Edward's despicable lies yesterday...

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-04-2003
Edward's despicable lies yesterday...
29
Wed, 10-13-2004 - 1:00pm
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/12/edwards.stem.cell/

Frist knocks Edwards over stem cell comment

Edwards invokes legacy of Christopher Reeve

Tuesday, October 12, 2004 Posted: 8:47 PM EDT (0047 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist attacked Sen. John Edwards on Tuesday over a comment the Democratic vice presidential candidate made regarding actor Christopher Reeve.

Edwards said Reeve, who died Sunday, "was a powerful voice for the need to do stem cell research and change the lives of people like him.

"If we do the work that we can do in this country, the work that we will do when John Kerry is president, people like Christopher Reeve will get up out of that wheelchair and walk again," Edwards said.

Frist, a Republican from Tennessee, called Edwards' remark "crass" and "shameful," and said it gave false hope that new treatments were imminent.

Edwards campaign spokesman Mark Kornblau hit back, "Yes, breakthrough research often takes time, but that's never been a reason to not even try -- until George Bush."

Edwards made the comment Monday while he was stumping in Newton, Iowa.

Frist, who was a heart surgeon before coming to the Senate, responded Tuesday in a conference call with reporters arranged by the Bush-Cheney campaign.

"I find it opportunistic to use the death of someone like Christopher Reeve -- I think it is shameful -- in order to mislead the American people," Frist said. "We should be offering people hope, but neither physicians, scientists, public servants or trial lawyers like John Edwards should be offering hype.

"It is cruel to people who have disabilities and chronic diseases, and, on top of that, it's dishonest. It's giving false hope to people, and I can tell you as a physician who's treated scores of thousands of patients that you don't give them false hope."

Kornblau, Edwards' spokesman, said, "What's crass is George Bush standing in the way of promising stem cell research."

Edwards and Democratic presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry have been critical of President Bush's decision to limit federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.

The candidates charge the federal limitation is hindering scientific progress on therapies that could offer hope to people suffering from maladies such as Parkinson's disease, juvenile diabetes and Alzheimer's disease.

Reeve, who was left paralyzed after a horseback-riding accident nine years ago, was an advocate for increased funding for new treatments for spinal cord injuries and stem cell research.

Kerry mentioned Reeve by name in Friday's presidential debate while criticizing Bush's stem cell policy.

Three years ago, citing moral and ethical considerations in destroying human embryos to extract stem cells, Bush limited federal research funding to embryonic stem cell lines already in existence.

Research using stem cells extracted from adult cells was not affected by the policy, nor was privately funded research using new embryonic stem cell lines.

The president and his supporters note that his administration is the first to offer any federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, accusing Democrats of trying to create the impression that Bush has banned the practice.

Criticizing Edwards' comment linking the lifting of Bush's policy to medical breakthroughs, Frist said research related to spinal cord injuries does not involve embryonic stem cells but rather adult stem cells, "where the president has absolutely no restrictions, no limitations and there are about 140 treatments."

Embryonic stem cells are believed to be able to develop into more kinds of cells than adult stem cells, and thus more useful in potentially treating diseases. Yet some research indicates that might not be the case, and the National Institutes of Health has called for further study of both adult and embryonic stem cells.

"Stem cell research is promising," Frist said. "The president vigorously promotes adult and embryonic stem cell research, but he does it with an ethical and moral framework."


iVillage Member
Registered: 02-23-2004
Wed, 10-13-2004 - 2:35pm


He is limiting federal funding of the research to existing cell lines. Prior to that no embryonic stem cell research was federally funded. There is no ban or limit on privately funded ESCR. He's not even saying stem cell research on living human embryos should be illegal, only that those who are morally opposed to it should not have to pay for it, particularly when it has yet to show any real promise of curing anything. I agree with him.

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-05-2004
Wed, 10-13-2004 - 2:37pm


If they are morally opposed to it and don't pay for it how can they have the fundings to do further research to give it a chance to be something in the future??

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-23-2004
Wed, 10-13-2004 - 2:47pm


They are doing the research on existing cell lines from embryos which have already been destroyed, and privately funded research continues. It's a huge moral dilemma-is it okay to create living human embryos and destroy them for research? What if that research never amounts to anything? For those who believe a fertilized egg is a developing human life, should they be forced to pay for something which in their mind is akin to slaughtering individuals for what could end up being completely futile medical experimentation? And where does it stop-suppose we could use three month old embryos for research-is it ok to create them for that purpose? How about killing a nine month old fetus in order to obtain an organ for transplant? Is that ok? It's not a person, legally, so some could argue that it's valid if it saves a life. We have to answer the ethical questions before we simply surge ahead with the medical ones.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-24-2003
Wed, 10-13-2004 - 4:15pm
Edwards in no shape or form lied. He made a positive and hopeful statement for the future of medicine.

Kerry and Reeve were quite close. Reeve called Kerry after Kerry mentioned him the second debate expressing his excitement for Kerry's recognition of stem cell capabilities.

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2004
Wed, 10-13-2004 - 4:34pm

There are no limits on private research. Federal funds were banned from any embryonic stem-cell research until Bush allowed existing strains of stem-cells to be used in federally funded research. Where was the outrage at Clinton's

Renee ~~~

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-16-2004
Wed, 10-13-2004 - 5:02pm
How does that compare to Bush saying that America would not be safe with John Kerry? I'm no expert on stem cell research, but why would Christopher Reeves support the democrats on the issue of stem cell research if there's no connection?
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2004
Wed, 10-13-2004 - 5:15pm

<<How does that compare to Bush saying that America would not be safe with John Kerry? >>


I personally don't believe the world would be safe from terrorism with a Kerry administration, but when did Bush say that?

Renee ~~~

Renee ~~~

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-31-2003
Wed, 10-13-2004 - 6:09pm
"Edwards in no shape or form lied. He made a positive and hopeful statement for the future of medicine."

Yes, he did. Do the research. It's not hard. Type in Stem cell and you'll get plenty of hits. I posted several links in another thread. Edwards did lie. No one is going to walk from spinal cord injuries in the next 4 years, if ever, from stem cell research.

NIU Ribbon   Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-05-2004
Wed, 10-13-2004 - 8:14pm


Bush has made points in the first debate that Kerry can't keep the U.S. safe. He made the point across that Kerry is still in the pre-September 11th mind frame. Here's a link to the script from the first debate: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/showdebate.php?debateid=29

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-23-2004
Wed, 10-13-2004 - 8:41pm


When did Bush say that? And if he did, perhaps he believes that his policies would make the America safer. In any case, it really doesn't compare to Edwards saying that when Kerry is president people like Christopher Reeve will rise up out of their wheelchairs and walk again. While the safety of the country is debatable, the status of embryonic stem cell research with regard to spinal cord injury is scientific fact that can't really be disputed.



There may very well be a connection someday, years down the road. But to claim that George Bush is blocking that possibility, when he is the first president to allow ANY federal funding for the research, and when there is no ban on privately funded research, is disingenuous. What about freedom of religion we're supposed to have in this country? We allowed people to conscientiously object and not serve in the military based on religious beliefs, but we're going to force people to pay for medical experiments on what they consider to be living human beings? He's trying to balance the interests of medical research with ethical issues. As of now there is no data that show ESC will cure anything. But for Edwards to try and claim that spinal cord injuries will be cured by ESCR during a Kerry presidency, that is an outright lie according to scientific opinion.


Edited 10/13/2004 8:43 pm ET ET by liveanew