• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

S.Korea cloning expert criticizes Bush policy

Status
Not open for further replies.

Macam

Banned
SEOUL (Reuters) - The Bush administration's reluctance to fully support stem cell research is impeding U.S. research that has the potential to make major medical breakthroughs, South Korea's top cloning expert said on Sunday.

Woo-Suk Hwang, the head of a team of South Korean scientists who cloned the first human embryo to use for research said in an interview with Reuters that stem cell science will advance because of its enormous potential, and will not be halted by political interests.

"The scientific effort to resolve the pain of patients with incurable conditions is very honorable, and I believe no mere individual politician or party can stop the historic trend," Hwang said at his laboratory at Seoul National University.

"Solving these problems is a common responsibility of humanity," he said.

Earlier this month, Hwang's team made news around the world for its research that fulfilled one of the basic promises of cloning technology in stem cell research -- that a piece of skin could be taken from a patient to grow stem cells with that patient's specific genetic material.

Researchers believe that the cells one day could be used to provide individually tailored tissue and organ transplants, as well as curing maladies such as juvenile diabetes and Parkinson's disease, or to repair severe spinal cord injuries.

Last week, President Bush expressed concern about Hwang's research and threatened to veto legislation that would loosen restrictions on U.S. government funding of embryonic stem cell research.

"I'm very concerned about cloning," Bush said last Friday. "I worry about a world in which cloning would be acceptable."

PECULIAR POLICY

Hwang said he had respect for Bush's views for their theological and political values, but he said they also represent a "peculiar policy" that hampers U.S. research.

"With all the great scientists and the great potential of the United States ... if because of some policy hurdle, the researchers cannot realize their dreams, I believe, as a fellow scientist this would be very regrettable," Hwang said.


Some religious groups oppose embryonic stem cell research, saying to destroy an embryo to harvest the stem cells is akin to abortion. Stem cells are primitive cells that have the ability to transform themselves into many other types of cells.

"The research by Professor Hwang's team is a kind of experimentation on live humans who have no power to protect themselves," the Korean Christian Bioethics Association said in a statement on the weekend.

Hwang said that he was not cloning human embryos, but using eggs harvested from human females to create cells that can never become an actual human being.

"I firmly reject the term human cloning," Hwang said. "This is a scientific activity called somatic nuclear cell transfer, and in no part does it involve the physiological process of fertilization of eggs by sperm."

In the nuclear transfer technology, a nucleus is removed from an egg cell, and replaced with the nucleus of the person or animal to be cloned, and then fused. The egg begins dividing, as if it had been fertilized, and sometimes becomes an embryo.

Some bioethics specialists said that Hwang's lab is not creating humans. "There is no reason to believe one of those things could ever become a human being," wrote David Magnus and Mildred Cho in a commentary for the Stanford University Center for Biomedical Ethics in California.

THE PATIENT COMES FIRST

Hwang would like to keep the science on stem cell research open and global, saying that greater international cooperation will lead to more effective results, more quickly.

For him, the ethical consideration should weigh heavily in favor of a patient suffering from a disease or malady now considered incurable -- as opposed to the stem cells he creates in the lab.

"Let's say we have a microproduct just 100 micrometers long, made through nuclear transfer technology, and let's say we have a human being who has lived in pain all his life," Hwang said. "To argue that there is a balance (in considering the humanity of the two) would not be ethical."

Hwang thinks his work could help open a new chapter in medical treatment by potentially creating individualized cells to treat maladies for which they may be no cure today.

"I dare believe this breakthrough will be a factor that will bring in a new era in medical history," Hwang said.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050529/ts_nm/science_korea_cloning_dc

It's utterly tragic that this administration seems hellbent on stifling scientific research at nearly every turn, not only with regards to research that may be susceptible to issues of medical ethics and political tug-o-wars, but even to matters as relatively neutral as astronomy. Whether it's opting to militarize space over allowing funding to repair the Hubble Telescope or reducing Voyager 1's meager $5m budget (with a voyage of nearly 28 years and requiring only 10 full-time scientists), it seems science is getting shafted month after month.

