Of Stem Cells and Fairy Tales

[Guest guest]

Of Stem Cells and Fairy Tales

Scientists who have been telling Reagan that embryonic stem cell

research could cure Alzheimer's now admit that it isn't true.

by Wesley J.

06/10/2004 3:00:00 PM

" PEOPLE NEED A FAIRY TALE, " D.G. McKay, a stem cell researcher

at the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, told

Washington Post reporter Rick Weiss, explaining why scientists have

allowed society to believe wrongly that stem cells are likely to

effectively treat Alzheimer's disease. " Maybe that's unfair, but they

need a story line that's relatively simple to understand. "

Or maybe Big Biotech needs access to taxpayer dollars to fund

embryonic stem cell and cloning research--private investors generally

give companies engaged in these endeavors a cold shoulder--and they

are using famous grief stricken families like the Reagans to do their

political lifting. If true, it demonstrates a depth of insincerity and

disingenuousness that is as cruel as it is unjustifiable.

Here's the story: Researchers have apparently known for some time that

embryonic stem cells will not be an effective treatment for

Alzheimer's, because as two researchers told a Senate subcommittee in

May, it is a " whole brain disease, " rather than a cellular disorder

(such as Parkinson's). This has generally been kept out of the news.

But now, Washington Post correspondent Rick Weiss, has blown the lid

off of the scam, reporting that while useful abstract information

might be gleaned about Alzheimer's through embryonic stem cell

research, " stem cell experts confess . . . that of all the diseases

that may be someday cured by embryonic stem cell treatments,

Alzheimer's is among the least likely to benefit. "

But people like Reagan have been allowed to believe otherwise,

" a distortion "

Weiss writes that " is not being aggressively corrected by scientists. "

Why? The false story line helps generate public support for the

biotech political agenda. As Weiss noted, " It [ Reagan's

statement in support of ESCR] is the kind of advocacy that researchers

have craved for years, and none wants to slow its momentum. "

This is a scandal. Misrepresentation by omission corrupts one of the

primary purposes of science, which is to provide society objective

information about the state of scientific knowledge without regard to

the political consequences. Such data then serves as a foundation for

crucial moral analysis about whether and how controversial fields of

scientific inquiry should be regulated, a debate in which all are

entitled to participate. But we can't do so intelligently if we are

not told the truth.

Some scientists have become alarmed by how politicized science has

become. As Pielke, Jr., Director of the Center for Science and

Technology Policy Research at the University of Colorado warned two

years ago in the prestigious science journal Nature, " Many scientists

[now] willingly adopt tactics of demagoguery and character

assassination as well as, or even instead of, reasoned argument, " in

promoting their views. This politicization of science, he worried, has

led some scientists, " not to mention lawyers and those with commercial

interests, " to " manipulate 'facts' to support " their advocacy,

" undermining the scientific community's ability to advise policy

makers. " Consequently, he warned, science " is becoming yet another

playing field for power politics, complete with the trappings of

political spin and a win-at-all-costs attitude. "