I checked the New York Times to see if they reported the great news that human diabetes patients have been effectively treated for their disease with adult stem cells. The Gray Lady only carried a muted report by the AP. Had this been an embryonic stem cell success, the story would have reaped huge headlines and an angry lead editorial decrying President Bush for his stem cell funding policy. (Remember, overturning the Bush policy is the prism through which the MSM reports almost all stories, and it explains the muted coverage of this very important story.) This is one form of media bias; substantially downplaying coverage of major adult stem cell breakthroughs so that it doesn’t really sink into the public’s consciousness. (Or, the MSM doesn’t report it at all as happened last year when most media erected a news blockade around the peer reviewed report of paralyzed spinal cord patients having feeling restored with adult stem cells.)
But note this little item from the story explaining why the success happened in Brazil instead of the USA:
The research was done in Brazil because doctors in the United States were not interested in the approach, said one of the authors, Dr. Richard K Burt of Northwestern University’s medical school.Could it be that the research was not carried out because so much propaganda has gone into pushing ESCR? And due to this campaign, scientists may see most of the $$$$ coming in the ESCR field? And/or that ESCR is now so “in” that some scientists didn’t see the potential for professional plaudits pursuing adult approaches?
I don’t know the answer but I think these are questions we should ponder.
