|
|
October 23, 2006Michael J Fox fighting for bad science - UPDATEDWhen I was a little girl, I remember a neighbor of ours who spent every Labor Day raging at Jerry Lewis for “parading those poor crippled children around to pull on the heartstrings so that people will send him money…” As though the funds raised by the Muscular Dystrophy Association were going into Lewis’ pocket. Today we’re being treated to this political commercial by Michael J Fox, who suffers from Parkinson’s Disease and is allowing himself to be used by Claire McCaskill’s political campaign to pull on the heartstrings (and create a sense of “moral outrage”) so as to defeat her opponant. McCaskill “shares my hope for a cure,” says Fox, while her (presumably evil) opponant apparently wants Fox to suffer. Booo…Hiss…. The video is indeed difficult to watch, and one sincerely wishes there was immediately in place a cure for Fox and his fellow sufferers. Fox believes that his cure lies in the use of Embryonic Stem Cells Research (ESCR) and puts his hope in research currently being done by using precisely those sorts of cells on Parkinson’s patients. So, this story must have been very unwelcome, yesterday. Stem cells might cause brain tumors, study finds Steven Goldman and colleagues at the University of Rochester Medical Center in New York said human stem cells injected into rat brains turned into cells that looked like early tumors. But the grafted cells started to show areas that no longer consisted of dopamine-releasing neurons, but of dividing cells that had the potential to give rise to tumors. The researchers killed the animals before they could know for sure, and said any experiments in humans would have to be done very cautiously. Scientists have long feared that human embryonic stem cells could turn into tumors, because of their pliability. This is not the first time ESC research for Parkinson’s sufferers has frightened scientists and halted experimentation. As reported by the New England Journal of Medicine, and - ahem - the New York Times, the injection of ESC’s into the brains of Parkinson’s patients became nightmarish experimentations gone bad. “They chew constantly, their fingers go up and down, their wrists flex and distend,” he said. And the patients writhe and twist, jerk their heads, fling their arms about.”It was tragic, catastrophic,” Greene said. “It’s a real nightmare. And we can’t selectively turn it off.” One man was so badly affected that he could no longer eat and had to use a feeding tube, Greene said. In another, the condition came and went unpredictably throughout the day, and when it occurred, the man’s speech was unintelligible. For now, Greene said, his position is clear: “No more fetal transplants. We are absolutely and adamantly convinced that this should be considered for research only. And whether it should be research in people is an open question.” In the past when I have cited this article, I have heard from supporters of ESC research that this study used not “embryonic” stem cells, but “fetal stem cells from aborted fetuses.” I know that is what the NY Times piece says, but I don’t see that in the NEJM report. Moreover, we must not forget that before a fetus is a fetus it is an embryo for 8 weeks. If these scientists got their stem cells from aborted pregnancies, they clearly were looking for embryos, and I think might be a safe presumption to say that the words “fetal” and “embryonic” were being used rather interchangably in the Times piece. But the NEJM report clearly uses the world EMBRYONIC both in its title and throughout the study, as we see here: Background Transplantation of human embryonic dopamine neurons into the brains of patients with Parkinson’s disease has proved beneficial in open clinical trials. However, whether this intervention would be more effective than sham surgery in a controlled trial is not known. Methods We randomly assigned 40 patients who were 34 to 75 years of age and had severe Parkinson’s disease (mean duration, 14 years) to receive a transplant of nerve cells or undergo sham surgery; all were to be followed in a double-blind manner for one year. In the transplant recipients, cultured mesencephalic tissue from four embryos was implanted into the putamen bilaterally. So, we see that in 2001, ESCR was showing the embryonic stem cells tended to be unmanagable and, actually, too powerful, too malleable. We see in 2006 that labrats treated with the stem cells tended to show some improvement but within a short time tissue growth becomes abnormal - one might assume that the rats, which were killed, might have displayed similiar behavior as was seen in 2001, had they lived. For all the talk we hear about the “great promise” of Embryonic Stem Cells, the research doesn’t support it. Nor, apparently, does private funding. There are, however, wonderful results being seen in various research and testing being done with the use of Adult Stem Cells (ASCR). We don’t hear very much about it, though. Writes Wesley J. Smith in the National Review Online, 2002: Stem cells were harvested from the patient’s brain using a routine brain biopsy procedure. They were cultured and expanded to several million cells. About 20 percent of these matured into dopamine-secreting neurons. In March 1999, the cells were injected into the patient’s brain. Three months after the procedure, the man’s motor skills had improved by 37 percent and there was an increase in dopamine production of 55.6 percent. One year after the procedure, the patient’s overall Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale had improved by 83 percent — this at a time when he was not taking any other Parkinson’s medication! That is an astonishing, remarkable success, one that you would have thought would set off blazing headlines and lead stories on the nightly news. Had the treatment been achieved with embryonic stem cells, undoubtedly the newspapers would