This article in the Times Online reports another case of promising results from treating diabetic patients with their own stem cells. Even though no embryonic stem cells were used the reporter felt the need to include the following:
Previous studies have suggested that stem-cell therapies offer huge potential to treat a variety of diseases such as Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and motor neuron disease. A study by British scientists in November also reported that stem-cell injections could repair organ damage in heart attack victims.
But research using the most versatile kind of stem cells — those acquired from human embryos — is currently opposed by powerful critics, including President Bush.
How can we not assume that these people are operating with an agenda? They try to make pro-lifers look like we are universally anti stem cell research without noticing the distinction between adult and embryonic and cord blood research. In articles that demonstrate the success of adult stem cell therapies, they will not acknowledge that we champion those studies. They continuously underplay the success of the adult stem cells versus the embryonic stem cells. How can we surmise anything other than that this is intentional?
Notice the comments at the bottom, though. Just keep talking and the truth gets out little by little.