Proposal 2 could bring new cures
Tweet
Ryan Dinkgrave
In my time as a columnist for this paper, I have written on a number of occasions about stem cell research, largely focused on embryonic stem cell research and the need for a revision of Michigan’s severe and archaic laws that restrict it. I also have looked at the issue on a national level, such as when I wrote about standing on the Capitol lawn in Washington, D.C., with 150 diabetic children singing “Promise to Remember Me” on the day before President Bush vetoed the bipartisan Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act for a second time. Finally, I have written about this topic from a very personal level, detailing my own frustrations and struggles with type 1 diabetes.
In June, I wrote about how Michigan voters have the incredible opportunity this year to do what the state legislature has failed to do and bring Michigan’s laws into line with 45 other states that allow this important research. I am someone with a disease that the medical research community believes will be cured through stem cell research, so it is logical that I would be on this side of the fight. However, I also wear my hat as a public relations graduate student, looking at the campaign the opposition has waged against Proposal 2.
When I last wrote about Proposal 2, I could not have imagined the disgusting lengths to which the opposition would go to fight it. In my studies, every PR course and lesson has involved a discussion of ethics, values and morals. The Public Relations Society of America holds as a principle that for the profession to be taken seriously, it must adhere to the highest of ethical standards.
Thus, when David Doyle emerged as the spokesperson for MiCAUSE, the group opposed to Proposal 2, and a respected, conservative colleague of mine referred to Doyle as “a hero” of hers, I felt slightly optimistic that the other side might have hired someone who would engage in only an honest campaign, devoid of lies and misleading words. How wrong I was.
The group fighting Proposal 2 has framed its argument in a number of different ways, none of which reflect its real opposition to the proposal, which is more clearly seen by taking a look at their two big bankrollers: the Michigan Catholic Conference and Right to Life. Instead, they have argued against Proposal 2 with absurd fear-mongering, outright lies and a demeanor devoid of any compassion for those whose lives depend on the cures that stem cell research has the potential to deliver.
First, they advertised Proposal 2 would cost taxpayers in Michigan millions of dollars, a lie even a casual review of the text of the proposal reveals, as it does not involve a single penny of taxpayer money. Their next advertisement made the absurd claim that passage of Proposal 2 would lead to the creation of embryo harvesting and a cloning industry in Michigan. This argument is ridiculous, as is the fact that the proposal specifically bans the buying and selling of embryos.
The central message of the opposition has been that the proposal “goes too far” and allows for unrestricted research. This is a misguided argument as well: The proposal allows for only ethical research with strong federal oversight, as is currently permitted in almost every other state in the nation.
Their most recent effort has been widely condemned as the most disgusting and morally reprehensible. In this advertisement, the group aims to connect embryonic stem cell research to a horrible long-term study that a federal entity conducted on syphilis in mostly black, low-income men through 1972. There is no merit to this claim, but the group is using this ad to scare African Americans in particular from voting for Proposal 2.
Thus, I wish to close this final pre-election column on this topic with one last plea. Everyone knows somebody affected by a condition that stem cell research holds the greatest promise for curing or treating. When you enter the voting booth, keep those people in mind and see through the noise and lies that the other side is generating. With a “yes” vote for Proposal 2, you can give greater hope for a cure to thousands of people in Michigan.
Ryan Dinkgrave is a State News columnist and a public relations graduate student. Reach him at dinkgrave@gmail.com.
Commentary
Add your $0.02, go to the comment form or follow the comment feed
NO SALE
(10/26/08 10:04pm)Report
Your position is fatally-flawed.
All it would have taken to get Michigan independents to vote with you was one clause:
NO PUBLIC TAX MONEY FOR EXPENSIVE, CRAZY-BUTT IDEAS. GET THE MONEY FROM THE PRIVATE SECTOR. PERIOD.
Better luck next time, pal.
No sale is an IDIOT!
(10/27/08 1:29am)Report
“NO PUBLIC TAX MONEY FOR EXPENSIVE, CRAZY-BUTT IDEAS.”
Yeah because furthering human knowledge is such a waste… Good grief you are without a doubt incredibly stupid. Scientific research is expensive and yes it doesn’t always yield usable technology, but we’ve been able do incredible things with what we do gain. For example, cancer is no longer a death sentence in many cases as was the cases not so long ago. Additionally, we’ve eradicated smallpox and are on the cusp on eventually eradicating polio all due to medical advances made through scientific research. And you want to tell me research isn’t worth it because its expensive and crazy?
Steve
(10/27/08 7:04am)Report
“NO PUBLIC TAX MONEY FOR EXPENSIVE, CRAZY-BUTT IDEAS. GET THE MONEY FROM THE PRIVATE SECTOR. PERIOD.”
Where does most money for scientific research that happens in the academic setting come from? Answer: The NIH. Who funds the NIH? Answer: The tax-payers. If you want unbiased research it has to be funded in an unbiased fashion. Moreover, if research is only funded by the private sector research will only be done on things that are profitable. After all, why would any company ever research a cure for diabetes? It’s not profitable. What’s profitable is keeping people on daily regimens for life.
Dan
(10/27/08 7:40am)Report
I believe what ails many conservatives regarding this issue is the possibility of black market harvesting and selling of embryos. There is a distinct opportunity, given the Prop 2 legislation, that such an act could occur—even under the eyes of Mr. Dinkgrave’s “federal oversight.”
