Notre Dame Graduation 2017 and 2009

A few dozen students walked out on Vice President Pence at the Notre Dame Graduation in 2017. It's their right to leave history in the making. Obama also created an historic moment in May 2009 and used a Notre Dame graduation to slam the Catholic Church by announcing embryonic stem cell research would continue on our tax dollar, undoing Bush's executive order (and no one sued him). He was too late; the research had moved so quickly during the Bush years we no longer needed that death trap. Despite its availability (was never illegal or banned) embryonic stem cell research had never produced that first cure or break through. Obama was so rude and narcissistic he thought his pretty words on abortion and holding hands could undo Catholic dogma 2000 years old on the sanctity of life. All he did was make himself look foolish in his first year as president. And thereafter, in my view.

Chinese scientist engaged in lawsuit against the Nobel Prize Assembly

A Chinese scientist, Dr. Rongxiang  Xu, claims to have discovered “human body regenerative restoration science''  and has filed a suit in Orange County, California, seeking credit for the research that led to the work of Sir John B. Gurdon (England) and Shinya Yamanaka (Japan)  for their discovery that "mature, specialised cells can be reprogrammed to become immature cells capable of developing into all tissues of the body."

“The work of Gurdon and Yamanaka led to a practical medical use for stem cell research that sidesteps the main argument by anti-abortion opponents” a feat pretty much ignored by our President who in 2009 reinstated embryonic stem cell research paid for by government funding (it was never illegal or restricted).

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/08/world/europe/sweden-nobel-prize-medicine/index.html

http://www.bmj.com/content/345/bmj.e8414/rr/619952

http://www.newswire.ca/en/story/1087407/world-renowned-scientist-dr-rongxiang-xu-speaks-out-about-nobel-assembly-statement-claiming-they-have-not-heard-of-him

Winner of Nobel prize, Dr. Shinya Yamanaka

No need to harvest human embryos in the name of advancing medical breakthroughs.  England's Sir John Gurdon and Dr. Shinya Yamanaka from Japan share the 2012 Nobel Prize in medicine for work on stem cells, revealing that mature cells can be reverted into primitive cells. There are both medical and ethical implications.

“The Nobel committee, however, made no mention of Yamanaka’s moral achievement. Not in its presentation, not in its press release, not in its interview with the laureate. It credited him only with developing “new tools” to study disease and develop therapies. Many reporters took the same approach. In its 600-word story, CNN ignored the ethics of Yamanaka’s work. The Los Angeles Times called restrictions on embryo destruction mere “headaches” for scientists. The New York Times said Yamanaka’s work, like other stem-cell technologies, had “generated objections from people who fear, on ethical or religious grounds, that scientists are pressing too far into nature’s mysteries and the ability to create life artificially.”

That’s completely wrong. Even before Yamanaka’s landmark paper, pro-lifers were all over his work. They loved it. The Vatican had followed his research with interest for years. When Cell published his paper, a pro-life coalition immediately declared his method “superior to cloning as a means of obtaining patient-specific pluripotent stem cells.” In a homily distributed by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Cardinal Rigali declared that Yamanaka’s story about looking into a fertility-clinic microscope showed how “God can use a helpless embryo to change a human heart.” People at the National Right to Life Committee were openly rooting for Yamanaka to win a Nobel.”

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/human_nature/2012/10/shinya_yamanaka_s_nobel_prize_he_saved_embryos_not_just_stem_cell_research_.html

"When I saw the embryo, I suddenly realized there was such a small difference between it and my daughters. I thought, we can't keep destroying embryos for our research. There must be another way," this was Dr Shinya Yamanaka, a father of two, in an interview in The New York Times in 2007.

http://www.biospectrumasia.com/biospectrum/influencers/23502/there

Embryonic stem cell research fails

The first thing Obama did upon taking office was approve more embryos for medical experiments using our tax dollar. It was never illegal, but the lines had been limited under Bush. This gave adult stem cell research a jump ahead, and it has taken off. The ethically challenged and far less successful embryonic research still has not had a success. And this one has been ended.

First tests failed--millions of cells injected in 4 patients, and the best they can report is there were no adverse effects.

There is confusion when you see stories about "stem cell research." Using ADULT stem cells for therapy is NOT controversial, and has shown great promise--like the recently reported heart failure story. Embryonic stem cell research involves killing a potential person.

