- FDA Rules for Cigarettes Are a Victory for Public Health, for Science (and for the Earth’s Climate?)
- Legislation Introduced to Codify Stem Cell Rules
- Commissioner Enhances FDA’s Commitment to Personalized Medicine
- Perfecting Policy on Stem Cells
- NIH and FDA Aim to Retool Regulatory Science
- DOE Leads Federal Funding for a Regional Innovation Cluster
- Certainty on the Science of Climate Change
- They’re Not Perfect Cells, But They’re Model Cells
- Genomic Medicine on the March
- President’s Budget Aims to Recharge Regional Innovation
- Event: The Science of Climate Change
- Progress in Bioethics
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
Bush: Science vs. Ethics or Scientists vs. Ethics?
Dr. Elias Zerhouni
In an interview with the magazine Medline Plus, NIH director Dr. Elias Zerhouni repeats his call for more embryonic stem cell research. Dr. Zerhouni has made similar statements before, including during congressional testimony in March.
When confronted with this disagreement with its policy on the part of its chief medical adviser, the White House has offered the typical non-denials—”No, there’s no disagreement, we both think embryonic stem cell research should proceed”—without confronting Zerhouni’s point that the research is hobbled by the current policy.
Also familiar is the spin that this is a matter of science versus ethics, a line the president used in the 2004 presidential debates. Now the administration has gone further.
The notion that scientists lack ethical judgment—they’re only trying to cure horrible diseases after all—surfaced more clearly than ever in the reported White House response to Dr. Zerhouni’s latest statement. According to the Washington Post blog The Sleuth, spokesman Tony Fratto said that the president must “draw the line in a different place than Dr. Zerhouni” because he has to take into account “moral and religious views.”
The change of tone is notable. The White House could have said, “Well, we just disagree and the president is the decider.” Instead, as its position has become more untenable the White House has moved from “science vs. ethics” to “scientists don’t worry about ethics.”
Fortunately, those benighted scientists and the rest of us have politicians to do that for us.
Comments on this article
Yeah, clearly the President and his administration has demonstrated their commitment to ethical behavior. Oh, except for the warrantless wiretapping, torturing prisoners, lying about the need to go to war, and a few other things…
October 18th, 2007 at 5:06 pmReligion has no place in either science or public policy. Period.
Anything else is both a violation of the Constitution and of common sense.
October 28th, 2007 at 12:33 am“Moral and religious views” HA
October 28th, 2007 at 12:34 amIt seems to me that history is repeating itself..religion also apposed the use of antibiotics,innoculations, it even apposed democracy, and the use of flouride. They were wrong in all of these and now they are dictating science policy to this administration. Everything mentioned above have a profound moral implication, and many were developed by scientists or people with a scientific mind.
December 11th, 2007 at 12:51 pm