Oh wait, maybe not:

In Iraq, we used a new hellfire missile for the first time, which can take out enemy fighters hiding on one floor of a building, without destroying the floors above and below. This missile is capable of reaching around corners to strike enemy forces that hide in caves, and bunkers and hardened multi-room complexes. In the coming years, there are going to be some awfully surprised terrorists when the thermobaric hellfire comes knocking. (Applause.)
Source: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/05/20050527.html

Hellfire? Gee, I wonder where THAT name came from?
 

B'z-chan

Banned
You know i have a idea. The reason why they put so much money into this stuff. Is so that they can great genetically engineered Super Soilders. That Jin Kong Lee fella is insane i tell you.

And yes i read the article i know its South Korea. I'm just joking around. I hope we get on the ball. Bush seems to be in the way too much on shit crap. For the last 5 years he's kind of been a wall for lots of things. Why the fuck did all of you vote for his ass again?
 

G4life98

Member
hopefully the guys in congress championing a change in stem-cell research policy can find a way to get enough votes to overide his impending veto.
 

Bat

Member
With all this paranoia of China's and the East's growing power, it is policies like these that are the greatest threat to the US's "superpower" status. Science and technology have always been the economic diriving force of the country and if the US misses the next big technology wave beacuse of the religious fanatics in charge, countries that have adopted progressive policies are going to be the new leaders in science, and ulimtialey benefit greatly economically. Already China is pumping out many more engineers than US schools are, and within 5 years will produce more doctorate degrees too. Also, from my experience doing University sponsored research in the US, more and more foriegn graduate students are looking to return to their home countries after getting their degrees, instead of staying and trying to find a job here. I think this is all a serious problem for the US; it could be the equivalent of not deciding not be part of the industrial revolution.
 

Zaptruder

Banned
A better future through social and technological advancements.

It's a burning dream, and even the liberties that were so valued are under seige... and through the ignorance and short attention span of the people, the elements that were once so hard fought for and now taken for granted are been slowly eroded.

Damn you God! If you were there, why have you let your minions run amok?! WHY HAVE YOU LET THEM WALLOW IN IGNORANCE THAT CONTRIBUTES TO THEIR OWN DOWNFALL!?!

/somewhat needed melodramatics
 

Lathentar

Looking for Pants
Bat said:
With all this paranoia of China's and the East's growing power, it is policies like these that are the greatest threat to the US's "superpower" status. Science and technology have always been the economic diriving force of the country and if the US misses the next big technology wave beacuse of the religious fanatics in charge, countries that have adopted progressive policies are going to be the new leaders in science, and ulimtialey benefit greatly economically. Already China is pumping out many more engineers than US schools are, and within 5 years will produce more doctorate degrees too. Also, from my experience doing University sponsored research in the US, more and more foriegn graduate students are looking to return to their home countries after getting their degrees, instead of staying and trying to find a job here. I think this is all a serious problem for the US; it could be the equivalent of not deciding not be part of the industrial revolution.
Have you read "The World is Flat" yet?
 
B'z-chan said:
You know i have a idea. The reason why they put so much money into this stuff. Is so that they can great genetically engineered Super Soilders. That Jin Kong Lee fella is insane i tell you.
wesker.jpg
 
Can one man really stand in the way of something that can change so many lives for the better?

Should that man really have so much power?

sad - sad
 

Lathentar

Looking for Pants
Smiles and Cries said:
Can one man really stand in the way of something that can change so many lives for the better?

Should that man really have so much power?

sad - sad
There is a lot more than one man saying no to stem cell research.
 
D

Deleted member 1235

Unconfirmed Member
"we are not going to desecrate human life with dirty stem cell research"

"hey doodz check out this missile we made that can kill people AROUND CORNERS"

..........
 

Phoenix

Member
Drozmight said:
Researching weapons that kill is A-OK!
Research that saves lives or makes lives better ISN'T!

Hasty (and incorrect) generalization....

Researching weapons that kill is A-OK!
Research that saves lives but requires life to be taken at the same time ISN'T.

