Bugs Bunny, Mickey Mouse, and Rep. William Delgado
The headline was buried in this NewScience.com article today, reporting on another potential scandal in the cloning world regarding London researcher Chris Shaw's recent claims of success of finding a way around the shortage of human eggs needed for experimentation.
While Shaw's boasts were called into question, his research wasn't, which was to "derive stem cells from embryos cloned using rabbit eggs."
First s/he-males (created by a Chicago researcher), then Mickey Mouse, and now a real-life Bugs Bunny.
Meanwhile, there are absolutely no regulations on embryonic and cloning experimentation in Illinois. Plus, Gov. Blagojevich last year forced Illinois taxpayers to foot the bill of these ghastly experiments.
Will Rep. William Delgado allow He-Man Blagojevich to wreak bioethic havoc in Illinois unfettered? We'll see. Delgado thus far does not like HB4156, a ban on taxpayer-funded human cloning in Illinois that his Human Services Committee is mulling. Delgado has offered amendments that would gut the bill.
Dr. Doolittle once wished to talk to the animals. Any day now, Dr., don't be surprised to converse with a live, 6-foot rabbit who asks, of course, "What's up, Doc?"
13 comments:
There should be no regulation on cloning experiments in Illinois other than you can't implant them into a uterus.
Whether nuclear transfer experiments should be publicly funded though is a totally different debate that I would likely side with you just based on the fact that there are more pressing things to spend state revenues on (like funding the pension system).
whatever, Jill...your rhetoric is beginning to sound stretched and silly. Just look at the headline of your post and ask yourself if that adds or subtracts from your credibility.
Thank you Rep. Delgado. Keep up the good work.
Mickey Mouse...Bugs Bunny...He-Man...Dr. Doolittle...bad mixed metaphor overload...
Jill, this post is a mess.
Bio Tech is raising serious and grave concerns. It's stunning how cycnical people can be about the Oil Industry or Defense Contractors, and yet have this total faith in the good will of the Bio Tech industry.
We need to talk more about the ethics of what they're doing and the potential of exploitation of people, especially in the harvesting of tissue.
It's weird sounding science but don't dismiss the person raising the alert.
This is the most compelling reason I can think of teaching William Jennings Byran in Biology class. He raised a moral argument agains evolution. What really needs to be heard is a moral argument against some of the new Bio Tech research because it's questionable stuff.
I've been out of pocket for a few days will write more next week.
Bill
There's a moral argument against social Darwinism that should be learned in school when Social Darwinism is talked about in American history, but to teach a moral argument against biological evolution is as silly as teaching a moral argument against gravity.
Yes Jill is very pasionate about her beliefs but Rep Ries is right on with his bill to just ban STATE TAX DOLLARS from being used on such controversal procedures.
This is not the far right trying to ban a procedure this is just banning the the use of taxpayers dollars that could be better put to use.
The liberal left is making fools of themselves on this one.
anon 12:42 It's not the moral arguement against Social Darwinism I want to see again (although sometimes it's sadly needed). It's the moral argument, or moral sense, that's going to be needed by this coming generation of bio engineers. There is some disturbing stuff on the horizon that should bother anyone of goodwill regardless of where they stand on the political spectrum, or religious belief or lack of it.
Liberals are not handling the topic well and seem to me at least to be handing open permission to the bio tech firms to do what they will.
With all unethical things that have gone on in Korea and California there is no way I want our government in charge of over seeing this type of research. Much less paying for it.
There's a big difference between bioethics, which we should all have a sense of, and saying that there is a morality to evolution, of which there is none, just as there is no morality in gravity. Evolution is an amoral scientific explanation that represents the accumulation of 150+ years of scientific observations.
scientist: is evolution still going on? if so, what's the forecast? seriously...this was always a stumbling block in Biology. I always wondered if we were headed for Dr. Spock's pure energy life forms.
Seems like a science could make a prediction.
Whenever you see a bacteria develop a resistance to an antibiotic, you are witnessing evolution
Post a Comment