have screamed loudly enough to be heard. Unfortunately, reportage about the Parkinson’s success story was strangely muted. True, the Washington Post ran an inside-the-paper story and there were some wire service reports. But the all-important New York Times — the one news outlet that drives television and cable news — did not report on it at all. Nor did a search of the Los Angeles Times website yield any stories about the experiment. Please read Smith’s article - it is long and chock-full of information on successful ASCR you never hear about because, for some reason, only the stuff of embryos is fascinating to the press and the left. I wonder why that is, really? Why are they so hot to exploit the embryo - when study after study says don’t do it - and so bored with a safer alternative that does not in any way exploit or destroy human life? Writing on this same subject a while back, I said: That research…made me believe that Embryonic stem cells are like uncut heroin…waaaay, way to powerful to use - they are part of begotten life in its purest form (perhaps still too near to God for our fooling with) - and they are so maleable as to be (so far in research) unpredictable and unusable. And that’s not even getting into the moral and ethical questions of whether or not a human embryo should be exploited in such a way, particularly when Adult Stem Cells are showing remarkable results in everything from helping sufferers of Sickle Cell Anemia and Thallassemias Major and Minor, to spinal injuries, skin regeneration and more. I still feel that way… The proponants of ESC research like to say obnoxious things along the lines of “Bush is against science,” and “[Talent] doesn’t want Michael J Fox to stop moving, just like the nazis on the right didn’t want Christopher Reeve to walk again!” And they like to pretend that ESC research and funding have been - or are about to be - criminalized. The truth is and always has been that scientists are free to conduct experiments using ESC, and private investors are free to fund it. All President Bush has ever said was, “the government is not going to fund it, the government is not going to help you create more ESC lines.” Booo…Hisss…. I feel badly for Michael J Fox, and for the father of my former neighbor who worked his garden while his Parkinson’s afflicted body flailed and he paced the plantings with a scissor-like walk. I felt badly for Pope John Paul II when he could no longer control his body, and I feel badly for the Rev. Billy Graham, too. I hope with all my heart that a treatment or cure can be found to alleviate such suffering. But let’s stop pretending that to be against government funding of ESCR is to be some mustachio-curling eeeevil entity who revels in human suffering, and let’s also stop pretending that Embryonic Stem Cell Research is a hotbed of medical innovation and staggering success, when precisely the opposite is true. Michael J. Fox’s ad is affecting, I guess. And as it is showing during the World Series in St. Louis, I suppose it’s going to win the day for his candidate, but in the end, it’s not going to do much for him, personally…and it is going to allow millions of people to feel noble and compassionate when they go to the polls and pull a wholly emotional lever while being completely underinformed about the realities of the matter. UPDATE: Not only am I not a scientist, but I’ve never claimed to be one. Those of you who have suffered through my attempts to make sense of technology are quite aware that I am a woman who knows her limitations! I can read, though, and process information, and I can see by what is presented that ESCR has not lived up to the hype. AJ Strata is much smarter than I am, though, and he goes into absorbing and fascinating detail on the issue of this research, and I urge you to read him. Also, he rightly identifies the “disingenuous” ones here. Michael J. Fox is not the bad guy, and I am sorry to see some rightwing sites being nasty about him. He’s just a guy who wants his circumstance to change; you can’t gainsay his desire. But the people telling him he can have his life back if only there was more federal funding for ESCR, and who think misrepresenting the whole issue is the way to go about it…they’re a whole ‘nother subject. They’re right up there with John Edwards saying that if he and John Kerry were elected, Christopher Reeve would walk away from his wheelchair. Over at National Review Online, Kathryn Lopez notes that the whole ESCR matter is more complicated than the left wants to admit and she is disgusted that McCaskill approved this ad: Amendment 2 is not a matter of voting for or against sick people. Claire McCaskill should be ashamed for approving a message that suggests such a thing. But apparently she’s comfortable running as just another snake-oil salesman. Dean Barnett on the other hand calls the ad disingenuous and points out that Fox never once uses the word “EMBRYONIC,” thus making it sound like those evil Republicans are against ALL Stem Cell Research. But of course. Like me, Barnett has a personal stake in the success of ASCR, but is opposed to ESCR. Meanwhile, John Stephenson has video of McCaskille supporters at work. Related articles on Adult Stem Cell Research: Also writing: Blue Crab Boulevard Other thoughts: The Dangerous Prayer of Blessing http://theanchoressonline.com/2006/10/23/michael-j-fox-fighting-for-bad-science/trackback/ 27 Responses to “Michael J Fox fighting for bad science - UPDATED” |
October 23rd, 2006 at 12:11 pm
I can understand the impulse of “clutching at straws”. We saw the same thing with laetrile as a cure for cancer. But the research needs to be done before folks leap over the precipice. Seeing as how adult stem cells have the same potential without - so far - the horrifying side effects of cancer growth, proponents of fetal stem cell use are simply pushing abortion. And that’s the saddest part of all of this.
