Monday, vice presidential candidate Sen. John Edwards promised Americans that diseases like juvenile diabetes and chronic paralysis would be cured if John Kerry were elected president. Never mind the fact that this might be one of the most outrageous campaign promises in the history of presidential races, it is also a smack in the face to people with these conditions.

“We will stop juvenile diabetes, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s and other debilitating diseases,” Edwards said. “When John Kerry is president, people like Christopher Reeve are going get up out of that wheelchair and walk again.”

Kerry and Edwards have been using the death of Christopher Reeve and the current condition of Michael J. Fox to outline their differences with President Bush over embryonic stem-cell research. Kerry and Edwards believe the president’s policies are hindering and slowing the path to a cure.

What Kerry and Edwards failed to mention is that the very man whose memory they are using to forge a trail to the Oval Office believed that embryonic stem cells would not be the path to his walking again.

In an interview with Reader’s Digest earlier in the year, Reeve said he believed the cure for chronic paralysis would not result from embryonic stem cell research.

“I advocate it because I think scientists should be free to pursue every possible avenue,” Reeve said. “It appears though, at the moment, that embryonic stem cells are effective in treating acute injuries and are not able to do much about chronic injuries.”

Presently there is no federal ban on embryonic stem-cell research. Tests from adult stem cells and stem cells from umbilical cords have yielded amazing results and show more promise in curing major diseases than embryonic stem cells. In the case of Reeves and treating spinal injuries, prevailing medical research prefers the use of adult stem cells over embryonic stem cells and in this area the Bush administration has placed no restrictions.

Whether it’s adult stem cells or embryonic stem cells, none have yielded significant enough results to even begin clinical trials.

That is not good news for John Edwards. It’s not uncommon for a drug or treatment to spend up to a decade or longer in clinical trials. That’s one great thing about the Food and Drug Administration, but also one of their drawbacks. You can be well assured what comes out of those tests will be safe, but you’ll have to wait years.

Medical breakthroughs don’t hang on presidential elections, and in the case of embryonic stem cells, the case is no different. Re-elect George W. Bush. Elect John Kerry. It doesn’t matter who’s in office because in 2008, those diseases will still be around and research is going to continue.

For myself, this is a big issue in the election. I was diagnosed with type-1 diabetes in 2001 and lost a career in the Air Force and a year in school. This has been the disease that everyone says is always ten years away from being cured. Still, there is no definitive hope out there right now that is close to market. Insulin inhalers in nebulizer form have been caught in clinical trails for almost four years now and are still a few years from fruition.

It’s simply ludicrous to say that four years of a new president will advance medical research far enough to cure chronic paralysis, Parkinson’s, Diabetes, Alzheimer’s and a plethora of other conditions. If John Kerry is elected and opens up embryonic stem cell research to additional lines then research might be facilitated. But a cure will not happen in the near future and by that I mean the next four years.

I’m not saying these diseases are impossible to cure, but we are just beginning to understand the complexities of diseases like Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s. I think John Kerry is on the right path when he says he wants to increase funding and open up new lines to research, but I think Edwards and him need to open their eyes to reality.

John and John like to tell Americans that “Hope is on the way.” In a way it is, if they follow through with their promises and open up new lines. What’s wrong here is the magnitude of hope they promise. What John Edwards preached in Iowa on Monday is good optimism with a bad choice of words. Telling Americans that electing one person will pave the way for curing conditions like chronic paralysis in the next three years is simply misleading. My advice to John and John is cut the ultra-optimistic rhetoric and stick to your promises of opening up new lines. The former is much more realistic than the latter and that’s where the true hope lies.

Derek Montgomery ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in journalism and political science.