President's Stem Cell Propaganda

Discussion in 'Science and Technology' started by PoliticalChic, Apr 28, 2010.

  1. PoliticalChic
    Online

    PoliticalChic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    55,686
    Thanks Received:
    15,586
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +24,817
    "Less than two months after his inauguration, Mr Obama issued an executive order “removing [Bush’s] barriers to responsible scientific research involving human stem cells” and “directing the head of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy to develop a strategy for restoring scientific integrity to government decision making”…. Finally we had a president who would open the floodgates of government funding for human embryonic stem cell research.

    Well, I hate to break it to you, but the Obama administration, confounding both friends and foes, has been more miserly with stem cell research than its predecessor. Here are the myths and the facts.

    Myth 1: Bush banned federal funding of hESC (human embryonic stem cell ) research. (Some people even thought that he outlawed the research itself.)

    (1) from President Obama’s address on March 9, 2009: “we will lift the ban on federal funding for promising embryonic stem cell research.”
    (2) from the media: “President Obama lifted the eight-year-old ban on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research yesterday…” – Washington Post, March 10, 2009
    (3) from progressive websites: “With the stroke of a pen, President Barack Obama today erased the Bush administration’s eight-year-old restrictions on federal funding of research involving human embryonic stem cells, reaffirming his commitment to evidence and biomedical hope over his predecessor’s ideological distortion of science.” – Science Progress
    (4) from bioethicists: "After eight years of zero-budget funding of embryonic stem cell research, it is hardly fair and completely disingenuous for critics to point to the practice and wonder why it lags four decades behind government-funded adult stem cell research," -- Art Caplan, University of Pennsylvania

    Fact 1: Bush was the first to initiate the federal funding of hESC research.

    Myth 2: Bush was a foe of science and stem cell research.

    Supporting evidence:
    (1) The signing of Obama’s executive order was “a momentous occasion for anyone who believes in the pursuit of biomedical knowledge for the betterment of human health." -- Harvard Stem Cell Institute researcher George Daley.
    (2) "This marks a new era for stem cell research. It will not only impact research in the laboratory, but perhaps more importantly, it finally lifts the black cloud that has hovered over this research for so long. We have been operating for the last decade with one hand tied behind our back," -- Robert Lanza, science director of Advanced Cell Technologies.
    (3) “Bush’s approach to the issue of embryonic stem cell research… showed a deep disregard for the role of scientific information in political decision-making.” -- Chris Mooney, The Republican War On Science

    Fact 2: The NIH stem cell budget grew by leaps and bounds under Bush.

    Myth 3: President Obama has greatly increased funding for human embryonic stem cell research.

    Supporting evidence:
    (1) “The order was issued just in time for researchers to take advantage of money in Mr. Obama's economic recovery package and use it for stem cell studies.” - NYTimes
    (2) “The President's [March 9, 2009] decision does much more than expand funding for stem-cell research. It heralds a shift in the government's view of science, ushering in an era in which it promises to defend science — and the pursuit of useful treatments — against ideology.” – Time, March 9, 2009

    Fact 3: Stem cell scientists are still waiting for the river of gold. Even though Obama removed Bush’s restrictions on federal funds for hESC research, he has barely increased the hESC budget."
    MercatorNet: Barack, can you spare a dime?


    Wow, dig that 'HOPE AND CHANGE'...some folk'll believe anything.
     
  2. G.T.
    Offline

    G.T. Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    47,474
    Thanks Received:
    7,571
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    out
    Ratings:
    +27,432
    Where is your supporting evidence for your claims on Bush's stem cell policies? And it's hardly Obama propoganda, it seems more like "scientific community" propoganda that Obama adopted, IF it's not true what they say. IF it's true, it's not propoganda.
     
  3. California Girl
    Offline

    California Girl BANNED

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    50,337
    Thanks Received:
    8,960
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +8,965
    yea, but..... only 5% of scientists are Republicans..... This is important because rdean repeats it regularly.
     
  4. G.T.
    Offline

    G.T. Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    47,474
    Thanks Received:
    7,571
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    out
    Ratings:
    +27,432
    I doubt that even 1/2 of Scientists are idealogues. Most Scientists are obsessed over their work, and there's nothing else in life but their work.
     
  5. PoliticalChic
    Online

    PoliticalChic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    55,686
    Thanks Received:
    15,586
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +24,817
    Ah, the 'Feeling Passes For Knowing' syndrome.

    Why 50%? Why not 25%? Or 99%?

    Since you have signed onto the concept of bias in scientists, I suggest that the thrust of your post sould be to coalesce with the poster who discussed the value of the scientific menthod in overcoming said bias.

    Sure you wish to cling to the idea that half of all scientists are immune to such pecuniary considerations as putting food on the table, and not having to take a second job at the late shift at McDonalds...or riding around in a Dodge Dart?
     
  6. G.T.
    Offline

    G.T. Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    47,474
    Thanks Received:
    7,571
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    out
    Ratings:
    +27,432
    You take things way too far.

    But anyways, please reference post #2 in the thread if you wish to have a discussion.
     
  7. PoliticalChic
    Online

    PoliticalChic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    55,686
    Thanks Received:
    15,586
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +24,817
    Now, don't make me have to bring this problem to the Hague, but I have claimed - for some time now- the right of insulting, humiliating, and banging the drum for deanie-weanie as the "Dumbest Poster in the USMB."

    A proprietary right.

    And I'm at a final stage in my experimental work in trying to determine exactly when deanie's grey matter passed into the dead zone.

    But there is no shortage of candidates...I'm sure you can pick another dolt.

    Please.

    Thanking you in advance for your consideration in this sensitive matter, I remain...

    sincerely, etc. etc.
     
  8. PoliticalChic
    Online

    PoliticalChic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    55,686
    Thanks Received:
    15,586
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +24,817
    Thank you.

    Actually, none of the language in the OP is mine...everything between the quotation marks is the original article.

    I posted it since I found it both interesting and enlighening. I hope I won't have to be responsible for going back and digging up said info.
     
  9. Samson
    Offline

    Samson Póg Mo Thóin Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,357
    Thanks Received:
    3,742
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    A Higher Plain
    Ratings:
    +4,210
    all you had to post was:

    Did Obama say the hESC budget would substatially increase?

    No.
     
  10. G.T.
    Offline

    G.T. Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    47,474
    Thanks Received:
    7,571
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    out
    Ratings:
    +27,432
    It shouldn't have been all too enlightening, is what I was alluding to to begin with.

    Perhaps you should have spot checked the Article's claims, and not accepted without verification the claims before putting your last sentence in there, "some folk'll believe anything," because you just admitted by proxy that you didn't verify any of this but believed anyways.
     

Share This Page