Why is President Obama so anti-life?

Obama has failed miserably in many areas, but one promise he kept was about approving more embryonic stem cell lines, even though by the time he became president, adult stem cells were the gold standard. "As president, I will lift the current administration’s ban on federal funding of research on embryonic stem cell lines created after August 9, 2001 through executive order ..." The National Institutes of Health continues to waste more taxpayer funds on destructive embryo research adding more lines. What does Obama have against the unborn that he is so Hell bent on destroying them?

Two very famous men of our time, Barack Obama and Steve Jobs, were born to very young, unwed mothers (who eventually married their birth fathers, although Obama's father being a Muslim was already married.). It was not an auspicious beginning, but Jobs was adopted and Obama was essentially raised by his grandparents. Neither faced poverty, want or lack of love and they went on to achieve the highest in politics and wealth that our current culture offers (although not in spiritual matters--and that's what counts in the end as Jobs has discovered).

So it puzzles me that two men who should be grateful for life itself are so careless about their own responsibilities. Jobs denied his out of wedlock child for years, putting mother and child on welfare, and Obama is the most virulently relentless advocate for killing the helpless unborn that we've ever had in any branch of government, federal or state. One is left to wonder if deep down there isn't some pool of self-hatred and lack of self-worth that they, particularly Obama, would demand such power over others' lives.

Oprah, the stem cell debate is dead

In this video from Oprah.com, Dr. Oz explains to Michael J. Fox, who has Parkinson’s Disease, and Oprah, why the debate about embryonic stem cells in research and medical advancement is dead. It was already dead when President Obama announced on March 9, 2009, that he was lifting the government ban on funding additional embryonic stem cell lines research. Why would he do that? Are his health advisers so naïve? Or is it because most Americans still think “embryonic” when they hear “stem cell” and he thought he could fool them? With adult stem cells, no embryos need to be killed; no toxic regimen of rejection drugs is needed for your own cells. The government doesn't need to take over women’s wombs for research. Adult stem cell is the way to go. Thank you, President Bush, for drawing the line 8 years before Obama told this lie, the beginning of his many lies about health and medicine.

http://www.oprah.com/health/Dr-Oz-on-the-Medical-Benefits-of-Stem-Cells-Video

From Obama’s speech, March 9, 2009

“Today, with the Executive Order I am about to sign, we will bring the change that so many scientists and researchers; doctors and innovators; patients and loved ones have hoped for, and fought for, these past eight years: we will lift the ban on federal funding for promising embryonic stem cell research. We will vigorously support scientists who pursue this research. And we will aim for America to lead the world in the discoveries it one day may yield.”

Why would Obama do this? Lack of respect for life, ignorance or pure political gain? Whichever, it was an immoral act, not the first and not the last of his medical lies.

Federal court case--backs down Obama's funding of March 2009. If you read the comments from readers at the various sites reporting yesterday's decision, it is clear that most people (referring to Republicans as knuckle dragging morons) don't realize that successful stem cell cures are only from adult cells, not embryonic stem cells, from which not a single cure has ever been developed.

Do not underestimate the power of the culture of death

"We’ve learned that what was unimaginable one day can become reality the next. Today, pressures for euthanasia are building; developments in biomedicine are occurring with such speed that they have outpaced reflection on their moral implications; experiments on human embryos are fostering a mentality that treats the lives of the weak as means to the ends of the strong; and the freedoms of religion and conscience are coming under increasing threat.

Thirty years ago, who could have imagined such a thing as partial-birth abortion! When I ask myself why so many people have been slow to realize how easily today’s atrocity can become tomorrow’s routine, one answer I come up with is that it was due in part to a failure to realize something very important about choice, namely that choices last.