I am voting no, and for good cause.
bbwhine
(10/27/08 8:31am)Report
Thanks Dan for helping me finally decide. If you’r against it the proposal must have merit so I will be voting yes.
Jane
(10/27/08 8:50am)Report
“This argument is ridiculous, as is the fact that the proposal specifically bans the buying and selling of embryos.”
Is this a mistake, or is the author saying that the proposal’s ban on the buying and selling of embryos is “ridiculous”?
SWolf
(10/27/08 9:04am)Report
Embryonic stem cells have made no cures. Adult stem cells have made many cures. Why not go on the path that has shown results as opposed to the frivolous exercise of chasing dead ends because there might be, if we hope against hope, a chance. So if the chance is one in 1,000,000 of success(which is about Embryonic stem cell’s record now), we should throw our tax money at it?
Look at the misleading things your own side is saying before throwing stones.
STUPIDITY RAMPANT @ MSU
(10/27/08 9:37am)Report
“ .. If you want unbiased research it has to be funded in an unbiased fashion.”
Why .. of course .. MSU is a haven for diverse ideas .. like not abusing non-Democrats .. HA, HA, HA, HA, HA, HA, HA, HA, HA, HA, HA, HA ..
“ .. Moreover, if research is only funded by the private sector research will only be done on things that are profitable ..”
WRONG! Ven-caps routinely fund companies, knowing 80% will FAIL! But they still TRY!
Get off the public dime — Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), Countrywide Mortgage’s favorite customer and pay-off target, has already jacked your taxes 10%.
John
(10/27/08 12:13pm)Report
Stupidity is not rampant at MSU, or in any other large population, given that intelligence is fairly evenly distributed. Even people who are of average intelligence are not normally called “stupid,” so that percentage, whatever it is, would be far less than 50%. A person who frequently calls other people “stupid” probably has much too high an opinion of himself and his own opinions.
POLITICAL BIAS/STUPIDITY RAMPANT @ MSU
(10/27/08 12:22pm)Report
Stupidity is not rampant at MSU, or in any other large population, given that intelligence is fairly evenly distributed.
—-
Why .. of course .. MSU is a haven for diverse ideas .. like not abusing non-Democrats .. HA, HA, HA, HA, HA, HA, HA, HA, HA, HA, HA, HA ..
No sale is an IDIOT!
(10/27/08 6:10pm)Report
“Embryonic stem cells have made no cures. Adult stem cells have made many cures. Why not go on the path that has shown results as opposed to the frivolous exercise of chasing dead ends…”
SWolf, I think you’re a little confused. Adult stem cells have been used to successfully treat some things. However, the reason adult stem cells are so successful thus far is also a failing of sorts. Since they’re already coming from a differentiated organism, i.e. the patient, their potential to differentiate into different kinds of cell is somewhat limited. For example, treating say a heart condition is best done using adult stem cells that are most compatible like haematopoietic stem cells. However, using stem cells from another area of the body would not be as successful. This is largely because the stem cells arose in an environment similar to the one in which they’re being used to create a treatment. Useful to be sure, but somewhat limited.
Embryonic stem cells on the other hand are potentially more universal since they are from something that has yet to differentiate. If we could learn how to control how they differentiate they could be extremely useful. That may not seem important to you, but it is because we would not longer be limited to using stem cells from the patient themselves. Along this same line of thinking this universality would be a lifechanger in cases where it wouldn’t be advantageous to use the patients own stem cells, like in cases where the patient has cancer.
Ryan Dinkgrave
(10/27/08 7:24pm)Report
Jane,
The line that appeared as “This argument is ridiculous, as is the fact that the proposal specifically bans the buying and selling of embryos” originally read “This argument is ridiculous, as the fact is that the proposal specifically bans the buying and selling of embryos.”
perhaps i could have been clearer, but the copy editor incorrectly assumed that i meant the opposite of what i intended.
sorry for any confusion
-the author
STILL NO SALE
(10/28/08 6:55am)Report
“Along this same line of thinking this universality would be a lifechanger in cases where it wouldn’t be advantageous to use the patients own stem cells, like in cases where the patient has cancer.”
—-
You so smart. Get your own Ven-Cap to do this. The taxpayers are NOT putting up a dime. Taxpayers tired of Gov. Grand-stand BULLSHIT.
No sale is an IDIOT!
(10/28/08 11:10am)Report
“You so smart. Get your own Ven-Cap to do this. The taxpayers are NOT putting up a dime. Taxpayers tired of Gov. Grand-stand BULLSHIT.”
Oh, I can play that way too. Listen up you ignoramus, no where in proposal 2 does it stipulate that tax dollars will go towards embryonic stem stem research. Don’t believe me? Read the freaking proposal here: STATE PROPOSALS – NOVEMBER 4, 2008 GENERAL ELECTION
Honestly, all it states is that physicians and researchers can conduct any research permitted under federal law on human
embryos may be conducted in Michigan, and that couples are allowed to donate their unused embryos form fertility treatments to research. No where, and I mean no where, does it make any statements about funding research or creating embryos solely for research. If you’re against that then fine, but stop with the fucking straw man arguments. They just make people like you look like morons that can’t properly assimulate information or debate properly!