More on Stem Cells

From today's Oregonian editorial:

On Tuesday, a Senate subcommittee heard testimony about some unproven methods for deriving embryonic stem cells without destroying embryos. These methods are intriguing, but no one knows if they work. Even the scientists researching them admitted as much Tuesday, agreeing that these methods are no substitute for the Senate's passage of the Specter-Harkin bill.

This bill would expand federal financing for embryonic stem-cell research using established methods. The cells are derived from excess embryos that fertility clinics just discard.

The problem with this statement? As the my bolded portion states, no one knows if they work. The same can be said of embryonic stem cell research in general. Adult stem cells, as my previous post noted, have already produced several favorable treatments. In addition, despite left-wing blather to the contrary, there is no ban on embryonic stem cell research, only a limit on federal funding. Non-government research is going on this very day.

So this editorial simply dismisses an "intriguing" method — one which would not destroy human embryos, would not stomp on the ethical concerns over the procedures, but would provide the same promise as the Specter-Harkin bill — while lauding an equally-unproven substitute. But such a position has no resemblance to any "compromise" the Democrats keep shouting for. It is, pure and simple, ideological drivel.