Originally Published: December 16, 2009 10:27 p.m.
Your Dec. 2 editorial was a tribute to the perseverance and determination of a man and his family to pursue medical treatment of a devastating condition called Parkinson's disease. We are all thrilled with the outcome of Phil Phillips and the restoration of normality to him and his family.
Your previous article concerning Mr. Phillips states that the stem cells obtained to help with his condition were from his own bone marrow.
There has never been a restriction of any sort by Mr. Bush or anyone else to inhibit the use of adult or umbilical cord stem cell research. Your reference to there being "73 different diseases or ailments" treated by these cells is entirely accurate. I applaud you for that. However, you state that Mr. Obama has "lifted the ban." You are not understanding the difference in what Obama has done.
He has authorized the use of embryonic stem cell research. This is entirely different in that they use (destroy) a human embryo in pursuit of pluripotent cells.
Mr. Phillips has seen a miraculous recovery with an entirely ethical use of stem cells. What Mr. Obama has done is not to allow simple, uncontroversial research to continue, but rather, he has authorized the federal funding (our tax dollars) of a morally controversial experimentation on human beings. You were confusing unquestionably ethical research and treatment with the termination of human embryos.
Is Mr. Obama really doing the right thing? I think not!
Dr. Richard DeMark