The Hwang Media Template
It is amazing how similar every story I have read on the Hwang fraud follows the same template, including this AP report. Ditto this New York Times story that ran on the front page below the fold.
1) Report the facts that Hwang is a fraud, but don't accurately describe the process of cloning;
2) Have scientists assure that the field will go forward, perhaps with even more vigor.
3) Describe the dashed hopes of people with degenerative conditions, but do not breathe a word about the adult stem cell research that offers at least as much, if not more, hope to these people--and sooner.
The AP story has an ironic twist. It quotes Australian stem cell researcher Alan Trounson as wondering how a scientist could lie. But as described in detail in Consumer's Guide to a Brave New World, he was forced to apologize himself after testifying before a parliamentary committee that embryonic stem cells had helped mice to walk, when the experiment in question hadn't involved ES cells.
Still no meaningful exploration of the history of hype surrounding cloning and ES cell research, whether the peer review system needs reform, the politicization of science, etc.
Thank goodness we have alternative media.
posted by Wesley J. Smith @ 8:24 AM
2 Comments
2 Comments:
I saw a NOVA piece tonight that seemed accurate in describing the fact that embryos are destroyed to obtain cells.
I guess that's what happens when you do a fair job of looking at the issue and why people on both sides see things the way they do.
They then described "a way to get embryonic cells without forming an embryo." And they did so very vaguely, then had a scientist scoff at the fact that scientists should cater to the moral scruples of the social conservatives because "you can't please everyone." I can only assume they were talking about that technique that's been talked about recently called "Altered Nuclear Transfer" (ANT).
I'm not sure how I feel about the ANT technique... it seems like it may be more akin to creating a "retarded" embryo rather than no embryo at all.
Wesley, if you could, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts, as well as any cool resources you've uncovered. All I know about ANT and the like is what's been discussed somewhat in the pages of First Things and then some of the Catholic/Christian blogosphere.
I understand they were referring to ANT. I know Bill Hurlbut quite well. He is a good friend. He believes that this technology could result in the creation of a cell mass of pluripotent cells that would never be an organism, that is, an embryo. He would also never support creating disabled embryos. Whether that can be done, remains to be seen. But an early animal study seemed to show promise.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home