Posted on 10/25/2006 11:26:02 PM PDT by TheEaglehasLanded
OOPS!! Make that "backfire" on the Dems.
"So he admitted that once he didn't take them"
And why did he not take them? What was the reason?
Well, he is two years farther into his disease.
What difference does it make what he looked like in the Ads? That was Rush's thing, we don't have to defend Rush when he is stupid.
As conservatives, we bristle when the left ignores the facts and attacks side issues. Well, Fox's appearance is a side issue that has no bearing on the real issue, which is that he lied about Talent, and is backing Cardin who voted AGAINST stem cell research.
And he falsely claimed the embryonic stem cell research was "restricted" when in fact Bush expanded it by allowing federal dollars for some research, and there are NO restrictions on the research being proposed, just limits on FEDERAL FUNDING.
And he falsely claimed that embryonic stem cell research was the "most promising", when in fact it is simply the most "speculative". All other stem cell projects have acheived real successes.
The only think embryonic research has going for it is that nobody has wasted their time much on it yet, so scientists could jump in and make a lot of money and build power bases with research hiring and operations if they could just get funding -- and since there's little hope for the research, there isn't much funding so they need the federal government to waste OUR tax dollars on it.
The idea that a multi-millionare like Michael Fox is using his disease to try to steal MY hard-earned money in tax dollars to pay for HIS cure should be laughable.
It's like Bill Gates suggesting we should pay for his dinner.
I have yet to hear MJF refute the speculation that he was off his meds. This is important, though. By (potentially) exaggerating or aggravating his symptoms, MJF veered into the same make-believe land where Hezbollah stages "body recovery" using already dead kids, but forgets to smear the blue pacifier with grime. The sparkling clean pacifier is a dead giveaway that something is amiss.
Having been subject to this kind of chicanery for years, it is decidedly NOT beyond the pale to consider whether or not the ads by MJF are lies in both form and substance, expecially since he has admitted in writing that he went off his meds to show congress how bad he had the disease.
The discussion right now IS about the message. MJF's tremors were a deliberate part of that message, and therefore are legitimate targets of debate. As I stated above, I have not heard MJF refute any of these claims. That, too, is telling.
Try this link with Fox and Ali.
http://www.veotag.com/player/Default.aspx?pid=b48abfb4-aa12-43e5-99e2-1bf3a47fa464
http://abortiontv.com/Misc/Embryonic_Stem_Cell%20Research_Tumors%20.htm
Embryonic Stem Cell Research Causes Tumors, New Study Shows
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
October 23, 2006
Rochester, NY (LifeNews.com) -- Scientists working with embryonic stem cell research on animals reconfirmed what pro-life advocates have been saying for years about it. Researcher Steven Goldman and colleagues at the University of Rochester Medical Center said injecting embryonic stem cells into the brains of patients with Parkinson's disease would cause tumors.
Goldman's research team has been injecting the controversial cells into rats that have the disease and the cells turned into tumors afterwards.
The scientists explained their findings in an article in the latest issue of Nature Medicine. They said the embryonic stem cell injections helped some of the rats but some of the cells started growing in a manner that would eventually lead to a tumor. "The behavioral data validate the utility of the approach. But it also raises a cautionary flag and says we are not ready for prime time yet," Goldman told the Washington Post.
He conceded that considerably more research would need to be done to determine whether the tumor problems could ever be overcome. Parkinson's is a disease where dopamine-releasing cells in the brain die out, which leads to muscle dysfunction and can eventually cause paralysis. The goal of stem cell research in Parkinson's is to replace the dead cells with stem cells that form into new dopamine cells. Goldman's team used human embryonic stem cells obtained by killing days-old unborn children that were grown in a special chemical used to coax them into becoming brain cells.
The team killed the rats before they could determine that the tumors that appeared to be growing actually finished appearing and they said that any embryonic stem cell treatments on humans, which has never been tried, would have to be closely monitored. Some autopsies on the rats found tumors and that the embryonic stem cells began to grow uncontrollably rather than becoming the dopamine cells as intended. Another team led by Ole Isacson, a Harvard Medical School professor of neuroscience and neurology, published similar results earlier this month in the online journal Stem Cells and found that the embryonic stem cells also produced tumors.
Adult stem cells have not had the same problems and have been used successfully to treat dozens of diseases and conditions. But scientists have said they don't think embryonic stem cell research will lead to a cure for Parkinson's. University of Melbourne Emeritus Professor of Medicine Thomas Martin told Australian lawmakers recently that he did not think that embryonic stem cell research would even lead to cures for major diseases such as diabetes or Parkinson's.
