Michael J Fox - Human Shield

[Said1]

The point is Fox did NOT take his meds so he would LOOK sicker then he really is; and that is how libs try to win debates

Not on the issues, not on the facts, but on pure emotion.

Just curious, but how could he look sicker than he is by not taking meds?

 

[no1tovote4]

What? Can you be more disingenuous? How many states other than California have embryonic stem cell research? The answer is zero. Thanks to Bush, California had to invent an unprecedented way to fund scientific research. We were forced to spend a large amount of money to bring the issue of scientic research funding before the voters. Have you ever voted on the funding of scientific research? That’s a real normal process don’t you think? Due to court actions from people with your attitude, the measure which passed by an overwhelming majority in 2004, will not dispense funds until the end of 2006. But the religious extremists were defeated.

You've mistaken Government Funding for the research itself. We donated the umbilicals of both our bio-children to CU research in stem cells. So, CO at least has stem cell research. It just isn't government funded.

 

[no1tovote4]

Just curious, but how could he look sicker than he is by not taking meds?

If he cut out the meds that minimized the shaking, while continuing on the meds that cause the shaking so he wouldn't stiffen, it would increase the amount of shaking he had during the commercial. Thus making the effects of the disease appear more affecting than they are...

 

[onedomino]

You've mistaken Government Funding for the research itself. We donated the umbilicals of both our bio-children to CU research in stem cells. So, CO at least has stem cell research. It just isn't government funded.

Thank you for the example of non-Californian embryonic stem cell research. I am referring to the billions of dollars in funding over many years that will be necessary to find out if effective treatments can be derived from embryonic stem cells. And then to develop those treatments, if they are shown to exist. This is what the Feds normally do for promising areas of medical research, with money allocated to universities and elsewhere. But because of Bush, the normal Federal process for funding research cannot happen for programs that investigate embryonic stem cells. Beyond California, I have not read about any other state that has a program for multi-billion dollar funding of stem cell reasearch.

 

[Hobbit]

Thank you for the example of non-Californian embryonic stem cell research. I am referring to the billions of dollars in funding over many years that will be necessary to find out if effective treatments can be derived from embryonic stem cells. And then to develop those treatments, if they are shown to exist. This is what the Feds normally do for promising areas of medical research, with money allocated to universities and elsewhere. But because of Bush, the normal Federal process for funding research cannot happen for programs that investigate embryonic stem cells. Beyond California, I have not read about any other state that has a program for multi-billion dollar funding of stem cell reasearch.

That's because most people see it as a waste of money. If it had any promise, the drug and health care companies would practically shove the money down the researchers' throats.

 

[red states rule]

As opposed to conservatives who use 6 foot posters of fetuses to unemotionally make their point about abortion.

They are six foot posters of dead babies to make the point abortion is murdered

 

[red states rule]

Just curious, but how could he look sicker than he is by not taking meds?

First Fox said he did not take his meds, now he is saying he took to much of his meds.

Libs can never keep their lies straight

 

[red states rule]

How mean-spirited can you get? It is garbage like this that will convince swing voters to cast their ballots for Democrats. Do you have even a shred of civility?

Yes I have alot of civility. I will not stand by and allow the liberal human shields to go on unchallenged

I am fed up with the left being able to say anddo anything and we (conservatives) are expected to shut up and stay on the sidelines

 

[The ClayTaurus]

They are six foot posters of dead babies to make the point abortion is murdered

But not an emotional point. Not at all. Conservatives don't do that.

 

[red states rule]

But not an emotional point. Not at all. Conservatives don't do that.

They are not emotional points, they are factual points

 

[The ClayTaurus]

They are not emotional points, they are factual points

A six foot poster of a dead fetus is not an emotional point?

 

[red states rule]

A six foot poster of a dead fetus is not an emotional point?

Once again a six foot poster of a dead baby is a fact. It is the result of the abortion

I notice libs have a difficult time calling a baby - a baby. So.........




