|
|
|
|
ACSA's Chief Scientist commented: "I, for one, differ only slightly from President Bush's perspective, even though we both agree overall that stem cell research and growth of replacement parts is improper. Each of us has a different reason, with the same outcome. I am not moved by false claims. People vainly ask me, suffering the ailment along with a loved one afflicted by it: "how could you cause people to suffer, by not supporting Stem Cell Research?" The same thing could be said: "How could you cause people to suffer, by not supporting Euthanasia?" Or, "How could you cause people to suffer, by not supporting the use of magical incantations?" Or: "how could you cause people to suffer by not putting all mongrel races and sub-humans to death?" The nature of that argument fails to consider our ability and responsibility to choose the correct course of action without being wildly admonished by people with loved ones suffering from a horrific ailment, in their moment of great pain, to leap at a choice that may be frivolous or even dangerous to the very existence of Humanity. I'm reminded of the "Jones Town Mass Suicide" whenever I share the pain of someone losing someone to a disease who makes me responsible of it because I believe Stem Cell Research and other forms of Cloning "Lethal at Any Speed." It is not heartless, it's responsible to resist conceding to others' pain so as to use the rational thought and research process to try and determine the CORRECT solution to the problem of disease and loss. Even if it may not make them believe you care about how great their loved one is suffering, nor how great their own pain over it. Resisting the urge to jump off the precipice to one's death by conceding to their pain, is the responsible action. Hopeful leaping with them at something that might be too dangerous to do any good and capable of doing a lot of bad, like cloning or stem cell research, thinking that by doing so lives will be saved BECAUSE you feel their pain and become emotionally involved, is an unfortunate aspect of the very nature of free will and use of our intelligence. While we may want to make the right choice, if we leap off the precipice to our demise, we are not. And, while I also personally do not believe the Bible should dictate that choice without further human contemplation, since sometimes people interpret it in a unilateral manner, forgetting it was recorded by us human beings, and itself may bear the scars of human inadequacy... On the issue of whether or not we should engage in Stem Cell research, the guidance obtained from the Bible does appear to be very sound since it in a different way identifies the true problem: manipulation of the Human Genome. Such manipulation could lead to Human Extinction. The Bible has always been extraordinary in it's ability to define what might to us scientists be a highly complicated issue, in relatively simple and basic terms. We are simply not advanced enough yet in science or medicine to be able to insure we do not do irreparable harm to the human species. I do not blame President Bush or anyone else for believing that it is against God's Law to manipulate ovum cells, stem cells or any other cells of the human body, genetically. We have to cross a bridge like that when we are ready, in my opinion, and I think we are naturally irresponsible, as a species, we are too driven by greed and the belief that a "magic bullet, no matter what the corresponding consequences may be, is better than a disease." DES was a magic bullet, yet even after being approved by the US Government, DES caused children to be born with appalling birth defects. Similarly, Stem Cell research, while itself useful in understanding the Human Genome, is premature when it comes to the POTENTIAL FOR DEADLY MODIFICATION of the Human Genome, in my opinion. Whether in replacement, splicing or alteration form, the same old danger, the 1930's "Office of Human Genetics" Master Race theory seems to apply: what is so wrong with ourselves that some powerful authority should have say over your and my genetic structure? While you don't see it now, Master Race Genetic Manipulation is the ultimate outcome of stem cell research, carried to it's natural ends. We've all seen the movies, read the novels and heard of the dangers that might go along with eliminating that rare gene for genius or some unusual ability that natural selection brings about, that Tiger Woods, Albert Einstein, Raquel Welch, or Marie Curie that makes so great a contribution to their chosen profession. Or the one mind that might have devised a solution to the problems of a plague that threatens our existence. Think of it as a scientific form of holocaust, where government authority and scientists try to determine the right genetic characteristics to build into each of us to make us better, but not "ourselves". "We" end up on the genetic trash heap of life, while "they" replace us with their idea of what's better than "us". Forgetting the likelihood that they might extinguish humanity itself, clearly stem cell research is about replacing you and me with "others, people of their own fantastic creation", leaving us on the cutting