Madam, - I pointed out in my letter of November 28th that the use of IUDs and the "morning-after pill" is legal and widespread in this country. Contributors who are against embryonic stem cell research have not addressed this issue.
Just in case the connection has been missed, let me remind your readers that the result of using these contraception methods is the destruction of the embryo.
If it wasn't for the embryonic stem cell debate I doubt whether many people would have realised that the majority of surplus embryos produced by IVF are never used and are destroyed. Indeed, even with that knowledge, I believe most people have no moral problem with IVF as they appreciate the joy it can bring to childless couples.
The potential benefits to mankind from embryonic stem cell research may be immense, but many people who appear to have no problem with IUDs, "morning after pills" and IVF find it abhorrent. Why is this? I think an answer can be found in Brendan Purcell's reply to David McConnell ("Rite and Reason", December 8th). He says, "if there was even the slightest chance that the human embryo was a human being, wouldn't one expect a scruple, a doubt, perhaps even a revulsion, on the part of a scientist?".
Yes, the malevolent scientist forever tinkering with God's creations.
This popular view, due to the complexity of modern science and the sensational media reporting of such areas as genetically modified organisms and reproductive cloning, needs to be counteracted by proper public debate and education.
The Irish Times must be commended for its efforts in this regard. However, much more needs to be done by the scientists themselves in order to get their message across.
But have no doubt, as the results of embryonic stem cell research move from the laboratory to the bedside, it will become no more controversial than IVF is today. - Yours, etc., TONY McELLIGOTT, Verschoyle Mews, Stephen's Lane, Dublin.