Martin, an internationally recognized Fellow of the Royal Society, said the embryonic stem cells produced from human cloning would have the same problems.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1726267/posts
The Wrong Tree Embryonic stem cells are not all that.
http://www.nationalreview.com/ ^ | May 13, 2004, 8:58 a.m. | Wesley J. Smith
Posted on 10/26/2006 7:32:20 AM PDT by Grampa Dave
http://www.nationalreview.com/script/printpage.p?ref=/comment/smith200405130858.asp
May 13, 2004, 8:58 a.m. The Wrong Tree Embryonic stem cells are not all that.
By Wesley J. Smith
Once again the media are trumpeting the call among many in Congress, pushed by millions in Big Biotech lobbying money, for President Bush to reverse his decision to limit federal funding of embryonic-stem-cell research (ESCR) to those lines already in existence on August 9, 2001. Fronted this time by the grief-stricken Nancy Reagan, and boosted by Hollywood celebrities such as Christopher Reeve, Michael J. Fox, and Mary Tyler Moore, we are warned darkly, as a recent New York Times editorial put it, that the existing federal-funding restrictions "are so potentially damaging to medicine" that the administration is encountering opposition to its policy even among its "own conservative supporters."
We have heard this mantra many times before but repetition does not make it true. A great deal has been learned about the potential of regenerative medicine since President Bush reached his "compromise" decision ending the stem-cell debate of 2001. And indeed, perhaps the time has come for us to revisit this issue, albeit from a different angle than suggested by ESCR boosters. Perhaps the problem with the Bush plan isn't that it provides too little federal money for ESCR, but too much — at least if our national goal is to find cures to diseases such as Alzheimer's, diabetes, and Parkinson's in the shortest period of time.
The media is so excited about the supposed potential of embryonic stem cells that it gives far too little attention to the many and serious problems associated with this potential source of regenerative medicine. Listening to the hype, one might think that ESCR is on the verge of tremendous success. But the hard truth is that it does not appear likely that embryonic stem cells will soon become the panacea that fervid supporters of the research often claim. For example:
In animal studies, embryonic-stem-cell treatments have been found to cause tumors. In one mouse study involving an attempt to treat Parkinson's-type symptoms, more than 20 percent of the mice died from brain tumors — this despite researchers reducing the number of cells administered from the usual 100,000 to 1,000.
Tissue rejection is another major hurdle to the use of embryonic stem cells in medical treatments. This is why ESCR is known as the gateway to human cloning, since one proposed way out of this potential dilemma is to create cloned embryos of patients being treated as a source of stem cells, a process known as "therapeutic cloning." Not coincidentally, many of the same proponents who are now urging increased funding for ESCR also advocate that we legalize and publicly fund therapeutic-cloning research, which many find immoral because it creates cloned human life for the sole purpose of experimentation and destruction.
Besides being immoral, therapeutic cloning also looks to be wildly impractical. For example, a recent report published by the National Academy of Sciences warned that it could cost in the neighborhood of $200,000 just to pay for the human eggs to derive one cloned human embryonic-stem-cell line.
The above is an excerpt. Please go to the full thread for an excellent rebuttal to Fox and the other lying liberals:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1726267/posts
Thank you. I hate it when we are so right about the fundamentals, but miss the bigger picture and get the strategy so wrong.
That may be true, but nothing we can do will stop it. They have nothing to say about issues, or ideas, so they have to go to pulling heartstrings. We have to accept that and develop a stronger message. It's just the way the landscape is for now.
You're talking about an answer. Rush asked a question. While I did not know of the prior incident, I too looked at that commercial and wondered what was happening. I've know a number of people with the same disease and that rocking behavior was new to me.
The involuntary movement is probably "dyskinesia"...it can be a symptom of the disease, but more often a side effect of the meds.
"Ummm no. It's a degenerative disease. The Arlen ad is from over 2 years ago. It doesn't prove anything, but I could I guess show you pictures of me at 18 which will prove that the weight gain since then is false using your logic."
Yeah, well Michael Fox just appeared at a press gathering a couple of days ago, and funny that, he wasn't violently shaking at all. He said his meds were working that day. This guy took his shakes and added to them exponentially in order to make a "pity" Ad to use to sway votes. This is what Ann Coulter said in her last book, how Dems always haul out victims or the walking (or not walking) wounded (like Christopher Reeves) to make their political points as it makes it extremely difficult for their opponents to attack the messages these "victims" deliver for the Dems. Another example is the rabid Dem 9/11 "moms". If you can't see what is being done before your very eyes, then you just aren't particularly politically astute, IMO.
It doesn't matter, the liberals will always accuse us of attacking the messenger, even when we only attack the message. Don't you know that to disagree with a liberal is to personally attack them?
I agree leave him alone it just makes us look small.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.