The American Spectator

Reader Mail

Dreamland

10.20.04 @ 12:01AM

(Page 5 of 5)

Tell me, is Timothy Carney cold-hearted, or is it that he simply lacks any understanding of embryonic stem cell research? In "Go Back to Ballet," (July 28, 2004) aside from his arrogant and pompous tone, Carney does not seem to understand what embryonic stem cell research is. He begins the discussion on embryonic stem cell research saying that ESC research holds very little assurance for treatment of Alzheimer's disease. On the contrary, scientists believe very strongly that embryonic stem cells will eventually hold the cure to diseases like Alzheimer's. Based on testing scientists have done on mouse cells, researchers have determined that embryonic stem cells may have the ability to explain how Alzheimer's disease develops. However, the only way to know if embryonic stem cells can save lives is to lift all restrictions and limitations placed upon ESC research and allow scientists to fully explore and investigate the world of embryonic stem cells. What I would like to know is how can scientists offer full assurance that embryonic stem cell treatment can work when they receive next to no federal funding? How can scientists offer full assurance that embryonic stem cell treatment can work when the only ESC cells they are allowed to use are those contaminated with mouse cells?

Carney further displays his ignorance when he describes the role that embryonic stem cells hope to play. He describes their role as the "replacement of corrupted cells in different parts of the body." However, this description also reveals a misconception: The truly amazing quality that embryonic stem cells possess, as opposed to adult stem cells is their ability to transform themselves into different tissues of the body. This could mean an end to debilitating and fatal diseases such as cancer, paralysis, muscular dystrophy, diabetes, and yes, Alzheimer's disease.

Carney does not stop there. In the article, Ron Reagan discusses why critics oppose embryonic stem cell research. Carney's response to Reagan demonstrates that he seems to overlook the fact that fertility clinics discard millions of unused, human embryos everyday. Which is worse, using human embryos in hope of finding cures to many fatal diseases or simply chucking them in the can?

Please do not misconstrue the purpose of this response. It is not my intention to bash Carney. However, I do believe that despite one's political beliefs, there is never a justifiable reason for being belligerent and mean. The world of embryonic stem cell research holds the potential to save many innocent lives and unfortunate deaths. And before the media's propaganda influences many American minds, it would probably be wise to get the facts straight. That's the least that you can do.
-- Danny Turken
Boston, Massachusetts, October 19, 2004

CARLIN SPRINGS
Re: Nick J.'s letter ("The Daily Showboat") in Reader Mail's Loser Lineup:

I take issue with Nick J. grouping George Carlin with Bill Maher, and to a lesser extent, Jon Stewart. Anyone who has followed Carlin's career will agree that he does not have an agenda, either overt or hidden, unless it is to point out some of our human frailties with humor.

Maher, on the other hand, so blatantly pursued his liberal bias on his early program on the broadcast media (which show's name I have thankfully forgotten) that his advertisers boycotted him and he was dropped. He surfaced again on cable TV with the same agenda, and I don't know if he's still there or not, nor do I much care.

As for Stewart, he's smart, clever, and young, and hasn't yet learned his lesson, so there's still hope for him. But it's very true, as Nick J. points out, that The Daily Show's success has more to do with the writers and supporting cast than Stewart's comedic skills. After the election is over, I wonder if The Daily Show will survive.
-- Bob Johnson
Bedford, Texas

WINNERS
Re: Rich Renken's and A.A. Reynolds' letters (under "Losing Big") in Reader Mail's Loser Lineup:

Re Rich Renken's letter: if Hillary is "tired of the grind" by the year 2116, I, for one, won't blame her.
-- Bob Fitzgibbon
Rome

If I'm ever asked to sum up what's wrong with liberalism today I would hand them a copy of A. A. Reynolds' letter -- which I'm thinking of framing.
-- John Nelson
Hebron, Connecticut

Letter to the Editor

topics:
Business, Earmarks, Religion, Environment, Hollywood, Law, Military, Iraq, Iran, Russia, Israel, Conservatism, Immigration, Oil