loses some credibility with this op-ed. Are we really supposed to take seriously the idea that the only people with “agendas” (or beliefs) on this issue are on the other side from her? I neither believe nor disbelieve William Cheshire’s conclusions, but I don’t see how his position on stem cells matters any more than Whelan’s does. (See here for my critique of her allegedly scientific, agenda-free take on this topic.) See here, here, and here for responses.