Each time we make policy on abortion, euthanasia, or embryonic experimentation, we are changing the moral ecology of our country. We are either helping to build the culture of life or cooperating with the culture of death. It hasn’t helped that the elite media, the powerful foundations, the sex industry, and the vast profit-making abortion industry have done their best to disguise the truth of what was happening."
Mary Ann Glendon

Obama's stem cell ban and the barn door

While we were in Israel, home of another human life miracle which took place over 2000 years ago, President Obama was reported to have lifted "the ban" on embryonic stem cell research. First of all, there was never a ban on the research, only on expanding the use of human embryos in research funded by the U.S. taxpayer, an ethical dilemma with the potential to make abortion and euthanasia look like kindergarten stuff (and to turn young women into fertilized egg machines for pay). The announcement was really for show--one of the few campaign promises he could keep (other than the one where he promised to drive us over the socialist cliff to financial ruin--which he seems hell-bent on keeping). Second, he's too late; the research has moved so quickly we no longer need that death trap. Third, despite its availability (was never illegal or banned) embryonic stem cell research has never produced that first cure or break through.

Here's what President Bush said in 2001. And thank you God for a President with guts and a good heart.

"My administration must decide whether to allow federal funds, your tax dollars, to be used for scientific research on stem cells derived from human embryos. . .

My position on these issues is shaped by deeply held beliefs. I'm a strong supporter of science and technology, and believe they have the potential for incredible good -- to improve lives, to save life, to conquer disease. Research offers hope that millions of our loved ones may be cured of a disease and rid of their suffering. I have friends whose children suffer from juvenile diabetes. Nancy Reagan has written me about President Reagan's struggle with Alzheimer's. My own family has confronted the tragedy of childhood leukemia. And like all Americans, I have great hope for cures.

I also believe human life is a sacred gift from our creator. I worry about a culture that devalues life, and believe as your president I have an important obligation to foster and encourage respect for life in America and throughout the world.

And while we're all hopeful about the potential of this research, no one can be certain that the science will live up to the hope it has generated. . . " Speech 9 August 2001

Then in November 2007 came an announcement in respected journals that research groups in Wisconsin and Japan generated “induced pluripotent stem” (iPS) cells with the properties of human embryonic stem cells by direct reprogramming of adult cells. No human life needed to be destroyed in this breakthrough.

"Unlike embryonic stem cells, which are obtained by destroying live embryos, iPSCs are made directly from adult cells by adding a small number of factors to these cells in the laboratory. These factors remodel the mature cells and convert them into stem cells that are functionally identical to stem cells obtained from embryos. No human eggs are required and no human embryos are generated. Adult cells are obtained from a simple skin biopsy, 1/10th inch in diameter and about as painful as a blood draw. One study was able to produce an average of 10 pluripotent stem cell lines from a single skin biopsy. This approach can be used to generate stem cell lines from patients with specific genetic diseases to better study these conditions, and to provide patient-specific stem cells for possible stem cell therapies."

And then shortly before Obama's announcement came this one (which I supposed caused his handlers to hurry with his announcement before he got left in the dust)

"Led by scientists Kathrin Plath and William Lowry, UCLA researchers used genetic alteration to turn back the clock on human skin cells and create cells that are nearly identical to human embryonic stem cells, which have the ability to become every cell type found in the human body. Four regulator genes were used to create the cells, called induced pluripotent stem cells or iPS cells. Science Daily

While the servile media drooled at the thought of embryos being destroyed in the name of science, House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, observed:

“Advancements in science and research have moved faster than the debates among politicians in Washington, D.C., and breakthroughs announced in recent years confirm that the full potential of stem cell research can be realized without the destruction of living human embryos. This issue is not about whether federal dollars should fund stem cell research. There is little debate about that, and Republicans enthusiastically support adult, cord blood, and pluripotent stem cell research that have shown so much promise in recent years. The question is whether taxpayer dollars should be used to subsidize the destruction of precious human life. Millions of Americans strongly oppose that, and rightfully so. Taxpayer dollars should not aid the destruction of innocent human life.” ABC News Blog (probably never got on national news)

Obama's triumph?

"Last week, President Obama removed virtually all restrictions on fetal stem cell research, claiming a triumph of science over “ideology.” The hope, of course, is that science may find new ways to prolong and improve our lives, now that the shackles of moral restraint, humility, and ethics have been removed. It seemed fitting, therefore, to repost this older essay, pondering whether the “victories” which science now has in store for us will be indeed Pyrrhic." Continue here with Dr. Bob on what does it mean to be human.

Another January 20 insult from Obama

"We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology's wonders to raise health care's quality and lower its cost."

