The article presents a major, polarizing, scientific issue. Most of what it says is already known, but is only occasionally emphasized in media science reporting. A problem with the referenda: I would assume that major funding to defeat these referenda would come from biotech entrepreneurs and the biotech industry generally? Where are they, and what are they financing - or aren't they? Or, as has also been occasionally reported, are they leaving research to non governmental funding,l or taking it to countries which are more welcoming?

First, let me say that I support the core arguments in this op-ed concerning the compassion society must show to those who support regenerative medicine, a rather anti-evolutionary idea. I can speak to this op-ed because I know the topic as a science writer, working with one of the world's most distinguished microbiologists, Tom Wagner, on the 2001 book LIVING WITHOUT FEAR: UNDERSTANDING CANCER AND THE NEW THERAPIES. Most of what we wrote no longer is new therapeutically but we were among the first to describe for a lay audience not only the inner workings of the genome as it relates to cancer-causing mutation, but also the human heart, as it struggles with the brutalities of evolution. To explain evolution metaphorically, I ... More »

The article makes a good commentary on medical science as it has been hindered in addressing regenerative medicine. There does not seem to be too much new in the article, but it presents the arguments well.