Crazy Freak Fetus Resembles Human Baby
Fetus Survives Killing of Mother, Washington Post

Kansas Woman Charged With Strangling Pregnant Woman, Then Stealing Fetus, New York Times

Woman Charged in Grisly Theft of Fetus, ABC News

N.C. Woman Helped Crack Stolen Fetus Case, TheCarolinaChannel.com

Suspect in Stolen Fetus Case to Be Arraigned, Fox News

Stolen fetus hearing venue to be set, The Washington Times

Communities struggle with death of mother, theft of fetus, KBCI Boise

Hearing set in stolen fetus killing, CNN.com

Woman Accused of Stealing Fetus to Appear in Court Tomorrow, WIBW-TV Topeka

Fetus Snatch Suspect Faces Hearing, CBS 2

Hospital: Stolen fetus in "remarkably good condition",News 14 Carolina

Woman Accused of Taking Fetus "Acted Normally", WOAI

Notice a pattern here? Even fascist Faux News and the Moonie Times agree that the bizarre creature brutally extracted from a murdered woman last week was a fetus. Not a human child, mind you, but a F-E-T-U-S. Yet despite a media consensus to the contrary, the anti-choice crowd still insists on referring to the damned thing as a "baby". A poor womyn is killed and a fetus is on the loose, yet all these repugs can think about is how to use this tragedy as a means to undermine Roe v. Wade.

Goddess forbid I should ever have a tapeworm. The fundies would probably insist it had a "right-to-life" and force me to carry it around inside me for the rest of my days.

Yes, I know the fetus has cute little "baby hands" with cute little "baby fingers" and makes cute little "baby noises", but that doesn't make it any more human than a baby-shaped intestinal parasite. Furthermore, I don't recall this fetus being "born", nor have I read anything remotely hinting that the host organism wanted it to be. She could have been on her way to the abortion clinic for all we know. So lacking a physical birth or any sort of written documentation certifying an intent to carry the pregnancy to term, we must protect a Woman's Right to Choose and err on the side of inhumanity. It's a FETUS, and will remain one until the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals says otherwise.

Unfortunately, that could take years. The fetus could be well into high school before it is deemed "alive" and awarded full human rights. Not quite living, yet not quite dead, this veritible Schrodinger's Fetus would be subject to relentless harassment and teasing all through it's quasi-childhood.

I know, because I've been there. There was a little girl on my street who was "born" prematurely, her "mother" having died in a car accident on the way to the abortion clinic. "Frannie the Fetus", we'd call her. We'd chase her all the way to the bus stop in the morning, singing "Frannie the Fetus! Frannie the Fetus! Watch out she's gonna eat us!" until she broke down in tears. Then her old man called the gestapo on me and I spent my 28th birthday picking up trash off the side of the freeway. So I'm no stranger to suffering.

Sadly, no one understood the potential danger of a fetus allowed to roam free back then, and they sure as hell don't understand it now. I hear that the "father" has already claimed custody of the fetus and is going to selfishly raise it as if it were his "child", oblivious to the damage he's doing to the cause of reproductive freedom. As with the Laci Peterson case, the anti-choicers will use the fetus' humanlike characteristics to insinuate life where there is none, and chip away at a Woman's Right to Choose.

One can almost smell the smoke as the Bill of Rights burns.


http://blamebush.typepad.com/blamebush/reproductive_rights/index.html

 

[Bullypulpit]

The point is Fox did NOT take his meds so he would LOOK sicker then he really is; and that is how libs try to win debates

Not on the issues, not on the facts, but on pure emotion.

Your ignorance is appalling, as is your dependence on Rush Limbaugh for talking points.

In my career in healthcare, I have taken care of many parkinsonian patients. Lacking their medication their muscles become very rigid, their affect becomes very flat. Movement and speech becomes difficult, if not impossible for them. It is their medication which allows them some semblance of mobility...It allows them to speak freely...The movements you saw in the add Mr. Fox appeared in, were the side effects of his medication. Without them he would have been a rigid mannequin, barely capable of motion or speech.

