Paul Berg, Prof. Cancer Research/ Biochemistry: "How could any administration with any conscience...

Faye · 09-11-2004, 09:18 PM

Published Thursday, September 9, 2004
Berg opposes limits on stem cell research

BY KATIE DEWITT
Staff Reporter

Paul Berg, a professor of cancer research and biochemistry at Stanford University, made it clear from the start of his lecture last night which side of the stem cell debate he supports.

"How could any administration with any conscience at all prohibit the possibility of saving lives just because the technology offends them?" he asked an audience of about 50 New Haven residents, professors, and students at the Slifka Center.

Berg's lecture, titled "Biotechnology: Dealing with Public Concerns," was part of a series of bioethics and public policy seminars that will be held throughout the academic year.

In explicating his opinion that the public is unwilling to accept many of the advances that are emerging in science, Berg provided two examples: DNA research and stem cell research. He displayed slides addressing the basic scientific processes of each and explained how he believed the research could be used to benefit patients.

He said in recent years scientists have feared the government may forbid certain lines of biomedical research altogether. Several bills have already passed through Congress and are sitting in the Senate that propose to make stem cell research a criminal offense.

"I am astonished that so many people are unaware that pending in our government is a law that says you will go to jail if you try to clone a stem cell," Berg said. "Biotechnology and certain valuable lines of biomedical research are at increasing risk."

In attacking the ethical dilemma of stem cell research, Berg drew a comparison to Dick Cheney's reformed stance on gay marriage. He said as soon as someone has a close friend or relative suffering from a disease that could benefit from stem cell research, his previous ideology goes out the window.

"I have no problem with the political system providing for the oversight of the application of new knowledge, but what we're seeing here is a big effort to prevent the acquisition of this knowledge altogether," he said.

Students and professors alike said they were impressed and informed by Berg's lecture. Arthur Galston, emeritus professor of molecular, cellular, and developmental biology, introduced Berg and provided closing comments for the evening.

"I think that was a model combination of impeccable science and penetrating moral inquiry," he said after the lecture.....

From Yale Daily News.

"We have a chance to take a giant stride forward for the good of all humanity" in the next election. "We can choose between the future and the past, between reason and ignorance, between true compassion and mere ideology."- Ron Reagan Jr.

Chris Chappell · 09-13-2004, 06:09 AM

Thankfully and in spite of the current administration's stance scientific progress will continue - albeit slowly.

Ultimately I believe that we, as a nation, will come to our collective senses and not be misguided by religious zealots, uninspired rhetoric and intellectual stagnation.

Our American ideology screams progressiveness. Whether its now or later thankfully science, balance, realism will ultimately prevail.

Funding in vast quantities will then follow. This is what I believe, my vision of the near future.

09-11-2004, 09:18 PM	#1
Faye Banned Join Date: May 2003 Location: Jacksonville, FL Posts: 6,840	Paul Berg, Prof. Cancer Research/ Biochemistry: "How could any administration with any conscience... Published Thursday, September 9, 2004 Berg opposes limits on stem cell research BY KATIE DEWITT Staff Reporter Paul Berg, a professor of cancer research and biochemistry at Stanford University, made it clear from the start of his lecture last night which side of the stem cell debate he supports. "How could any administration with any conscience at all prohibit the possibility of saving lives just because the technology offends them?" he asked an audience of about 50 New Haven residents, professors, and students at the Slifka Center. Berg's lecture, titled "Biotechnology: Dealing with Public Concerns," was part of a series of bioethics and public policy seminars that will be held throughout the academic year. In explicating his opinion that the public is unwilling to accept many of the advances that are emerging in science, Berg provided two examples: DNA research and stem cell research. He displayed slides addressing the basic scientific processes of each and explained how he believed the research could be used to benefit patients. He said in recent years scientists have feared the government may forbid certain lines of biomedical research altogether. Several bills have already passed through Congress and are sitting in the Senate that propose to make stem cell research a criminal offense. "I am astonished that so many people are unaware that pending in our government is a law that says you will go to jail if you try to clone a stem cell," Berg said. "Biotechnology and certain valuable lines of biomedical research are at increasing risk." In attacking the ethical dilemma of stem cell research, Berg drew a comparison to Dick Cheney's reformed stance on gay marriage. He said as soon as someone has a close friend or relative suffering from a disease that could benefit from stem cell research, his previous ideology goes out the window. "I have no problem with the political system providing for the oversight of the application of new knowledge, but what we're seeing here is a big effort to prevent the acquisition of this knowledge altogether," he said. Students and professors alike said they were impressed and informed by Berg's lecture. Arthur Galston, emeritus professor of molecular, cellular, and developmental biology, introduced Berg and provided closing comments for the evening. "I think that was a model combination of impeccable science and penetrating moral inquiry," he said after the lecture..... From Yale Daily News. "We have a chance to take a giant stride forward for the good of all humanity" in the next election. "We can choose between the future and the past, between reason and ignorance, between true compassion and mere ideology."- Ron Reagan Jr.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

09-13-2004, 06:09 AM	#2
Chris Chappell Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Denver, CO Posts: 7,035	Thankfully and in spite of the current administration's stance scientific progress will continue - albeit slowly. Ultimately I believe that we, as a nation, will come to our collective senses and not be misguided by religious zealots, uninspired rhetoric and intellectual stagnation. Our American ideology screams progressiveness. Whether its now or later thankfully science, balance, realism will ultimately prevail. Funding in vast quantities will then follow. This is what I believe, my vision of the near future.