The whole "stem cell research" brouhaha is so full of misinformation, it hurts my head. People think that the debate is about all stem cell research. It never has been about all stem cell research. The debate is specifically about public funding for some methods of sourcing the raw materials for embryonic stem cell research. When the debate began, the science of stem cell research was fairly nascent. At the time, the only effective way to obtain stem cell lines was to use whole fetuses. Some of these fetuses were leftovers from abortions or IVF. Those that weren't, were created in a petri dish. Not suprisingly, the Republican controlled-government, anti-abortion organizations, some religious groups and many ethicists found this to be morally problematic.

When President George W. Bush was in power back in 2001, he grandfathered in public funding for a human stem cell lines in a well-meaning, though scientifically naive compromise to unrestricted funding for embryonic stem cell research. He did this not ban or impede stem cell private sector research in any way. It merely curtailed taxpayer funding for projects that were deemed morally questionable. Thankfully, privately-funded scientists and pretty much rendered the debate irrelevant in an expedient manner.

Generally, there is no objection by religious groups and ethicists in obtaining embryonic stem lines cell using non-lethal methods such as single blastomere extraction. No one who has any understanding of the different types of stem cells, has any objections to research involving artificial embryonic (pluripotent) stem cells created with ordinary human skin or a cheek swab. Stem cell tissues obtained from discarded foreskin, afterbirth, umbilical cord or bone marrow are not controversial either. Adult stem cells have already been succesfully treat a myriad of health concerns without the mutations and rejection that plague embryonic stem cell treatments. Aside from therapeutic cloning from the person needing stem cell treatments, the destruction fetuses that caused so much contention in the arena of stem cell research, has been, for the most part, been rendered obsolete. Unfortunately, the government, the mass media and the public tend to be scientifically ignorant.

When President Barack Obama lifted the ban public funding from a mostly obsolete form of scientific research that has no private-funding barriers, it seemed just as naive as Bush's original ban. His florid speech extolling the triumph of science and implying that government made stem cell research possible again at all, completely ignored the fact that a lot has happened since 2001. The question should not be, "Do you think that stem cell research is good, bad or dangerous?" The question should be, "Do you understand the issues behind stem cell research?" Or more to the point, "Do you understand what a stem cell is?  If so, what are the different types?"

Your tax dollars at work!