President Bush saved our country from the ethical morass of harvesting human embryos for stem cell research. The breakthrough of 2008 might have never come if government money had been used for embryo farming and more demands for embryos. Under Obama, we can be assured of far less respect for human life and fewer ethical concerns at the beginning and at the end, especially with his promise of FOCA.

Scientific Breakthroughs, December 30, 2008 at America.gov reporting Science, magazine article.

"In a triumph of molecular magic, scientists took skin cells from adults suffering from a range of genetic diseases and transformed them into stem cells that could be used to test potential treatments or replace damaged cells in patients.

In its December 19, 2008 issue, Science magazine, one of the world’s most prominent scientific journals, hailed this and related advances as the breakthrough of the year, first on a list of the top 10 scientific advances of 2008.

“When Science's writers and editors set out to pick this year's biggest advances, we looked for research that answers major questions about how the universe works and that paves the way for future discoveries,” deputy news editor Robert Coontz said in a December 18 statement. “Our top choice, cellular reprogramming, opened a new field of biology almost overnight and holds out hope of life-saving medical advances.”
Before scientists developed methods to reprogram cells, isolating stem cells from people required harvesting them from human embryos, an ethically controversial procedure. Several countries, including the United States, restricted the technique, thereby hampering stem cell research. [This is incorrect--the research was never restricted--only the government funding beyond certain cell lines. Private research was always an option for any company wanting to put up the money and the USA produced far more research and papers on stem cell research even with limited cell lines than any other country.]

Normally, a mature cell maintains its identity for life — skin cells do not transform into brain cells, muscle cells do not become liver cells. In 2006, researchers turned on four genes in cells from a mouse’s tail and found that the cells had been “reprogrammed” into stem cells — immature cells that have the potential to mature into a variety of different cell types.

Cultured in a dish, stem cells can be incubated with chemical cocktails to coax them to mature into different cell types, including those found in the liver, muscle and brain.

This year’s breakthrough in cellular reprogramming allows researchers to generate new stem cell lines from people with genetic diseases."

Thank you, thank you, Mr. President

As I read the year end article on science breakthroughs in the paper yesterday I could only whisper a Thank You to George W. Bush for holding the line on embryonic stem cell research. Perhaps you've forgotten, but that issue became a subplot in the 2004 election. Like the Iraq War, stem cell research was off the political agenda in 2008. GWB held out.

"In an effort to cause the country to abandon this conviction [ethical principles], some advocates of the research, including nearly every prominent Democrat in Congress, have made reckless and irresponsible promises, offered false hope to the suffering, depicted their opponents as heartless enemies of science, and exploited sick people for crass political gain." Link.

It's not illegal in the U.S., never has been, to experiment on human embryos, to wallow up to your knees and soul in a bioethical swamp that hasn't been drained. But it wasn't expanded with government money during the Bush years. And then. The break through that only PETA extremists could quibble about (originally done in mice).

"A crescendo of discoveries pushed stem cells from the lab dish to news headlines this year. Only two years ago, a Japanese research team led by Shinya Yamanaka of Kyoto University announced a method for turning mouse skin cells into unspecialized ones that resembled embryonic stem cells, prized by biomedical researchers for the potential to turn into any kind of tissue. This year, teams made use of the discovery in human cells to earn "Breakthrough of the Year" status from Science magazine. For the first time, two teams created families of induced pluripotent cells — unspecialized cells derived from specialized cells — from patients suffering 11 different diseases, including Parkinson's disease and juvenile diabetes. And a team led by Harvard's Doug Melton demonstrated "lineage switching" in a Nature journal study, switching ordinary kidney cells into specialized tissues that produce insulin in mice. The end goal of cell reprogrammers is to create immune-system-friendly transplant tissues for patients." USAToday

Now we won't have to have colonies of poor women farming their eggs, and Bush has saved the Democratic Party from yet one more accolade of being the party of death, already enthusiastic about abortion and euthanasia for the less than perfect, the poor, the elderly and the handicapped.