room floor. Trying to cultivate this kind of "replacement humanity" not only creates a battle between humanity and nature, and that is a battle we are destined to lose, if you've ever lived through a Class 4 or 5 Hurricane, it also creates a battle between humanity and science, where the science is trying to make the humanity "better" and in doing so, replaces it in entirety with synthetically created humans who have no genetic and no biological ancestors. Had you realized that the steps into cloning stem cell based replacement tissue, eventually leads to replacement of nearly the entire person, and could lead to technologically misguided steps to create Artificial Humanity who can become slaves to societal responsibilities, leaving what's left of humanity to become weak and eventually die out? As a scientist, I've come to a rational understanding of the natural Universe. Nonetheless: I've seen general wisdom stemming from Biblical passages and interpretation, which have proven out in real life consequences, which have to me, as to Einstein, as to most people, suggested that the Universe was created by an unseen, infinitely intelligent, infinitely powerful force. I feel that we should not disrespect the possibility that whatever it was that did, whether each of us personally elects to call him or her 'God' if you wish, did so with wisdom and purpose beyond our limited comprehension. Perhaps such a 'God' may have imprinted on the Human genome the wisdom to properly interpret texts of scripture carried down from generation to generation in a way that guideposts us to make the right decision while enabling us to exercise free will. But, free will, as such, is not itself a warrant that any path of behavior is acceptable - it is not a promise, it's simply a privilege which must be tempered by our own beliefs, whether scientific or religious. Even if we don't understand the scientific consequences or even the basics of the issues facing us. Bottom Line: I fear the outcome of any synthetic alteration of our genome, our DNA structure. Forget the movies, Minority Report, Clone, etc. I believe that "synthetic selection" in the DNA sense, could whether intentioned or not, be an arrogant belief of our own infallibility. Synthetic selection of our own genome might very will interfere with the natural selection process process that human mating provides, it may have scientific consequences well beyond the limits of our vision, which have definitive limits whether we are willing to accept that or not. I do not believe President Bush is a scientist, but I do believe he is an honest man who is, like any honest man, often targeted by dishonest men, and I would include a number of his opponents who could be termed "dishonest men", including John Kerry in that assessment. I knew John decades ago and he wasn't honest then, either. He was what I used to call 'an establishment stooge'. I consider Kerry's team could very easily be summed up in the following manner: "Mr. Potato Head" (John Kerry), "3's Company" (John Edwards, who resembles the late John Ritter), "Spawn" (Michael Moore, who resembles John Leguzaimo's satan-esque clown in the movie by the same name, a clown who appears to be a minion of Satan) and "Garfield the Cat" (Howard Dean, badboy who possesses the quick wit to tell the convincing lies he's been concocting these days for the TV cameras.) They have lambasted the president for bringing us into war on so-called 'false pretenses'. That is simply not the case. In fact the President and Congress brought us into war to bring down a deadly and deceptive dictator who was intent upon fooling the UN into lifting sanctions upon him, so he could buy into Pakistan's AQ Kahn network, and buy nuclear weapons to send in the hands of Terrorists to get his revenge on Washington and London for beating him in Gulf War I. They also brought us into war to bring down a deadly and deceptive threesome, Saddam and his sons, who routinely murdered 3-5000 of their own citizens at a time, mostly incarcerated for reasons ranging from stealing a loaf of bread to voicing a scowl over Saddam's public policies, just to make enough room in a prison to house another 3-5000 more. They also brought us into war to keep Saddam from hosting a deadly terrorist training facility in North Eastern Iraq which had been the jumping off place for the 9/11 Jet Hijackers. In it Al Qaeda was developing deadly Ricin and Anthrax toxins to deliver to America in mail and parcels, and to deliver death blows to international resorts, schools, houses of government and individual civilian populations, all with Saddam's blessing. They brought us into war to keep Saddam from murdering the Kurds, from starting another war with Iran, and to keep him from firing his missiles at Israel and other countries in the Middle East. Those missiles he had developed while he was being inspected by the UN who failed to notice any of the above, have been found in junkyards (sold for money by terrorists fleeing the oncoming American army in Iraq) throughout Europe. They also brought us into war to give the Iraqi people a say in their own government, a chance to have democracy and self rule, a