The lack of distinction misinforms the casually interested reader and propagates the Embryonic Stem Cell Myth and that's what galls me.
but it really bothers me that this author (or reporter) like so many others obviously doesn’t realize the huge difference between dozens of ASC treatments and ZERO ESC applications. Not even any promising animal trials. >>>
I agree, it bothers me too. The drive-by, biased satanic MSM will do everything to deceive and push their pro-abortion agenda.
The lack of distinction misinforms the casually interested reader and propagates the Embryonic Stem Cell Myth and that’s what galls me. >>>
I’ve noticed a pattern, when “non-embryonic” (adult) stem cells are used successfully, the article will be Titled “Stem Cells.....” in the Headline with NO mention of “adult” or “non-embryonic” and when “embryonic stem cells” are used the Headline will read “Embryonic Stem Cells”. They also fail to mention that with 25 yrs. of research with embryonic stem cells, there has yet to be one successful clinical trial in humans and that these cells are rejected by the patient’s immune system, grow too rapidly and form deadly tumors.
It’s up to us to start educating the general public.