story describes how skin cells have been reverted to embryonic-like stem cells. The potential consequence is that cloned embryos might not be needed to obtain the treatment benefits that the proponents of therapeutic cloning have claimed that procedure could provide. (The process would involve fusing an embryonic stem cell, like those already approved for federal funding by Pres. Bush, with the patient's own skin cell.)
Good for the Washington Post
for printing it, and for Rick Weiss, the Post
science reporter for reporting it. Weiss is pro therapeutic cloning and has implied that opponents of these technologies are Taliban. But he is also a good journalist. For example, when President Ronald Reagan died, some biotech boosters used the event to push embryonic stem cell research and therapeutic cloning as a way of helping cure people with Alzheimer's. They still do. But Weiss was the only mainstream reporter and the Post
the only major outlet of which I am aware to report
that stem cells are very unlikely
to be a viable treatment for Alzheimer's. When asked why biotechnologists were permitting Alzheimer's victims and their families to believe an untruth that ES cells offered them hope, Weiss quoted one as stating cynically that "people need a fairy tale." So much for compassion.
Most establishment media outlets continue to underreport adult stem cell successes. And they usually continue to list Alzheimer's as one of the diseases that may be cured by cloning or ES cell research. But these two Post
stories are pleasant exceptions.