demonstration to counteract too many dictatorships implementing terrorism in Pakistan, Lebanon, Syria and the Palestinian Territories, terrorism that was spreading to our shores and the shores of 58 other countries around the world. When you look at the record, Saddam killing 50,000 Kurds with Blue Nerve Gas, killing millions of his own people and Iranians, invading Kuwait, and simply waiting to get his hands on AQ Khan's nuclear bombs or Mrs. Germ's RICIN and ANTHRAX, you realize very quickly that the President could not have made a better decision. That the administration before him should have acted long before, but it did not, suggests that Kerry will do the same thing, leading to the ultimate nuclear holocaust President Bush hoped to prevent. No Fly Zones and Weapons Inspectors with inadequate reach to halt the progression of Al Qaeda terrorists through Iraq's Terror Training Center in it's North east. Terrorists who want Saddam to buy AQ Khan nuclear weapons and through that camp in North East Iraq, train and then carry those nukes to Moscow, NYC, London or Paris to blow up and then nuclear blackmail the world. What Bill Clinton did about it all is not "action" in the conventional sense. It was quite clear that with the help of misguided German, Belgium, French and Russian business interests, Saddam was almost at the point of getting the UN sanctions lifted long enough to carry out nuclear war on the world he so much wanted to vent his rage at for being denied his acquisition of Kuwait and other nearby Gulf States, and overrunning of Iran, by Gulf War I. The man is an insane butcher, now being mischaracterized by Democratic Party hopefuls as "a lover of American films like 'Old Man River" - and "oh, he was just trying to fool us, he never had any WMDs". In a world where a deadly devil of a butcher like Saddam can buy all the nukes he wants from an AQ Khan ready to sell him Pakistani ones, you don't need a WMD development program, just: six terrorists, a power boat, $5000, and plenty of oil. Then you can trade that oil for nuclear weapons, put them on the boat, give the terrorists $5000 to buy enough gasoline to power that boat from the Gulf to the Hudson bay. Then you can later claim it was terrorists, not Saddam, who blew up an American City, to earn the passionate respect of all your fellow Arabs for your defiant position. That is the evil the premeditated mass murder mentality that exists in some parts of the middle east, that was embodied by Saddam Hussein. To even attempt to paint him otherwise, is the same thing as "Springtime with Hitler in Germany", the play within the film "The Producers" - it's a comedic flop that is almost so funny it makes a fortune for it's hopeful failure aspirant producers, thereby sending them into bankruptcy and prison. Perhaps John Kerry will face the same end. For these reasons and others, President Bush brought us into war, knowing full well that within a year, Saddam would have had the sanctions lifted. Then he would have been off and running at a break neck pace so as to become a nuclear power. His first acts would have been to blow up Washington, NY, Paris, London and Moscow just to set the stage for the beginnings of his tyrannical rise. Then he would have started annexing surrounding nations. Then he would have started mass executions of infidels in a re-issue of the Nazi Death Camps, only this time those camps would have been inhabited by ANYONE NOT ISLAM, AND MANY MUSLIMS WHO MIGHT HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DISAGREED WITH SADDAM. Now, that no longer can nor will happen. Perhaps John Kerry is sad that the global conflict that would have happened, that would have sold all that Exxon and Chevron oil, is now not going to happen, that now, not that many stealth fighters or bombers will have to be built. A blow for peace by eliminating another Adolph Hitler, but that is something the American Democratic Party has dirtied itself to try and attack America's National Security and that of the globe, so as to try and seize power in America. Those lies on the tongues of Kerry, Edwards and Dean will haunt them every day of their subsequent lives. They are using dirty pool to skew the election process, with the blessing of the big 3 oil companies and their minions, waiting for Mr. Potatohead, Jack Tripper, Clowny and Garfield to get them those Iraqi Oil Reserves for their own benefit. Kind of sounds like what Saddam Hussein was up to, doesn't it?. Such political dishonesty has no place in America, yet it is full bloom in the Democratic Party today. Yet Jay and David Rockefeller have so much influence over CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN and even this morning's FOX TV broadcast, they can INSERT the proper language of lies directly into every single newscaster's mouth in the bunch, making half truths and false claims into an indictment of a President who has in my estimation demonstrated more bravery and more honesty and more intelligence than I'd seen for a very long time in Political America. As to the misconceptions about Stem Cell research: it is decades away from any period during which American Scientists could responsibly