A young man named Anthony Succar has written an excellent piece for The Australian opposing embryonic stem cell research and calling for resources to be given instead to adult stem cell research which, to date, has shown much more promising results. He writes:
ONE of the most frustrating experiences of life is the feeling of being used, exploited for the benefit of others while suffering loss or harm. It is a feeling of being violated and, while leaving self-esteem shattered, it kindles a deep sense of outrage.
This is how I feel every time I hear one of our politicians claiming that people who suffer from crippling diseases support embryonic stem cell research and therapeutic cloning. When I was 14 I was involved in a motor vehicle accident that left me a C4-5 quadriplegic, paralysed from the neck down. With all the hardships I undergo everyday as a result of my disability it is even more unbearable being used as a marketing tool for the agenda of others.
Despite the rhetoric surrounding embryonic stem cell research, adult stem cell research has great potential to help people, with a record of documented results that excites great hope. Research is achieving substantial results using stem cells acquired from adults and umbilical-cord blood. Sadly, this inspiring research, which has filled countless people with hope, is being attacked by those brandishing alternative agendas, with the rise of embryonic stem cell research usurping the necessary resources for adult stem cell research to continue.
It is all the more heartbreaking knowing the frailest and most vulnerable in our society are being used by politicians and pharmaceutical companies to sell their lies. In addition to holding back authentic medical research, choosing an avenue with no foreseeable benefits over documented evidence of success, politicians have also opened the door for anyone to legally assault and destroy human life.
Considering that opponents of embryonic stem cell research are often condemned as having no compassion on those who the treatment will help, it is fascinating to read such an impassioned plea from one of those who would stand to benefit from the research, if it were successful. Some of the responses to this piece, however, are truly astounding:
There is only one key thing that explains your views on this subject. That is that you are catholic. You believe irrationally in an all powerful sky-god and the fact that people have a magical quality called a soul. This is because your holy-men told you that this is how things are.
The problem for you is that those who engage in medical research don’t believe in these things. But they are still engaging in their research to do good. Not so they can kill “babies”. They do good not because of the fear of going to an imaginary place called hell, but simply because they are good people.
Understand that most people do not share your irrational view of the world and suddenly people’s motives become a lot clearer.
A few undifferentiated cells is not a baby.
The Australian’s attempts to set itself up as the Catholic newspaper have surely reached rock bottom with the publication of this crap. You might enjoy being a quadriplegic Anthony, but millions of others don’t enjoy being disabled and desperately want the chance to be normal that stem cell research brings. Shame on The Australian for printing this and the moronic editorials defending Cardinal Pell.
The Australian has always taken a biased editorial view on stem cell research, utterly abandoning any pretence of balanced journalism.
How ridiculous to disparage medical researchers for holding out hope to people. No, not ridiculous: disgusting. Yes, there is hope in therapeutic cloning using pluripotent stem cells.
And it is ingenuine to claim that there’s sufficient evidence to abandon embryonic stem cells in favour of adult stem cells. Tell me, is an IT support analyst a valid source for expert opinion on the potential for stem cell therapies? It’s time that a scientifically literate journalist provided some unbiased reporting of the evidence base for each of these approaches. That might debunk some of the myths perpetuated by the theologically-motivated.
You ask me what I think… I think that this newspaper needs to lift its game, stop pushing a particular regilious line, and start representing all sides of this important debate. For now, The Australian does not deserve its name as the national broadsheet.
It's just incredible...
2 comments:
Hey Lara
Thanks for the comment on my blog. Yes, incredible responses aren't they. It is good to see people like the blog author getting a really good go at expressing his opinion in the Oz.
I'm not sure I understand what that first author is accusing people of.
Ok, I see that he doesn't like being used as a reason for research that he doesn't like. Certainly advocates shouldn't lump together all people with spinal problems and assume they support research by any means. Yet, he has no right to be indignant unless someone has named him personally, simply because many (if not most) people with spinal injuries do support embryonic stem cell research.
Here's what I don't understand - what does he think "agenda" means? He claims that everyone who supports embryonic stem cell research has alternative agendas. Isn't their agenda to find a cure for spinal injuries? Don't researchers have the same agenda whether they concentrate on embryonic or umbilical stem cells? Or is he suggesting that it's only possible that scientific research on umbilical stem cells has this good motive? He seems to be suggesting that the real motive behind embryonic stem cells is not to save adult lives (a mere byproduct) their real motive is to kill as many babies as possible and drive a wedge between nominally Catholic politicians and George Cardinal Pell.
Post a Comment