October 23rd, 2006 at 12:20 pm
I couldn’t agree more! As both a scientist who has worked for years with Adult Stem Cells and a Catholic, I have thought about the “why” a lot. I preach all the time that ESR’s are the biggest banboozle of the century, well, maybe next to global warming, but no one wants to hear it. Not only does it stymy the good & promising Adult research, it preys on the vulnerable. After all, in a country that loves to run from suffering, doesn’t everyone have an “Aunt Molly” who needs a cure?
My best guesses for the why(s) are:
1. Follow the money (as always). Having depended on research grants for years, I know how the game is played. Also, there is a TON of money to be made from patents and licenses of “ESC” even if they NEVER work for patient care–sort of like the dot.com stock greed–get in now before it all goes bust. Greed, greed, and more greed. Try asking one of these folks to document ONE, just ONE postive/promising rsh result or heaven fobid, succesful clinical trial, and see how fast they run.
2. I think it also might be linked to the Roe V Wade potential reversal. If we get the country thinking, by alturistic reasons of course, that “killing babies”, well, IS sort of ok, we increase the odds that the country will “desensitize” against “baby killing”, ahh, I mean “choice.”
3. It’s a really good vote getter; even for Bill Frist who should/does know better. This is a candidate’s dream–too complicated for most lay folks to REALLY understand, so just keep feeding them empty promises.
4. Last but not least, most Amercians are horrified at any personal suffering, even beyond Aunt Molly, so let’s buy into the plan! It all goes with the outing of God and running from the cross, but few if any ever want to go THERE. Embrace the cross? What’s that? FYI, the Anchoress does is beautifully. She may have her “human moments”, but she never, never runs FROM it. I just heard a priest say, IF angels could envy, they would envy that we get to suffer and they can’t. Imagine!
October 23rd, 2006 at 12:35 pm
[...] I swear, nothing is sacred. Michael J Fox, of whom I was a former fan, is pimping his Parkinson’s disease in a campaign ad. During the World Series! Sad. Sad. It’s the typical, “if you’re not with us, you’re against us” meme. Anchoress: The proponents of ESC research like to say obnoxious things along the lines of “Bush is against science,” and “[Talent] doesn’t want Michael J Fox to stop moving, just like the nazis on the right didn’t want Christopher Reeve to walk again!” And they like to pretend that ESC research and funding have been - or are about to be - criminalized. The truth is and always has been that scientists are free to conduct experiments using ESC, and private investors are free to fund it. All President Bush has ever said was, “the government is not going to fund it, the government is not going to help you create more ESC lines.” Booo…Hisss…. [...]
October 23rd, 2006 at 12:35 pm
Ads like this and misleading scientific articles leave me feeling very sad and angry at the same time. preying on sick and sometimes desperate people with false hope to get in office or to get more money for research is very wrong. my husband works in the scientific research field with a well known genetic firm and he gets so dicouraged by the dishonesty and outright false hope given to people who are sick and just want their lives back. it is sad so many say they are doing it for the betterment of mankind. they are in it for the fame and money and will do anything and say anything to get fame and money and the sick people live in dispair and pain .angry that they are being denied something when in reality it doesn’t exist and most likly will not exist for a very long time. very very sad.
October 23rd, 2006 at 2:02 pm
[...] The Anchoress, who I ‘met’ over the ESCR issue, has a good post out today highlighting the problematic results of ESCR to date. Especially the consistent problem of tumors and uncontrolled cell growth in response to ESCR therapies. ESCR is a process to integrate cells and DNA in a manner never before tried, and therefore poses a host of challenges. The challenges are manifold and follow the progression from an undifferentiated stem cell (an neutral cell) to a target cell (a specific cell type like a liver, skin or nerve cell), to tissue and organs (which are a collection of cell types which create the liver, and skin, etc). First the strem cell needs to translate into a target cell type. How this happens is completely unknown at this time. We know the general process involves a sequence of activating and deactivating genes under controlled chemical and evironmental conditions which change from step to step. But that is like knowing that to do brain surgery we need to open up the skull and repair damaged areas. Generally correct, impossible to implement if that is all we know. [...]
