Stem Cells and the Politics of Science

Since the DNC, much has been said about stem-cell research by various Democrats. Clearly this is an issue that is important because it could potentially provide cures for a number of diseases. Clearly it requires serious analysis and debate, and just as clearly there has been no real debate, only simplistic, misleading (and oftentimes mendacious) slogans that obscure the real issues.

"What if we have a president who believes in science, so we can unleash the wonders of discovery -- like stem cell research -- and treat illness for millions of lives?"

"Sound like magic? Welcome to the future of medicine."

"lift the ban" and "unleash the wonders of discovery."

These are all quotes from speakers at the DNC, and all they accomplish is the politicization of science. The last two quotes are intentionally misleading, giving people the impression that the Bush Administration has imposed a "ban" on any research on stem cells and has cut off all funds for it. As Anne Applebaum points out, this is completely false.

Stem cell research is not, in fact, either illegal or unfunded: The federal budget in 2003 included $24.8 million for human embryonic stem cell research -- up from zero in 2000. Private funding of stem cell research, which is unlimited, runs into the tens and possibly hundreds of millions of dollars.

Additionally, to say that the results of stem cell research will produce a panacea is irresponsible. At this point, we know very little about what the possibilities of the research are. There have been a number of promising research routes recently, and then as now there were promises of new technology that would cure everything. The Human Genome Project and gene therapy were two such innovations that despite huge promise have produced few real results. It is possible that stem cell research will produce cures, but it is just as possible that it will produce little.

One potential gauge for the usefulness of this research is the level of investment in this research by private companies. If the results were as certain and as close as the Democrats would have us think, why aren't the big drug companies investing billions of dollars into this research. Clearly any company would be interested in technology with such promise. The fact that private investments have not been at such a level is an indication of the risks and uncertainties in this technology.

I don't think that the stem cell research issue will be a major one in the election, but it is another indication of the politicization of science. Such politicization can only hurt scientific discovery, as it causes the sides to become entrenched in their views, and less open to new ideas.