Comments on: New Polls Offer Positive Outlook On The Public’s View of “Controversial” Science

By: Greenpeace Confirms ExxonMobil Funded Climate Deniers, But Change May Be Coming | The Intersection | Discover Magazine

Fri, 01 Jul 2011 22:12:36 +0000

[...] Governor, Chris Christie, has expressed similar sentiments. It’s a good thing, too, because a recent poll published in Nature Biotechnology reveals that the American public prefers political candidates who [...]

By: 1985

1985 — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 07:17:24 +0000

3. Colin Says:
June 29th, 2011 at 7:53 pm
@ 1985:
I absolutely agree. I guess I must be one of the 21% who defer to my religion and would refuse treatments based on embryonic stem cells for ethical reasons. I would also be one of the 70% above once I confirmed that they meant embryonic stem cells, which I’m sure they did.

1. The exact phrase is “therapeutic cloning and stem cells from in vitro fertilized embryos”. It is always a good idea to first read before one writes

2. There isn’t going to be any cures from embryonic stem cells for a very long time. I highly doubt that many people who don’t really understand the subject would reply the same way if they did understand it better. If they understood it well, then they would be all for it, but that’s always going to be very few people

By: Chris Mooney

Chris Mooney — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 06:16:16 +0000

The stem cell issue has been won for a long time. I’m not nearly so optimistic, Jamie, about climate change.

By: ╦heBigo╦

╦heBigo╦ — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 05:43:52 +0000

I think it was Mark Twain whom once stated ” There are three kinds of lies. Lies, Damned lies and statistics “. Take a poll of 312,000,000 Americans then we might actually have an accurate poll for the first time. Not a small marginal sample of about 0.001% of the population.

By: Bob Koss

Bob Koss — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 00:16:24 +0000

I searched high and low in the Stanford poll looking for the text of the green and non-green statements made. I couldn’t find them anywhere. The other statements made were all listed. Why not those? Make me rather suspicious of the even-handedness of the polling.

I remember seeing a previous poll by this same guy. I wasn’t impressed with that one and I’m not any more impressed with this one.

By: Colin

Colin — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 23:53:11 +0000

@ 1985:
I absolutely agree. I guess I must be one of the 21% who defer to my religion and would refuse treatments based on embryonic stem cells for ethical reasons. I would also be one of the 70% above once I confirmed that they meant embryonic stem cells, which I’m sure they did.

By: Rob

Rob — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 23:01:45 +0000

“Interestingly, though, more individuals (21%) did follow the will of their church than followed the recommendations of their medical doctors (15%) or the U.S. National Institutes of Health (13%).”

Not particularly surprising, considering that the debate centers more around morality than effectiveness or safety. I have mad love for doctors and respect their opinions on matters of medicine, but I wouldn’t consider them a moral compass. Granted on many issues I wouldn’t look to the church for moral guidance either, but a lot of people do.

By: 1985

1985 — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 22:31:03 +0000

More than 70% of respondents support the use of therapeutic cloning and stem cells from in vitro fertilized embryos to cure cancer or treat heart attacks.

Of course, as usual, the survey didn’t make sure that the people answering it actually knew what they were answering. You really think that the average person on the street knows what a stem cell is? They probably just saw the key phrases “cure cancer” and “treat heart attacks” and went immediately “I’m for that”.