Stem cell victory positive for Mich.
(Last updated: 11/17/08 6:30pm)On Nov. 4, the citizens of Michigan sent the state Legislature, the Michigan Catholic Conference and Right to Life Michigan a clear message: “You won’t keep us from cures.”
Ryan Dinkgrave
Despite several popularly supported bills to change the state’s archaic laws on embryonic stem cell research, the state legislature had failed the people of Michigan by not moving these bills to law. So citizens organized, collected thousands of petition signatures and got the issue on the ballot as Proposal 2.
Despite a disgusting, deceitful and cruel campaign run by MiCAUSE, the group funded by the Michigan Catholic Conference and Right to Life, the people of Michigan stood together and endorsed embryonic stem cell research.
MiCAUSE spokesman David Doyle wrote a Detroit Free Press editorial about how he was against the pursuit of lifesaving cures even though he has a chronic medical condition. Despite this, the people of Michigan stood up and said this research is valuable, and it must be allowed and encouraged.
This experience should give Catholics in Michigan reason to pause and consider exactly why they give money to their churches. When the churchgoing family whose house is being foreclosed gave the few dollars they could to the church collection basket, did they do so to fund a sensational campaign to discourage lifesaving medical research? Or did they do it because they believed that the money would go to good causes in their community? What are the church’s real priorities?
I wonder what it felt like to be a diabetic in a Catholic church in the past few months. I cannot imagine how it felt to walk past the church one has belonged to his or her whole life and seen neon green and black signs screaming that the research that could cure your disease and lengthen your life “Goes 2 Far.”
Now that the victory party and the sighs and tears of relief have come and gone, it is time to reconcile with those who stood against this lifesaving research. Despite what the opponents of stem cell research said during this campaign, when the cure for diabetes is found, they will be lining up with the rest of us to receive it. When new treatments for those who have suffered spinal cord injuries are developed, the opponents of stem cell research also will be in line to receive them.
The differences between those who supported and those who opposed this proposal are no longer relevant, as all of Michigan benefits from the passage of Proposal 2. Rather than be viewed as a scientific backwater, Michigan will now be able to competitively attract biotech and medical research businesses to our state, at a time when it is in desperate need of economic diversification and opportunity.
For people who could one day benefit from the cures and treatments developed through stem cell research, the passage of Proposal 2 means they no longer need to fear that they will not be able to receive these therapies because of some old, misguided law. Instead, they can feel confident that their right to a cure is respected and protected by their state government.
Proposal 2’s passage is a victory for everyone in Michigan, but I also wish to take a moment to acknowledge the personal victory that it feels like for me. I was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes 15 years ago when I was 10 years old. I could not have imagined back then that I would ever have to argue for researchers to have the legal right to pursue the cure to my disease.
I also could not have imagined my efforts to advocate for the funding of diabetes research, for which I received much praise from adults of all political persuasions when I was younger, would be bitterly battled by an entire religious institution.
I never imagined that I would learn as much as I have about medicine and science, topics that in my years of education failed to interest or excite me, in pursuit of a cure to diabetes. With the passage of Proposal 2, we are one step closer to that cure.
Michigan’s best minds can now focus on doing what they do best and research new treatments and cures for some of the world’s worst ailments. As for me, I am happy to put this battle behind me and turn my attention to writing about the many other things that interest me in this world.
Ryan Dinkgrave is a State News columnist and a public relations graduate student. Reach him at dinkgrave@gmail.com.
Originally Published: 11/17/08 6:25pm
Get Science
11/17/08 10:40pmSir, you have no idea what, if anything, will come from that kind of stem-cell research. No one does.
And taxpayers in Calif. are already burdened with $3,000,000,000.00 in taxes for this unknown research. Let me guess — Michigan should do the same. Too bad — Michigan is so jacked-up, it can’t borrow a penny — so Gov. Job-Killer has f’d that, real good.
If Gov. Job-Killer thinks this kind of stem-cell research is such a grand idea — LET HER PUT HER SAVINGS IN, FIRST. I’ll be right behind her.
Just A Moron
11/18/08 5:58amGiven your name I think you would know better, but I’ll go ahead and state it anyway. A majority of research money comes from federal and private funding, not state. Good day to you sir!
GET A CLUE
11/18/08 6:25am“ .. A majority of research money comes from federal and private funding, not state ..”
REPEATING: State of Calif. passed a $3,000,000,000.00 bond for this kind of work. Duh!
And federal taxes do NOT affect Michiganians? God, how utterly stupid.
Free Press editorial was clear — this was for U-M and MSU to get tax dollars. Period.
No one knows how this strain of research will turn out. Get the money from Insurance Agent Warren Buffett — he likes to complain he doesn’t pay enough in taxes.
Stop smoking dope and try thinking. You’ll feel better.
have a clue
11/18/08 8:42amState of Calif. passed a $3,000,000,000.00 bond for this kind of work. Duh!
Yes, and that is why they are “burdened with $3,000,000,000.00 in taxes.” The citizens of Michigan, on the other hand, voted to make this research legal with several restrictions. With the state economy, research funding across the board will be low and our research universities will not be given $300million in a year for stem-cells any time soon.
Paul
11/18/08 12:23pmyou failed to mention the strides that have been made using adult stem cells, which do not require detroying human life in pursuit of medical cures. The Catholic Church fully supports that research.
