Sen. Frist's politicized science

Just what kind of science is he using?

That's the question left hanging in the air in the wake of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist's assertion that it's a "fact of science" that the destruction of human embryos will lead to miraculous cures for all sorts of horrible diseases.

TRENDING: May the Farce be with you

In reality, most of the serious science out there paints an entirely different picture.

Consider, for instance, that not one patient has been cured by embryonic stem-cell research. Yet there've been literally thousands of patients successfully treated – representing more than 70 diseases – by adult stem-cell research, an option that does not require the destruction of human life.

But politicians like Frist dismiss that fact with a wave of their hand, arguing that embryonic stem cells hold special "promise" because they can grow into any kind of body tissue.

Here's a news flash: Adult stem cells can, too. Recently published studies show that many adult stem cells can form all types of tissue in the human body. And what's more, it's been proven that adult stem cells can also replicate indefinitely – the "gold standard" previously attributed only to embryonic ones.

The bottom line: Adult stem cells can do everything embryonic stem cells can – if not more.

Just ask Keon Penn, who was cured of sickle-cell anemia by a transplant of umbilical-cord stem cells. Or Susan Stross, one of hundreds of multiple-sclerosis patients around the world whose conditions have stabilized or improved, thanks to stem-cell transplants from their own bone marrow.

Bet you haven't heard of them, though – that's because there's been a media blackout of those success stories. Reporters, for the most part, seem content to propagate the myth that ESCR is a miracle cure-all, while ignoring the real progress made with adult stem cells.

We've grown to accept the fact that such media bias exists. But it's another matter entirely for a national leader like Sen. Frist to join in – and actually promote that misrepresentation.

It's almost like he took his talking points from the media and biotechnology industry when he kept repeating the same old mantra – that ESCR holds "specific promise" to cure life-threatening diseases. But what exactly are those "specifics"? Where are the Keon Penns and Susan Strosses of ESCR?

The answer is there are none. (There is risk, however – 20-plus years of research with animal embryonic stem cells have revealed two serious risks to humans: the formation of tumors and immune system rejection, which don't seem to appear in humans who use their own adult stem cells.)

But it's not just bad science and political hype that Frist is guilty of – it's also blatant distortion.

In his speech, Frist made it sound like ESCR is some sort of neglected stepchild. But the reality is that the United States leads the world in ESCR funding, and has the largest number of established embryonic stem-cell lines available for research. In 2004, the U.S. government spent $24 million on human ESCR – but Frist didn't mention that.

Then there's the question of ethics.

Sadly, Frist himself acknowledged that an embryo is a "nascent human life" that "must be destroyed" in order to do this type of research.

"I believe human life begins at conception," he said, then in the same breath asked the U.S. Senate to authorize and fund the destruction of that life – insisting that the sacrifice was necessary for the sake of "science."

But good science has always been grounded in good ethics. And is it really ethical and compassionate to raise the hopes of millions of Americans based on nothing more than a "promise"? Is it really ethical to allocate our nation's precious resources on research that has produced no actual cures and is guaranteed to destroy life – when other life-saving and moral alternatives exist?

Every dollar diverted to ESCR is a dollar denied to adult stem-cell therapies that are proven to work on actual patients.

You would think that, as a respected heart surgeon, Frist would be well aware of these facts. Instead, he seems to be distracted by unsubstantiated hype, rather than focused on the actual "facts of science" right under his nose.

The media have already begun to speculate that Frist is eyeing a presidential run in 2008. If that's the case, then he's just made a huge miscalculation; he alienated a large part of his base last week by putting politics over principle – and ignoring objective data.

That's what you might call politicized science.

Carrie Gordon Earll is the senior policy analyst for bioethics at Focus on the Family. She lives in Colorado Springs, Colo.