Blind spots lead to wrong conclusions

Joseph O'Day's June 10 letter, in which he claimed to be astounded by my ignorance concerning stem cells, was interesting. I was impressed by his using two words I had not heard before (totipotent and pluripotent) in explaining the difference between adult and embryonic stem cells. Even though I knew how it is easy to fall into the trap of falsely assuming that one's facility with the language indicates a superior knowledge of the subject, I was ready to give Mr. O'Day the benefit of the doubt until I read the rest of his letter.

True, Mr. O'Day seems to have an adequate understanding of the basic difference between adult and embryonic stem cells, but he lost me when he wrote, "Here is the truth about stem cells," and then blithely went on to tell us that, "Adult stem cell research is showing results while embryonic stem cell research has so far shown nothing."

I was disappointing that Mr. O'Day failed to connect the dots. An average fourth-grader could see that Bush's ban on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research and the resultant 8-year virtual cessation of such research in the United States rendered any results impossible. Mr. O'Day's letter is an excellent example of a universal truth, which is that all of us, even Mr. O'Day, are subject to an occasional cognitive bias (blind spot).

And finally, concerning those two words that drove me to the dictionary, I have a theory that the use of a dead language (Latin) by the legal profession and others is simply a way of setting themselves apart from us ordinary folk.

Gene McDougall

Arlington Heights