Seriously Underplayed Story of the Day
If I may interrupt the very enjoyable festival of reading other people's email for a moment, there was a remarkably under-reported development yesterday that demonstrates, I think, President Bush's loss of authority in the past few months. Elias Zerhouni, the head of the National Institutes of Health, testified to a Senate committee that he favors a lifting of Bush's limit on stem cell research. It leaves us fighting disease (and foreign competition) "with one hand tied behind our back," Zerhouni said. Clearly prepared to say what he said, Zerhouni offered a vivid metaphor: he called stem cells the "software of life."
This story did not seem to make the paper editions of either the New York Times or the Washington Post. (The Wall Street Journal had a very short blurb on page one and no longer story.) All the papers had it on-line, of course. But isn't this a pretty big deal? Bush has used his veto only once: to kill a bill that would have lifted the near-ban on federally funded stem cell research that he imposed in 2001. He feels strongly about it, apparently. Zerhouni, like the US Attorneys, serves at the pleasure of the president. And the president cannot be pleased. Either Zerhouni is confident that Bush won't fire him, or he doesn't care.
Zerhouni's strong endorsement of embryonic stem cell research--and especially his emphasis on urgency--puts the lie to several preposterous defenses of the Bush restriction: 1) that it isn't really a ban because it only applies to federally funded research (the terms of the restriction make it almost impossible, or at least extremely and pointlessly costly, to do privately funded stem cell research if you also accept federal funding for other research, as all major medical research facilities do); 2) that adult stem cells are just as promising (they're not); and so on.
I should add that I have an interest here: a malady (Parkinson's) for which stem cells are especially promising. One of the most ridiculous things sometimes suggested by the other side in this dispute is that advocates of embryonic stem cell research are motivated more by a desire to slaughter embryos than by hope for what might come from the research. Let me assure them that the interest in the research is pretty intense and definitely sincere.
Add Your Comment:
Most Popular »
- Best of the Decade: Sci-Fi Movies
- CNN Poll: Man Made Global Warming Takes a Hit
- "How Will Dave Ever Make Fun of Sex Scandals Again?"
- Why Wells Fargo isn't paying back TARP
- Is Harry Reid Burning Out?
- How Will Obama Pay For Stimulus 2.1? (or 3.0, 3.1, whatever you want to call it)
- War of the Supermen: Q&A With Matt Idelson
- The Health Reform Abortion Wars, Part Deux
- A Jobs Speech with Elbows
- Economists Growing More Wary of the Senate Health Bill
- The Truth Behind the Leaked Climate-Change E-Mails
- Mexico Witness Protection: Corrupt Program, New Killings
- Tiger Woods Must Face His Fans' Moral Outrage
- Helicopter Parents: The Backlash Against Overparenting
- Taiwan: World's Lowest Birthrate Could Affect Society
- How Strong Is the Evidence Against Amanda Knox?
- Creating Jobs: Can Obama Government Boost Employment?
- U.S. Doesn't Know Where bin Laden Is; Time to Let Go
- That Viral Thing: Facebook's Secret Code
- Humanure: Goodbye, Toilets. Hello, Extreme Composting













RSS