Personally I believe that stem-cell research should continue. Not only for the sake of science, but also because we may become behind in the worldwide intelligence race. what are your opinions on stem cell research? :m:

Same as my views on abortion. Unless you can give a clear reason why killing it's different than killing your appendix, go for it.

because it has a soul? I don't really know. I don't really care about abortion, haven't got an opinion either way. :m:

I don't really see much of a difference either way. Someone's opinion 'should' be the same in both cases.

If you believe killing a fetus is murder then it shouldn't really matter if it's for science.

hmm. And by the way, the only reason i posted this was so we had a thread for this category. :m:

Those against stem cell research really need to go back into the cave they seem to be living in.

- N

Any information links for those of us folk who aren't really all that modern?

One of many easy to find links:
http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/faqs.asp#excited

Personally I believe that stem-cell research should continue. Not only for the sake of science, but also because we may become behind in the worldwide intelligence race. what are your opinions on stem cell research? :m:

There are few ethical issues with current human stem cell research. Stem cells are routinely isolated from human bone marrow. Other stem cell types (eg. skin stem cells, liver stem cells etc) are also isolated fairly routinely. Other stem cell types are harder to extract from living humans, such as neural stem cells.

Oh, I see, you meant to say <B><I>embryonic</I></B> stem cells……(?)

The latest Scientific American has a feature article on "the Stem Cell Challenge"

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000DFA43-04B1-10AA-84B183414B7F0000&chanID=sa008

If that doesn't work you can get to their home page via http://www.sciam.com

I read that. Was that the one that also had the article on DNA assembly? :m:

Well, I don't see that but there is the one on Gene Doping, http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colID=1&articleID=000E7ACE-5686-10CF-94EB83414B7F0000

I found the one on "Gods Number is Up" http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colID=13&articleID=000E350F-2F66-10CF-AD3D83414B7F0000
to be an example why Scientific American appears liberal to those who too often call themselves conservative nowadays.

do you ever read popular science? It had an interesting article on new weapons, which are really cool, but debated over due to their necessity and cost-benefit-ratio-net-loss-de-gross-ifimication-capita-deduction-of the nut!! :m:

Personally I believe that stem-cell research should continue. Not only for the sake of science, but also because we may become behind in the worldwide intelligence race. what are your opinions on stem cell research? :m:

What is so good about stem cell research that you "need" it?

Anything that is for the betterment of mankind, has got to be good.

If the stem cell is suffering and when that will be proved then after that we should discontinue the research, OK.

What is so good about stem cell research that you "need" it?

It can help people who are suffering from otherwise incurable diseases. It can provide much-needed organs to people who need them in the nick of time to save 'em.

Those are the things I can think of right now.

It can help people who are suffering from otherwise incurable diseases. It can provide much-needed organs to people who need them in the nick of time to save 'em.

Those are the things I can think of right now.

How can stem cells do that?

I figured this would be worth a bump just so I can say:

I am one of those whose lives would be immensely bettered if I got my hands on embryonic stem cells. However, I do not believe that another life should be taken just so mine won't suck so much. So in case anybody would ask, "What if you had some awful disease that needed stem cells to cure? Would you still be against it then?" Yes, I would.

Many countries ARE persuing stem cell research. Just because America is not advancing the studies others are and will continue the persuit. I don't think this is as great as they believe for genetic research would be more benificial IMHO.

i've heard that the umibical cord also carries stem cells. why not use that. it's leftover anyways.

You can't just use something because it is a leftover. For instance you need special permission to use fertilized eggs that fertilization clinics are not using.

Because people like to think that they have ethics.

Matter of fact America leads the way in stem cell research only the federal government doesn't do as much as it could to contribute large sums of money for more research. American mediacal research companies would love the Fed to open the flood gates of money to them to enrich them even more than they already are. Private firms NEVER give anything back to the federal government if the reap huge profits from whatever the may find but always have their hand out to recieve everything they can get.

stem cells are the master cells of the body they can make them selfs into what ever cells it is told to. Need a new liver trigger a stem cell to grow a new one. or just inject stem cells triggered to grow liver cells into a damaged one to make it work better.

