Letters: Aug. 28, 2006

Stem Cells: The Hope and the Hype

Our cover story addressed the complicated reality behind the optimistic predictions and heated ethical and political arguments about stem cells. Doctors, patients and concerned citizens weighed in on issues of medical progress, morality and the President's veto of the human embryonic-stem-cell bill

Nancy Gibbs is to be commended for articulating the science of stem cells in layman's terms [Aug. 7] so that the public can make an informed decision regarding it. Science and technology have a long way to go with regard to this research, but imposing limits could impede a medical breakthrough. As a rare-disease patient and taxpayer, I hope that in a country with as much knowledge, expertise and resources as the U.S., that breakthrough will occur in my lifetime. TRACY E. LATIMER VICE PRESIDENT, CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM VASCULITIS FOUNDATION Las Vegas

Think of embryos used for research as troops being sent to war. Some must die so that others can live. Embryonic-stem-cell research should be funded, just as the war on terrorism is. MEGHAN CHUA Deerfield, Wis.

I voted for President Bush and have agreed with almost all the decisions he has made. But the veto on embryonic-stem-cell research wasn't among them. I'm terminally ill, and although it's too late for me, denying U.S. scientists access to this 21st century technology because of religious beliefs is madness. If the President ever needs such treatment and decides not to use it, so be it. Denying it to everyone else is inhuman. JOHN PORTER Portland, Ore.

The same scientific process that demonstrated that the earth is round and that animal species have evolved shows beyond a doubt that a fertilized egg is a full human being. The proposition that life begins sometime after fertilization is based on convenience, not science, and clears the way for the destruction of the weakest members of society. I am a liberal Democrat and a card-carrying member of the A.C.L.U. who considers protection of the embryo a matter of civil liberties. LODOVICO BALDUCCI Tampa, Fla.

When the President vetoed the stem-cell-research bill, many Americans, including me, were finally able to support a major presidential decision. No one is opposed to improving treatments for cancer, spinal-cord injuries or heart disease, but I am opposed to destroying life in order to get there. Embryos must be respected in the same way an 8-month-old fetus is respected. I believe science should pursue research on umbilical-cord and adult stem cells but leave the embryos alone. BRIAN WALLIS Glen Allen, Va.

I'm an Independent, but I will be voting for Democrats this November--and in 2008. Potential breakthroughs in health care should not be sacrificed to a political agenda. DAN BRITT San Antonio, Texas

Has anyone considered the potential economic impact of cures resulting from human embryonic-stem-cell research? At a time when our medical and Medicare systems are being stretched and their costs are escalating, the possibility of curing patients--as opposed to managing their illnesses--could be a tremendous financial boon. The research should move forward. C. ELISE ALEGRIA Arlington, Mass.

Condi's Clout