argue for modification of the human genome and even then, they should lose the argument. Our very rush to touch on GMH (Genetically Modified Humanity) is itself a sign of our immaturity and irresponsibility: aside from probably not working, it could be our very end. In some ways, Stem Cell Research is analogous to Genetically Modifying Plants, only far, far riskier - we possess neither the talent nor the technology to accurately predict the consequences of modification to stem cells introduced into the Human mitochondrial DNA or nuclear DNA structure. Computer models that have tested the random effects of minor defects that inevitably will arise in Stem Cell genetic restructuring in a genome as complex as the human organizational DNA complex, along with non-uniformity that shows up over 75% of the time, as in any other form of Cloning, suggests that the long term effects of introducing Stem Cells as a means for tissue repair or replacement will lead to a potential introduction of inherited traits caused by random sequences that effect the human reproductive cycle. We'd potentially produce monsters with unbelievable birth defects in only a few generations. These traits could lead in any unpredictable direction, such as causing the introduction of a derivative species of human who is incapable of recognizing the concept of numbers or the difference between wrong and right. Or it could lead to any number of other malformations in the human species, including disruption of the endocrinal, vascular or cranial sacral system in a way that leads to shortened lifespan, or early brain death. Short terms gains are likely going to be compounded by long term damage to the process of "natural selection" which presently governs human evolution. The "choice factor" that has biologically governed mating, the rights of the male and female to develop a bond, may be impacted so severely, that parents will have no idea that their mating could produce eventual generations of "Alpha Nulls" - soulless, vegetative, animal-like humans with little ability to learn, more like lower animals, having lost their entire ability to develop intelligence. Worse, is the possibility that the mathematical extremes of synthetically altering the human genome, will produce an end to the Human Race at some future generation altogether, perhaps it will altogether eliminate the function of the reproductive organs, or cause blindness, or cause children born without all their bones or pieces intact. We simply do not possess the ability nor the capability to develop predictive instruments that can process random pairings between humans or their offspring bearing the consequences of our ham handed genetic alterations to our own genomic DNA lines. As a result, we could be as easily bringing about an end to the Human Species. I was once told by a genetic scientist that "gene splicing", the method for modifying a nuclear cell, such as a stem cell, is an "enormously inexact science - we do not know what 3/4 of the genes are for, and it will be several hundred years before we figure them all out." One can not but wonder why anyone would then rush forward and use the suffering or degenerative disease of another, such as Michael Fox, to promote a process that could lead to the downfall of the human race in such a dangerous manner. If anything, our hopefulness of a cure for Michael, a beloved actor in every sense in America, who we all feel for, much as we feel for Christopher Reeves, whose spine is in need of unavailable repair, or any other member of the celebrity or public community, should guide us in a different manner: we are playing with fire if we think we are smart enough to modify our very nature. Introduction of hastily tested and designed genetically modified stem cells to replace damaged tissue suggests that we can do with the Human Body, that which Auto Body Repair Shops do with the damaged automobile. Anyone expert in Auto Repair can tell you that that kind of modification to an automobile inevitably weakens the car, in 9 out of 10 cases. The fundamental molecular structure of the Human System with "replacement parts" is not necessarily better off than when it was damaged, since we do not yet know the potential impact replacement tissue might have on existing tissue. Nor do we know what the consequences are that might be passed down to our children. Are we to limit all use of Stem Cell regrowth to those who no longer can conceive? How does one contemplate that in the case of trying to treat Type 1 Diabetes by growing a replacement pancreas. Even if we use the same DNA as the host, we are unable to replace the entire mitochondria of the stem cell without destroying the nature of the stem, accordingly, we end up with a mixture of foreign and natural DNA structures in the cell, which in practice could lead to the cogeneration of deadly retrovirus... viruses not all that dissimilar from HIV just by introducing the mix of mitochondrial DNA, RNA, mRNA and DNA into the same living cell. And, inevitably, even when we transplant or splice host DNA into a cell, and specialize it to make a tissue complex like a pancreas or nerve tissue, we are playing with