Liberals do not miss an opportunity to force feed propaganda and misinformation via Hollywood. One expects fantasy from Hollywood, but it is disingenuous for Hollywood to advocate the liberal agenda under the guise of “docudrama” or productions that it purports to be objective. A case in point is a recent episode of Law & Order.
While I am a fan of Law & Order, occasionally I can hardly stomach the liberal propaganda spewing forth as fact. This was never more evident than episode 384, Season #17, “Talking Points” that aired Feb. 2, 2007. In this episode a college student was shot and killed by a grad student, Malcom Yates (allusion for Michael J. Fox) attempting to kill a speaker, Judith Barlow (allusion for Ann Coulter) for her open criticism for “embryonic” stem cell research that Yates advocated would provide a cure for his Parkinson disease.
Nice story line, but Hollywood could not resist propagandizing the plot and utilizing gross deception. They referenced Barlow, Coulter’s character, as a “controversial” speaker and failed to reference Yates, Fox’s character, as controversial, like his position isn’t. One would gather the only real crime was Yates missed Barlow and killed some innocent bystander and had he killed Barlow the killing might have been justified. The show did, however, illustrate liberal intolerance for anyone expressing an opinion contradictory to tenants of the Religion of Liberalism.
The gross deception was demonstrated in combining “embryonic” stem cell research and stem cell or “adult” stem cell research – as one in the same. And it’s not. The show erroneously insinuated “embryonic” stem cell research offered some promise for cures to debilitating diseases, like Parkinson. A liberal Lie! The truth is that “adult” stem cell research has had some promising results, which the show failed to mention. The episode’s erroneous portrayal of Coulter’s position was an egregious disservice to the viewing public.
Research debunking the value of “Embryonic” stem cell research is extensive. Here are a few examples.
Wesley Smith critiqued a video, “Pathway to Cures†and reported the producers undermined “the reputation of science by engaging in deception, obfuscation, spin, and hype to win the political debate over embryonic stem-cell and human cloning researchâ€.
In a study by Robert Moffit, Kelly Hollowell, Phil Coelho and Dave Weldon, they reported, “No currently approved treatments have been obtained using embryonic stem cells. There are no human trials despite all the hype and all the media. After 20 years of research, embryonic stem cells haven”t been used to treat people because the cells are unproven and unsafe! They also noted, “So far, more than 6,000 patients and 66 diseases have been successfully treated with stem cells from cord blood. The clinical advantages of cord blood are promising”. Results are even more promising with children, with clinical trials showing an 80% survival rate for children with immunodeficiency diseases.
Most notably a Prentice study reported, “As of July 16, 2006 – List of 72 diseases and conditions that studies have shown potential benefits from Adult Stem Cells that include Cancers, Auto-Immune Diseases, Cardiovascular, Ocular, Immunodeficiencies, Neural Degenerative Diseases and Injuries, Anemias and Other Blood Conditions, Wounds and Injuries, Other Metabolic Disorders, Liver Disease, Bladder Disease.” Yet, “Embryonic Stem Cells have failed to show any potential benefits in any classification of medical diseases or conditions.”
Michael Fumento noted the media has been quiet about another useful source for “adult” stem cells. He reported, “This has caused great consternation on the part of those seeking increased taxpayer embryonic stem cell funds. There hasn’t even been a single clinical trial involving them. Researchers admit we won’t have approved embryonic stem cell treatments for at least 10 years.”
One might ask why liberals deny the failure of “embryonic” stem cell research. It’s not that difficult to answer. Fumento touched on one reason and that is the need for tax payers to continue funding the research. However the primary reason for liberals is the need for more acceptable justifications for abortion. If Embryonic Stem Cells do not offer cures for disease, then how can they use the argument in support for abortion. The failure of Embryonic Stem Cells to provide any promise for medical benefits only chips away at liberal justifications for abortion.
Benefits of Stem Cells to Human Patients. Adult Stem Cells v. Embryonic Stem Cells. Retrieved January 13, 2006 at http://www.stemcellresearch.org/facts/treatments.htm. Research cite; Prentice, D. “Adult Stem Cells” Appendix K in Monitoring Stem Cell Research: A Report of the President”s Council on Bioethics (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 2004), 309-346. http://www.stemcellresearch.org/old/Prentice-AdultStemCells.pdf
Fumento, M. (02/08/07). Code of silence. Weekly Standard. Retrieved February 8, 2007 at http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/260wxcdx.asp
Moffit, R. Ph.D., Kelly Hollowell, K. Ph.D., Phil Coelho, P. and Dave Weldon, D. (05/24/05). Federal Stem Cell Research: What Taxpayers Should Know. WebMemo #749 Retrieved on January 13, 2006 at http://www.heritage.org/Research/HealthCare/wm749.cfm
Smith, W.J. (11/24/2006). Science and Spin. Weekly Standard. Retrieved November 25, 2006 at http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/990cuqpf.asp
Leave a Reply