Another point, regarding regulation, did people miss the final line on the ballot, which says that no future laws can be adopted that would regulate, restrict, or even discourage embryonic stem cell research?! Talk about a blank check!
Just A Moron
11/18/08 12:27pmYeah and Paul you’ve failed to mention that adult stem cells aren’t as universal as embryonic stem cells.
Just A Moron
11/18/08 12:32pmOh and ‘Get A Clue’ your federal taxes are already going toward research to begin with, a small fraction I might add compared to national defense or social welfare programs. Additionally, you known that whole “no one knows how this strain of research will turn out” bullshit you’re trying to pull? We can say that about any research really. Science is all about hypothesizes and theories not absolutes!
paul
11/18/08 12:44pmhave in fact adult stem cells done any good? be honest! And the success rate for embryonic stem cells? be honest.
EG
11/18/08 12:55pmAnother point, regarding regulation, did people miss the final line on the ballot, which says that no future laws can be adopted that would regulate, restrict, or even discourage embryonic stem cell research?!
Paul, the line you reference states no laws can be adopted which “prevent, restrict, obstruct, or discourage any stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures that are permitted by the provisions of this section “ The citizens voted to amend the State Constitution.
...View full comment »
Just A Moron
11/18/08 12:57pmWhat is you’re point sir? That you have lots of questions, no answer and very little knowledge of anything?
Just A Moron
11/18/08 1:04pmWoops! Nice going there EG you beat me by two minutes! Oh well, can’t fault you for making an excellent point. Anyhow, my last post is directed at Paul.
I reiterate. What is your point sir? You’re argument are a lot of hot air and nothing else. Where’s the substance?
Paul
11/18/08 1:23pmdid not intend for my questions to be rhetorical…just wanted you to answer them.
I simply did not take the time to type out the whole clause, thanks for doing that for us all! my point is, knowing this is a constituional amendment, that laws are prevented from regulating this industry, now that it has constitutional protection. I know that you could not pass a law making embryonic stem cell illegal, but I think that even laws that would regulate the donation process would be preclude from consideration. That is the blank check fear that I have.
Just A Moron
11/18/08 1:49pmOkay, I think I see where you’re coming from, at least in terms of funding. It’s ultimately going to hinge on how the amendment is interrupted obviously, but I very much doubt the amendment is a so-called ‘blank check’. From my understanding of the language used in the ballot proposal and ultimately the amendment itself, it prohibits laws banning it outright, and funding.
...View full comment »
paul
11/18/08 2:18pmthe ballot did not address funding…that will come next.
so still waiting for answers regarding success rates of adult v. embryonic stem cells.
glad we are starting to understand where we are coming from!
GET A BRAIN
11/18/08 3:22pm“ .. you known (sic) that whole “no one knows how this strain of research will turn out” bullshit ..”
Hey, Einstein — Gov. Job-Killer and your idiot pals have blown TRILLIONS in silly dream-chasing.
Want to chase goofy-butt ideas? Do it ON YOUR DIME — NOT MINE.
Tom W
11/18/08 5:20pmEverybody knows that regardless of what state laws may or may not be passed regarding stem cell research, it is not going to be unrestricted or unregulated research.
The research that will take place in Michigan will still be subject to any current or future federal laws/regulations
And the killing human life argument is a non sequitor. If your beef is with killing human life it is with the process that creates excess embryos otherwise destined for the dumpster, not the law that puts medical waste to scientific use
Tom W
11/18/08 5:21pmMy first sentence was meant to be a question: “Everybody knows…right?”
Just A Moron
11/18/08 5:34pm“Hey, Einstein — Gov. Job-Killer and your idiot pals have blown TRILLIONS in silly dream-chasing.
Want to chase goofy-butt ideas? Do it ON YOUR DIME — NOT MINE.”
Yeah you what you’re absolutely right. The pursuit of science is just some goofy-butt idea. We shouldn’t do it at all, and never should have started. I mean who needs modern medicine, chemistry, physics, biology, mathematics or anything derived therefrom like the computer, the internet, vaccines, artificial hearts and such? Yeah goofy-butt ideas are bad. God, I can’t see how I didn’t see the light before. Now it’s so clear!
kb
11/18/08 6:06pm“you’ve failed to mention that adult stem cells aren’t as universal as embryonic stem cells.” – Just a moron
look up “induced pluripotent stem cells”. Adult stem cells certainly do have the potential to be just as universal as embryonic stem cells.
Yeah, you're a moron
11/18/08 7:52pmYeah you what you’re absolutely right. The pursuit of science is just some goofy-butt idea.
—-
In your incompetent hands — yes. Thanks for agreeing with me. Have a Starbucks career.
slick
11/23/08 4:05pm“And the killing human life argument is a non sequitor. If your beef is with killing human life it is with the process that creates excess embryos otherwise destined for the dumpster, not the law that puts medical waste to scientific use…”
So, would stem cell research and eventual USE be restricted to those embryos that were decidedly discarded or would embryos end up being made specifically for use in stem-cell treatments, meaning that a surplus would be made rather than using the waste.
Whether it’s “life” or not is a different argument one that no one can say positively yes or no… whether the excess embryos should have been made in the first place … maybe they shouldn’t.
...View full comment »