"In one fell swoop the politics of the issue shifted, says Ramesh Ponnuru, a harsh critique of the Democrats' stem cell policy and author of "The Party of Death: The Democrats, the Media, the Courts, and the Disregard for Human Life." "I am not surprised to see that politicians running for office on the Democratic side are talking about this issue less because there is not as much profit to it anymore," Ponnuru said. Democrats had downplayed the possibility that adult stem cells could be used as an alternative. They argued instead that embryonic cells represented the cutting edge of science. "Now that same argument can be turned against them," Ponnuru said. "If they want to go based on clinical results, adult stem cells are better. If they want to go based on which has more promise, these (new) alternatives are better." Link

Thank you again, Mr. President. So your Treasury guy was a bust--you still saved a lot of lives.

Cells from human testes superior to embryonic stem cells

was the headline in the paper October 8. Well, good. They can start using men as cell farms and poking and proding them instead of pregnant women. If GWB never did one more good thing in his life time other than these three, 1) appoint two outstanding judges to the Supreme Court, 2) stay focused in Iraq and not turn tail and run out on the people he liberated, and 3) hold the line on growing embryos so the guys in lab coats could experiment, then he should go down in history as our finest President. Ever.

Abstract: "Human primordial germ cells and mouse neonatal and adult germline stem cells are pluripotent and show similar properties to embryonic stem cells. Here we report the successful establishment of human adult germline stem cells derived from spermatogonial cells of adult human testis. Cellular and molecular characterization of these cells revealed many similarities to human embryonic stem cells, and the germline stem cells produced teratomas after transplantation into immunodeficient mice. The human adult germline stem cells differentiated into various types of somatic cells of all three germ layers when grown under conditions used to induce the differentiation of human embryonic stem cells. We conclude that the generation of human adult germline stem cells from testicular biopsies may provide simple and non-controversial access to individual cell-based therapy without the ethical and immunological problems associated with human embryonic stem cells." Nature, online Oct. 8, 2008

"On Aug. 9, 2001, Bush announced his decision on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research in an address to the nation. He said only research on stem cell lines already in existence by the time of his speech would be eligible for federal funding.

He said research on these stem cell lines was permissible because an embryo had already been destroyed. But federal funding would not be allowed for research on any stem cell line created after Aug. 9, 2001, as to discourage future embryo destruction. However, privately funded human embryonic stem cell research has remained permissible on either the “existing” human lines or on lines derived after August 9, 2001.

At the time of the address, the National Institutes of Health determined that there were 64 stem cell lines in existence. However, researchers have expressed doubts about how many lines are actually available for use, whether the cells provided enough genetic diversity and whether the lines are contaminated with animal cells. On Sept. 5, 2001, Thompson acknowledged that only 24 or 25 of the cell lines were established embryonic stem cell lines.

On Nov. 7, 2001, the NIH Human Embryonic Stem Cell Registry was launched. It lists all the cell lines that are eligible for federally funded research, as well as contact information for researchers who wish to use them." Stem Cell Research 101

And I should give Bill Clinton and Congress of the late 1990s some credit too, who held the line all through the 90s with just a little slip up in 2000, which opened up those original lines for research. The U.S. never fell behind on stem cell research, in fact it led the world. It was only the federal money that was restricted--and my goodness, look what you can accomplish! You wouldn't know that if you only let NYT or WaPo form your opinions about the value of human life.

The stem cell miracle breakthrough

It will be interesting the see the left/right line up on the news of the new stem cell technique that doesn't require the complexity of removing an egg from a woman. I don't understand the old method or the new, except it doesn't come with the moral and ethical baggage of the old. Here's the explanation by Dr. Jonathon Lapook at CBS News.

What's so surprising is that the recipe is relatively easy to follow. I expect there will be an explosion of stem cell research all over the world.

Essentially, this new method makes the old way of destroying harvested or left over embryos the dinosaur. Researchers who have invested their careers, grants and labs in this are not going to be happy. It's like the guy who invested his fortune in buggy whips when people started buying into the idea of the automobile.

I don't think it will end the national debate peacefully, as WaPo quoted Rev. Thomas Berg. The left will never concede this victory to Bush. If he hadn't held the line on refusing to release federal money in destroying human life, this easier, simpler and cheaper method probably would not have been found.

[James] Thomson said he was surprised it didn't take longer to discover how to reprogram ordinary cells. The technique, he said, is so simple that "thousands of labs in the United States can do this, basically tomorrow." In contrast, the cloning approach is so complex and expensive that many scientists say it couldn't be used routinely to supply stem cells for therapy.

We'll just have to see. There have been promised breakthroughs before.