But don't let facts stand in the way of your utter, willful and disgraceful ignorance. You really should be ashamed of yourself.

 

[Bullypulpit]

First Fox said he did not take his meds, now he is saying he took to much of his meds.

Libs can never keep their lies straight

Care to provide your citation for that statement?

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Once again a six foot poster of a dead baby is a fact. It is the result of the abortion

I notice libs have a difficult time calling a baby - a baby. So.........

Ah. Well I'm glad to hear you aren't making those six foot dead baby posters to play off people's emotions. Just the facts m'am, just the facts.

 

[Hobbit]

Your ignorance is appalling, as is your dependence on Rush Limbaugh for talking points.

In my career in healthcare, I have taken care of many parkinsonian patients. Lacking their medication their muscles become very rigid, their affect becomes very flat. Movement and speech becomes difficult, if not impossible for them. It is their medication which allows them some semblance of mobility...It allows them to speak freely...The movements you saw in the add Mr. Fox appeared in, were the side effects of his medication. Without them he would have been a rigid mannequin, barely capable of motion or speech.

But don't let facts stand in the way of your utter, willful and disgraceful ignorance. You really should be ashamed of yourself.

There are other meds to suppress the shaking. Fox stops taking those meds when he talks about his condition because it draws attention to the condition. He takes them regularly the rest of the time and they have been effective enough to allow him to carry on a minor career in acting, as he was recently a guest on Boston Legal and had no problem with his shaking. Now, I don't have a problem with him doing this. When you're on all those meds, it only makes you look normal, not feel normal, and could detract from the impact of his speech. Limbaugh has said as much, as well, and when he strayed so far as to say Fox may have been acting, he apologized before his show even ended, saying it was probably out of bounds.

My issue is that the information he gave in his commercial is factually incorrect and intended as a way to attack a Republican candidate so close to the election as to prevent a retort. I think he's being used by the Democrats in this fashion. He's being used as just another human tool, just like Cindy Sheehan, in their jihad against the Republicans. Maybe he's ok with that, but then shame on him. I'm also objecting to the idea that what he says cannot be challanged because he's sick. Yeah, he makes a sympathetic spokesman, but my sympathy will not spare him from my criticism of his remarks.

 

[Hobbit]

And I'm going to agree with the posters of the aborted fetuses. The things are bloody and gross. It's all about shock value. The ones I like are the ones that show a live fetus from a pre-natal camera. It's not bloody or gross, but sends the message that fetuses are, in fact, people.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Thank you for the example of non-Californian embryonic stem cell research. I am referring to the billions of dollars in funding over many years that will be necessary to find out if effective treatments can be derived from embryonic stem cells. And then to develop those treatments, if they are shown to exist. This is what the Feds normally do for promising areas of medical research, with money allocated to universities and elsewhere. But because of Bush, the normal Federal process for funding research cannot happen for programs that investigate embryonic stem cells. Beyond California, I have not read about any other state that has a program for multi-billion dollar funding of stem cell reasearch.

Why is California supporting something that is only a pie-in-the-sky hope? Just so they can waste billions? Just to waste valuable time? Just to satisfy the Hollyweird crowd? Just so they can experiment with human life? Guess that's crazy California for ya….land of fruits and NUTS. Or...what I would say… a communist experiment.

People are ALREADY being helped through adult stem cell research. That's where the effort and money should go. You don't need an embryo cell to help a liver cell. Scientific leaders are also speaking about the many PROBLEMS with embryonic research. Not that you're going to hear much of anything about those things in our media....

Luckily, the Australian media has been paying attention. The Australian ran a series of articles this week about Dr. James Sherley, associate professor of biological engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), who is lecturing in Australia about stem cells and cloning. The Australian reports “concern about scientific dishonesty had driven him out of his Massachusetts Institute of Technology laboratory and into the public debate.” Why? The Australian summarizes, “supporters of embryonic stem cell research ignored evidence that adult stem cells had far greater potential, if they could be produced in large quantities.” Sherley is now at work on methods to mass produce these cells.