That is the ACTUAL position of the people against the research. I don't necessarily agree with them, but you have to at least get their position correct before you can argue against it.
 

Phoenix

Member
UltraMarioMan said:
The south?

There aren't stupid people in the north? If 'being stupid' is all based on voting for Bush, there are a large number of 'stupid people' all across the country.
 

Macam

Banned
Phoenix said:
Hasty (and incorrect) generalization....

Researching weapons that kill is A-OK!
Research that saves lives but requires life to be taken at the same time ISN'T.

That is the ACTUAL position of the people against the research. I don't necessarily agree with them, but you have to at least get their position correct before you can argue against it.

"Their" whole position is based around the position of defining "life". Point in case:

Brownback suggested limiting the number of in vitro fertilizations allowed and pushed the use of adult stem cells or cord blood cells -- which many scientists say are useful, but not as useful as the more flexible embryonic stem cells.

He also argued repeatedly during the ABC program that embryos are "the youngest of human life" and at one point asked Specter and host George Stephanopoulos when their lives began. Specter replied that he was "a lot more concerned, at this point, about when my life is going to end," to which Brownback responded that he prays for the Pennsylvanian and asked again when life starts.

From: http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/05/29/stem.cells/index.html?section=cnn_topstories)

Of course, the political manipulation aspect of this is to just to start dubbing everything as "babies". I mean, who wants to kill babies, let alone SNOWFLAKE BABIES (from the same article)?

President Bush opposes that and held a news conference last week to promote adopting the embryos, which he called "snowflake babies."

Arlen Specter is unfortunate enough to have to personally realize the potential payoffs of the research, being a victim of cancer; at the very least it forces him to acknowledge the very real connection of what happens in the lab to what happens to people suffering from such health conditions. I don't doubt for two seconds that if either of Bush's daughters were in a similar position, that he would do all he could to save them. Unfortunately, it's painfully obvious that he's oblivious to the world outside his ivory tower. When life starts is a question that's open to debate, but ironically enough, if it weren't for science in the first place, most of these people would simply presume it begins near the time you come out of the womb and not a moment before.
 
I read an interesting piece in Time a couple years ago that outlined the East researching genetic super soldiers and the West researching better outfitted (aka: Tech) soldiers.

Terminators VS Clones FIGHT!
 

Phoenix

Member
Macam said:
"Their" whole position is based around the position of defining "life". Point in case:

Indeed it does, and it is a debatable issue to define when life 'begins'. Its almost as much a matter of opinion as it is a scientific fact as if it were a scientific fact, the scientific community would agree on an acceptable definition of it.

Of course, the political manipulation aspect of this is to just to start dubbing everything as "babies". I mean, who wants to kill babies, let alone SNOWFLAKE BABIES (from the same article)?

Not really. But I guess you can draw that inference since an embryo will become one, at some point, if it follows its natural course of existence.

embryo->fetus
fetus->baby

therefore

embryo->baby

this killing an embryo denies the baby to exist. It is a logically sound argument. Not necessarily agreeing with some of the implications of it - but it is in fact logical reasoning - logic 101 reasoning in fact.



Arlen Specter is unfortunate enough to have to personally realize the potential payoffs of the research, being a victim of cancer; at the very least it forces him to acknowledge the very real connection of what happens in the lab to what happens to people suffering from such health conditions. I don't doubt for two seconds that if either of Bush's daughters were in a similar position, that he would do all he could to save them

It does not, however, follow that he would approve the law. Doing all he could to save them could involve going elsewhere for treatment. It wouldn't be the first time that a politician has made or backed a law that they couldn't follow themselves in practice. Doesn't imply that the law is necessarily bad, however.

. Unfortunately, it's painfully obvious that he's oblivious to the world outside his ivory tower. When life starts is a question that's open to debate, but ironically enough, if it weren't for science in the first place, most of these people would simply presume it begins near the time you come out of the womb and not a moment before.

No evidence of that at all without a definition of "these people". Who are "these people" of which you speak?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom