My lab group sits through ethical research training annually. We go over all of the rules, but even more intriguing is indepth study of specific cases. One such case that we cover each year are the studies done by Nazi doctors on Jewish prisoners. In those studies, the Nazis allowed prisoners to die of hypothermia in order to study the effectiveness of particular clothing or conditions to prevent hypothermia. This is, of course, very unethical. However, does this mean that we shouldn't use the data? According to the guidelines that govern ethical research in the US, the data can and should be used. In fact, it is actually considered unethical to not use the data if it pertains to your area of study. Don't get me wrong, this in no way condones unethical research.
So even within secular, evolutionist research the use of data derived through unethical practices is used. In the same way, I would expect creationists to use advances derived through evolutionary biology in the same way, and I wouldn't find it hypocritical. If something works, it works. If the methodology used to derive further technology is ethical, even if it is considered blasphemous by some, should not stop people from using it.
However, I would argue against removing evolution as a tool for researching disease. So far, comparative genomics has been a very useful tool for discovering the cause of many genetic diseases. Again, I do not feel that creationists would be hypocritical for wanting this type of research to continue. First and foremost, creationists want the suffering of people to be abated as much as any evolutionists, so if it works keep using it.
™ Version 4.2