Saturday, July 15, 2006
Writing the gospel-
Appearing this week in Science is a letter addressing the question; can we treat disease with adult stem cells? http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/1129987v1
The letter is written specifically in regard to statements made by David A. Prentice Ph.D, a man who advises at least one senator and several other opponents of embryonic stem cell research. In Prentice’s words “Adult stem cells have now helped patients with at least 65 different human diseases. It’s real help for real patients”. However, the authors of this editorial do not agree with these statistics, and they proceeded to pick apart each of his references one by one and demonstrate that “A review of those references reveals that Prentice not only misinterprets existing adult stem cell treatments but also frequently distorts the nature and content of the references he cites”.
In addition to having a Ph.D, Prentice is a Professor of Life Sciences at Indiana State University and Adjunct Professor of Medical and Molecular Genetics at Indiana University School of Medicine. And, in addition to advising a host of policymakers on issues of science he is a founding member of Do No Harm: The Coalition of Americans for Research Ethics (http://www.stemcellresearch.org/). Finally, if there was still any lingering question as to whether Dr. Prentice’s beliefs were driven by religion, he recently spoke at the 2nd International Christian Medical Conference on alternative measures based on the Bible for embryonic stem cell research, cloning and euthanasia.
First of all, how does a group calling themselves the ‘Coalition of Americans for Research Ethics’ adopt a website entitled ‘stemcellresearch.org’? That aside, I am beginning to wonder if as a country we should be separating science and religion in the same way we seek to separate government and religion. I can respect that a person such as Dr. Prentice feels strongly about Christianity and how it impacts his daily life and I realize that for him there can be no separation between his work and his religion. But at the same time, I believe this makes him entirely unqualified to advise policymakers on issues of science. I think even Dr. Prentice would agree that simply having a Ph.D does not make your word gospel.
Finally, I have to say the editorial in Science is well written and well researched. As a scientist I’m pleased to see other scientists responding to Dr. Prentice with discourse and rebuttal, rather than dismissal. It is only through questioning and defending our work that we achieve validity. Read this if you have a chance:
http://www.dailyutahchronicle.com/media/storage/paper244/news/2002/02/28/Opinion/A.Separation.Of.Church.And.science-193464.shtml?norewrite200607150004&sourcedomain=www.dailyutahchronicle.com
The letter is written specifically in regard to statements made by David A. Prentice Ph.D, a man who advises at least one senator and several other opponents of embryonic stem cell research. In Prentice’s words “Adult stem cells have now helped patients with at least 65 different human diseases. It’s real help for real patients”. However, the authors of this editorial do not agree with these statistics, and they proceeded to pick apart each of his references one by one and demonstrate that “A review of those references reveals that Prentice not only misinterprets existing adult stem cell treatments but also frequently distorts the nature and content of the references he cites”.
In addition to having a Ph.D, Prentice is a Professor of Life Sciences at Indiana State University and Adjunct Professor of Medical and Molecular Genetics at Indiana University School of Medicine. And, in addition to advising a host of policymakers on issues of science he is a founding member of Do No Harm: The Coalition of Americans for Research Ethics (http://www.stemcellresearch.org/). Finally, if there was still any lingering question as to whether Dr. Prentice’s beliefs were driven by religion, he recently spoke at the 2nd International Christian Medical Conference on alternative measures based on the Bible for embryonic stem cell research, cloning and euthanasia.
First of all, how does a group calling themselves the ‘Coalition of Americans for Research Ethics’ adopt a website entitled ‘stemcellresearch.org’? That aside, I am beginning to wonder if as a country we should be separating science and religion in the same way we seek to separate government and religion. I can respect that a person such as Dr. Prentice feels strongly about Christianity and how it impacts his daily life and I realize that for him there can be no separation between his work and his religion. But at the same time, I believe this makes him entirely unqualified to advise policymakers on issues of science. I think even Dr. Prentice would agree that simply having a Ph.D does not make your word gospel.
Finally, I have to say the editorial in Science is well written and well researched. As a scientist I’m pleased to see other scientists responding to Dr. Prentice with discourse and rebuttal, rather than dismissal. It is only through questioning and defending our work that we achieve validity. Read this if you have a chance:
http://www.dailyutahchronicle.com/media/storage/paper244/news/2002/02/28/Opinion/A.Separation.Of.Church.And.science-193464.shtml?norewrite200607150004&sourcedomain=www.dailyutahchronicle.com
# posted by Sarah : 12:19 AM
