Now that the debate seems to be over, what can we say about Bush’s policy and the long months it took for him to devise it? I think it is fair to look upon it as a model of how to deal with the complicated scientific and ethical dilemmas that will continue to confront political leaders in the age of biotechnology. Bush refused to accept the notion that we must choose between medical research and the principle of the dignity of life at every stage. He sought both to advance biomedical science and at the same time to respect the sanctity of human life. In the end he came to a moderate, balanced decision that drew a prudent and principled line. The decision was both informed and reasoned, based on lengthy study and consultation with people of widely divergent viewpoints. It was consciously not guided by public-opinion polls.
Commentary Link
This well-written article gives the background on the embryonic stem cell decision. Of course, my problem with the decision is that it has not aged that well. Problems with contamination of the original approved lines restricted research and new developments could not be accomodated.
The President looked better after recent announcements allowing creation of embryonic stem cells that did not require destroying embryos. Everyone including me is rejoycing. But, these cells are not the cells I developed from. These cells do not show the beginnings of disease that will kill me later. Only embryonic stem cells can provide the material that gives answers to how humans really develop. Research in that area needs to continue.
Lets not be too quick in saying that cells developed for modified skin cells are the SAME as ESC. ESC cells that we know very little about no less. We may have to back up on that too.