a very dangerous consequence: replicative and combinatorial malformation - the effect that is caused whenever we try and manipulate DNA, it produces mutations that are unexpected and sometimes it occurs in later generations of cellular reproduction and manufacture. A final warning emerges from the discovery that fragmented proteins from the manufacture of stem cells, which would be called PRIONs, themselves can interact with host tissue and cause dormant defects and diseases that might not emerge until years or decades later. Diseases like JKD (mad cow) and Kudzu are examples of such malformations. While the scientist may be able to test a donor tissue in a lab, there is no way to predict how it might interact with a target recipient long term, and clearly the consequences are going to be longer term than other prosthetic implants, like silicon breast implants that have caused so much damage. How do we take out the stem cell based tissues once we implant them? It seems like it is a nonreversible procedure, which can cause further invasive attachment of the modified DNA within the implanted tissues to react with and potentially invade surrounding cellular matter, leading to tumors or worse: modification to reproductive genetic structures, leading to the passing of an undesirable trait to one's offspring. Perhaps there will be a day when we learn to manufacture safe stem cells without relying on the human reproductive system to create them. Perhaps then, at that day or time, President Bush and those who share his opinions will see that as a leap beyond the use of cells that represent the origins of human conception, and therefore are no longer a concern when it comes to the bible. Or not. But I doubt any rational scientist not driven by the pharmaceutical greed of selling these imagined cures to every man jack person on the street, re-equipping them with un-aging tissues for a small fortune paid into the local skin-job clinic - and that, folks, is why Hollywood is behind stem cell research - the constant quest to halt aging and reverse it's processes has caused every last one of the people who lives in dreamland to realize that "if only they could really use stem cells to reverse aging and prolong life" even if only cosmetically, I doubt any rational scientist could convince himself that the risks outweigh the gains, we can not guarantee we won't deep six the entire human species with some derivative contagion or defect that only shows up 10 generations later, like humans born with no brain, based on the level of knowledge we have of the possible introduction of a defect no matter how well we prepare our specialized stem cells. And so, I for one, do not blame President Bush, nor anyone else for being opposed. My mother is in her 80s and will not touch a single Genetically Modified Organism when she is at the supermarket, e.g.- to her, Monsanto's Miracle Grow by GMO is itself inviting to the dinner table, food made from "Frankenstein's Body" - Franken-food. I don't blame her, we really have no idea what eating tomatoes with rat genes in them or corn with pig genes in them will do to us. It's outlawed in much of Europe. Yet, when it comes to healing the sick, my mother and her peer's objectivity seems to bias, yes - she thinks stem cell research will help my father who suffers from Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and related brain disease dementia, a man whom she has loved for 60+ years, and who she has suffered caring for for 16 years, a task I share with her. Even given my love for my parents, I still do not think it is worth the risk.. I have looked at it from every angle and it violates the notions of the laws of mathematics, of what I know to be the limits of human vision as to the consequences of the practice of modifying our own DNA Genome. We simply are infants in the grand scale of scientific knowledge - we can only learn by study, but I know that the rush to earn profits is so overwhelming in the Medical field, that many corners will be cut, many too many researchers will be competing for the Brass ring, and like so many things like AIDS, DES, Tobacco Radioactivity (Polonium 210) and every other plague like thing that faces humanity, that little two headed, eyeless, no reproductive tract monster your great great great great grand daughter gives birth to is so far down the road, that not a single researcher will bother to consider what the dangers really are today that might lead to that. For by the time we figure out what we did to ourselves in the first two decades of the 21st Century, we will be in the middle of the 22nd Century at which time we may be facing human extinction, with two hundred years of wonderful movies starring a forever young J. Michael Fox, a forever young Pamela Sue Anderson, a forever young Joan Rivers and lord knows how many other life prolonged, stem cell rehabilitated Celebrity Geriatrics who resemble their own 21 year old great, great, great, great grand daughters who gave birth to the two headed, no brained, no reproductive tract being that signaled the end of and extinction of Humanity. Extinction is not something worth risking. Copyright © 2004 ACSA INC |