October 23rd, 2006 at 2:17 pm
Embryonic vs Adult Stem Cells for Parkinson’s
The Anchoress speculates That research…made me believe that Embryonic stem cells are like uncut heroin…waaaay, way to powerful to use - they are part of begotten life in its purest form (perhaps still too near to God for our fooling with) …
October 23rd, 2006 at 2:53 pm
Stem Cells = Tumor?
A very disquieting news report that should really bother those who are strong proponents of embryonic stem cell research. It is very preliminary, but it is also very frightening.
Steven Goldman and colleagues at the University of Rochester Me…
October 23rd, 2006 at 3:06 pm
[...] UPDATE: The Anchoress, as usual, has her finger on the pulse of this sordid nonsense. [...]
October 23rd, 2006 at 3:51 pm
[...] Byrd, Anchoress By: Sister Toldjah in: Election ‘06, Elections, Congress | EMail This Post | Print This Post | Trackback URI for this post:http://sistertoldjah.com/archives/2006/10/23/missouris-jim-talent-your-typical-heartless-and-cruel-conservative/trackback/ » [...]
October 23rd, 2006 at 3:54 pm
Anchoress,
Thanks for your efforts on this issue. As I emailed you, the tragedy of watching MJ Fox suffer his illness was only compounded by the realization he was being fooled.
I did find an interesting tragic irony (and updated my post on it). It turns out the good Dr Goodman, who discovered another case of ESCR results going bad, works for the Michael J Fox Foundation. The very results you cited probably came from Fox’s own investment.
It has been clear from the outset there is an element in the scientific and medical community that will knowingly misinform the public about ESCR and its challenges. And the horrific results are hidden behind incomprehensible scientific jargon to maintain the fantasy that ESCR is not the Frankenstein’s Monster it is.
If the image of a child’s arm attached to an adult to replace a lost limb bothers people, what would the image of a child’s brain cells battling the patients brain cells? Here is a description from the doctors biography:
“Isolation and molecular characterization of different progenitor cell types of both the fetal and adult human CNS”
In layman’s terms: they pull out the brain and nervous system cells from fetuses and adults that
have not completed their final transition into a locked in cell type, and run tests on them. Presumably the individuals are dead when this happens.
I understand the need for scientific research. I did a lot when I was studying biology. And sacrificing an organism to understand the processed and mechanics is the heartless part of the job. But the spectrum of possible results are both good and bad, and the bad ones probably vastly outnumber the good ones. If you can get one of these scientist to be honest, they would probably agree and say the odds are long that we will solve the parkinson’s disease within 20 years with ESCR. But as you noted, the ASCR path is already showing results.
We need to establish a information base that is not so biased, and can translate the complete picture, good and bad, to the American people.
October 23rd, 2006 at 4:02 pm
Michael J. Fox Ad for McCaskill Airs During World Series
O.K., so the video below about the McCaskil Vandals is old news I learn. This video is the latest outrage.
The Anchoress has this one covered.
feel badly for Michael J Fox, and for the father of my former neighbor who worked his garden while h…
October 23rd, 2006 at 4:11 pm
One last update on the post you may find interesting. It seems Dr Goodman not only works for Fox, but he is on the record saying the ASCR methods show much more promise for Fox’s conditions than the ESCR. It is the last update to my post on the subject. It would seem Fox should listen to Goodman more and stay away from campaign commercials.
October 23rd, 2006 at 8:30 pm
On Embryos and Principles (and Inevitably Politics)
The Anchoress has a post up today reacting to a “yank on your heartstrings” political ad featuring Michael J. Fox which apparently aired during the World Ser…
October 24th, 2006 at 12:04 am
Was Michael J Fox deliberately enhancing his symptoms for this ad?
It is a serious issue and a serious accusation.
At issue is this campaign ad for Democrat Claire McCaskill against Republican Jim Talent:
Fox is clearly suffering from the effects of Parkinson’s. The question raised by many was &quo…
October 24th, 2006 at 12:59 am
Well, I now know personally TWO people who have undergone ASC implants, one for cancer and the other for myelodysplastic anemia. In both cases, they used the patient’s *own* stem cells, and both treatments were successful.
I may not have all the details, but it seems to me that, if you’re going to use ESC, the recipient is going to have to take immunosuppressive medications to prevent rejection, as in all organ transplants. In ASC implants, which use the patient’s own cells, no immunosuppressive therapy is necessary. The procedure itself does weaken the immune system for a while, requiring the patient to be in total isolation for a time, but that’s only temporary. The first person I knew, after his period of isolation, is back out in a normal life. The second just received her treatment recently and is still in isolation, but she is doing well.