Sherley argues that adult stem cells present greater promise for medicinal cures because they are already specialized into the tissue-type needed, and—because they are harvested directly from the patient in need of therapy—they have the same genotype and thus avoid the risk of immune rejection (without need for cloning or embryo destruction). As Sherley put it: “If you have a problem with your liver, you need a liver stem cell, you don’t need an embryonic stem cell.”

Embryonic stem cells, meanwhile, have several major problems, notably—and seldom mentioned—they cause tumors and form cancerous growths. Sherley explains it this way: “When you put them [ESC] in an environment where they can grow and develop, they make lots of different kind of tissues. This tumour formation property is an inherent feature of the cells. And all you have to do is simply inject them into an animal tissue—this happens at very high efficiency.” Currently, there are no solutions to this problem on the horizon. As Sherley put it: “And although some might say we can solve the tumour problem down the road, that’s equivalent to saying we can solve the cancer problem, and we may, but that’s a long time coming.”

Ironically, pointing out this scientific concern will no doubt result in being labeled “anti-science” or “science-phobic.” Sherley recognizes that pressure from the media and from patient groups desperate for cures who have had their hopes raised by hype from politicians and members of the scientific community has led other scientists to fear speaking out. The Australian reports: “Sherley said many scientists agreed with his views but were too scared to speak out over concerns as it could affect their funding and reputation.”

If you doubt this is the case, one need only look to the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM)—the multibillion-dollar institute dedicated to embryonic stem-cell research on the California taxpayers’ dime—and their recent proposed strategic report. The report states: “t is unlikely that CIRM will be able to fully develop stem cell therapy for routine clinical use during the ten years of the plan. Within that time span, however, we will be able to advance therapies for several diseases to early stage clinical trials, and to have therapies for other diseases in the pipeline.” For the next ten years, the best they can promise is “early stage clinical trials” and therapies “in the pipeline.” The Mercury News in an article last week reports that the Institute’s president, Zach Hall, “predicted it might take 15 years before the institute’s research results in a medical product.” Meanwhile, adult stem-cell therapies are healing patients now—despite the fact that they receive only a fraction of the funding.

One can hope that the alternative techniques to produce embryonic-type (pluripotent) stem cells are soon perfected and that in the near future we will have a workable method to produce embryonic stem cells without destroying living human embryos. Even when that is accomplished (studies are being reviewed as we speak), the resulting cells will still have the same cancerous-tumor-formation problem that all embryonic stem cells possess. This leaves one question: Given the severe ethical problems with current methods of embryonic stem-cell research and the inherent scientific problems with tumor formation, why have they been hyped to such a large extent while adult stems have gone unnoticed? One can only guess.

Ryan T. Anderson is a junior fellow at First Things. He is also the assistant director of the Program on Bioethics and Human Dignity at the Witherspoon Institute of Princeton, N.J.

http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/?p=498

 

[Dr Grump]

The point is Fox did NOT take his meds so he would LOOK sicker then he really is.

It's the exact opposite. The meds STOP him looking as sick as he really is...without them, we see the real disease, warts and all...

 

[Dr Grump]

Actually, the shaking and wiggling is caused by taking medication. Those with parkinsons that have not taken their medication stiffen up and become like a board. There is no wiggling or moving.

You are right and wrong. Right in that stiffening is one symptom, but so is shaking or tremors..

http://www.neurologychannel.com/parkinsonsdisease/symptoms.shtml

Tremors in the hands, fingers, forearm, or foot tend to occur when the limb is at rest but not when performing tasks. Tremor may occur in the mouth and chin as well.

Rigidity, or stiff muscles, may produce muscle pain and an expressionless, mask-like face. Rigidity tends to increase during movement.