In this day and age, even with the marvels of modern medical science, there are just some things you cannot cure- such as paralysis, blindness, Lou Gehrig’s disease, muscular dystrophy and cancer.

Any of these disorders can dramatically change a life for the worse, and there is little one can do other than learn to cope with the newfound affliction. But what if someone only had to receive an injection to return to normal health?

It is not science fiction; it is the unjustly controversial issue of stem cell treatment. Yes, stem cells have the possibility to cure all these ailments.

Yet research on this potential miracle cure has been sluggish at best, thanks to politics.

To understand why this has become a divisive issue in Washington, one has to know exactly what a stem cell is. Stem cells are essentially repair cells for the body, allowing any cell, anywhere, to regenerate. Stem cells come in two varieties: the adult type, which can be found in anyone, and embryonic, which can only be found in human embryos.

Adult stem cells, while plentiful and with disease-eradicating potential, are scarce and hard to isolate for means of research or treatment.

Embryonic stem cells, on the other hand have been responsible for impressive medical feats as allowing blind people to see, paralyzed mice to walk and shrinking cancerous tumors into remission.

Researchers believe a great number of incurable diseases could also be treated with these cells.

Yet almost as soon as embryonic stem cell research started, a number of government regulations were placed on its research funding, limiting almost all government aid and thereby forcing researchers to turn to small amounts of private aid for research.

Why would our government enforce such regulations? Unfortunately, embryonic stem cell research is thrown in with the most divisive issue in our nation today, abortion. Embryonic stem cells come from blastocysts, early-stage human embryos. Extracting stem cells from these embryos is abortion, according to some conservatives.

Because of this, in 2001, President Bush allowed embryonic research only on the limited number of blastocysts scientists already had, and in 2002, replaced three pro-embryonic research officials on the Council of Bioethics with officials against it.

But this columnist, along with a great deal of Americans, believes this is one issue that doesn’t need partisan politics.

Rather than focus on potentially eradicating dozens of cruel and terrible disorders and diseases, we have instead focused on debating whether a days-old embryo is a human life. To throw it in with the abortion issue is, at best, flawed.

Stem cell-rich blastocysts do not come from aborted fetuses, but rather failed embryos with no chance at growing into a human being, and using these embryos to alleviate the suffering of millions is common sense.

With the majority of Americans now supporting embryonic research, a number of former stem cell opponents, including prominent Republican Senators Bill Frist and Arlen Specter, have now spoken out in support of embryonic research.

California recently became the first state to publicly fund embryonic research, with Illinois doing the same to a lesser extent. But these states can only do a fraction of the research that could be possible if research was supported nationwide.

With the numbers of research supporters growing, it may only be a matter of time before this happens and the eventual eradication of deadly and debilitating diseases could begin in our lifetimes.

However, until our public officials throw out special-interest pandering and vote with common sense on this issue, it could be a long time before we achieve a golden age of health.

Columns reflect the opinion of the author and not necessarily that of the Northern Star staff.