So, even if you take the morality out of the equation, ASC treatments make a heck of a lot more sense.
October 24th, 2006 at 11:07 am
I think it, like so many issues, has been caught up in irrelevant side isssues- namely, abortion. I’ll buy the argument that says asc is more promising, so should get the $$. But when the reason given for not supporting esc is religious, then no. But, would argue that Bush helped frame the debate as prolife vs porchoice when he first framed it as such when he promised to veto it. That’s the contexdt that was chosen, so that’s the context being fought. When really, the ONLY issue should be if it’s more promising than other areas of research. If it’s not- give the $$ to what is.
October 24th, 2006 at 8:25 pm
[...] Check again the Anchoress for practical reasons why embryonic stem-cell research is not a good thing. [...]
October 25th, 2006 at 11:46 am
When really, the ONLY issue should be if it’s more promising than other areas of research. If it’s not- give the $$ to what is.
Really??? That’s the ONLY issue that should matter? What if the most promising research is flaying people alive, but it only works if the people tortured to death are named “stephanie”? Do you still think that effectiveness should be the ONLY criteria?
It’s really convenient that in this particular case transplants harvested from murdered people don’t work nearly as well as transplants taken without having to kill anyone. But that’s just a bonus reason, and the next moral question might not be so “convenient” for us. Murdering people to steal their body parts is simply wrong, no matter how much “good” can actually be done with the victims’ stolen body parts.
October 25th, 2006 at 12:52 pm
[...] The Anchoress has written a funny script for a GOP ad she’d like to see. MJ Fox is confusing the stem cell debate for alot of people, just to pull a few votes for Democratic pals. Bethany (isn’t she cute? Smart, too!) over at HotAir takes on politicians who briefly darken church doors to trawl for votes. “Modern day evangelicals expect more of their politicians than just church appearances. They expect integrity, character and consistency…above reproach and represent a contrast to perceived moral and ethical deficiencies in the political arena today…accountable for their actions in Washington and in their home district” [...]
October 26th, 2006 at 12:47 pm
[...] Addendum Speaking of reprehensible campaign tactics, The Anchoress has a few (thousand) words on the Michael J. Fox ads. It’s fascinating how the truly promising research — using adult stem cells — has been downplayed by the client media, preserving a phony but politically useful controversy. Republicans are easily caricatured as “anti-science,” with all their blather about Intelligent Design. But Democrats can conspire against science too, and Parkinson’s patients are merely a means to an end — power. Posted at 1:17 PM | | [...]
October 26th, 2006 at 2:07 pm
Michael J. Fox on CBS and the goo of victimhood
Michael J. Fox is going to do a couple of minutes with Katie Couric this evening on the CBS Evening News. In considering what that will be like, I realize that 30-minute broadcast news shows are essentially pointless. In the…
October 29th, 2006 at 8:02 pm
[...] Michael J Fox fighting for bad science - UPDATED [...]
October 30th, 2006 at 11:45 pm
[...] And they’re not convincing me. If ESCR held the promise these folks vaunt, there would be venture capitalists lined up around the block to throw money at the researchers. Hey, there is nothing stopping them from doing so, there is NO LAW against ESCR. When I see that happening, when I see the chilling George Soros investing as much money in ESCR as he has invested in political manipulation, I’ll start to believe that ESCR might actually show some promise. [...]
November 4th, 2006 at 2:54 pm
[...] More blatant dishonesty (and unconscionable emotional manipulation) meant to benefit the McCaskill campaign. Staggering connivance. And weren’t the Dems just criticizing Republicans for “exploiting children” in a campaign ad< ?a>? Why yes, yes they were. Unreal. Relevant to the issue and to this race: Missouri Scientists Under Fire for Fudging Stem Cell Research. [...]
November 9th, 2006 at 11:27 am
Three blind mice … no more?
The Washington Post reports today on an experiment that restored the sight of blind test mice by transplanting cells from the eyes of healthy mice: Blind mice regained some ability to see after getting transplants of cells taken from the
November 14th, 2006 at 4:01 pm
[...] As we watch this seemingly inexorable march toward the elimination of imperfect or sickly people for the good of humankind, I wonder, sometimes, if the Michael J Fox’s of the world realize that they are advocating the sorts of people and policies that will one day tell him that if he really cared about being a good citizen in the world, he’d take himself out. [...]
November 30th, 2007 at 4:13 pm
[...] L. Davenport, MD, writing in The American Thinker, calls Michael J. Fox’s distortive political ads nothing less than [...]