How can stem cells do that?

Stem cells can be used to grow entire new organs for a person. Need a new liver? They can grow one from a stem cell culture. Stem cells can even be used to repair nerve and brain damage. The beauty of them is that they are very generalized cells that can change into any sort of cell in the human body.

Though maybe you were being facetious? "How can stem cells do that?" well that is just what the research we are not funding would find out, now isn’t it?

Spymoose, he was indeed being facetious, since this is more or less his field of expertise. I don't think that we are quite as far as you think we are though. We can certainly cause stem cells to differentiate into various types of cells, as they would in our body, but we cannot grow organs in vitro. We can grow sheets of liver cells, but not a functioning liver.

Though maybe you were being facetious? "How can stem cells do that?" well that is just what the research we are not funding would find out, now isn’t it?

If you say so.

I donated the umbilical cord from my second child to LifeSource.

I've heard on the news that the Pancreas also has a high number of stem cells. Stem Cells don't always come from human embryos.

No one is killing viable fetuses to further research. They are simply inseminated eggs that have split a few times. We eat them all the time at breakfast and no one seems to have an ethical issue about that. (Well some do, but I personally feel those folks are half-baked already.)

I'm really surprised that this is even an issue. And I thought basic biology was required education in high school. Do that many people drop out of school before eighth grade, or am I over-estimating the education system? Stem-cell research has the potential of being the largest medical breakthrough since, well, medicine. We should all do everything we can do to support this amazing technology.

Hey christians tell Ur fathers that RawThinkTank is here to help humans.

If they have problem with the nerveless embroys then so be it. Put all your money in cell division research, find out how to divide stemcell directly without an egg, study how the egg does that in the first place. Create tons of stemcells from one.

Any suggestions on how to go about are welcome, critics are also welcomed to blast the above idea.

p.s. What is even more disturbing is that these fathers blatently discriminate between humans and animals. I mean humans are animals , why is it that animals can be eaten but not humans, for christians this is all justa matter of convinience for thier bellies, thats what I expect from humans.

Same as my views on abortion. Unless you can give a clear reason why killing it's different than killing your appendix, go for it.


Since when is stem cell research equal to abortion. The last time I checked my English grammar basics, there was still a difference between PAST TENSE and FUTURE TENSE...meaning, if the fetus is ALREADY DEAD (i.e. past tense, the fetus died) then the stem cells can be thrown away and wasted, or they can be studied for the benefit of all.

Also, the last time I checked, the past/present/future tenses applied in religions as well.

I'm pro-stem cell research, new parts is the coolest thing to me.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/science/08/27/jaw.transplant.ap/index.html

you can also get stem cells from hair follicles and baby teeth. keep em coming. :m:

I'm pro-stem cell research, new parts is the coolest thing to me.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/science/08/27/jaw.transplant.ap/index.html
Haha, what the fuck? I can see the headlines in the future when, in a freak med school prank, a bunch of residents plant a penis in the mouth of the class shill.

As for the topic Persol said it best. I really see no reason why to ban something in a just because it might stance, when it's not grounded in some relevant facts. That's just dumb.

Hey U christian fathers U killed our SuperMan

[QUOTE=No one is killing viable fetuses to further research. They are simply inseminated eggs that have split a few times. We eat them all the time at breakfast and no one seems to have an ethical issue about that. (Well some do, but I personally feel those folks are half-baked already.)[/QUOTE]


A chickens egg is not fertilized for they are , for the most part, kept in cages away from roosters so insemination can't ever happen as you think it does.

Stem cell research is being done by the private sector already and what everyone is complaining about is that they want more-----> M O N E Y<---- to do research with the governments ----> M O N E Y <---- not using their own money in case it doesn't actually work as they say it will. It seems that BUSINESSES want free money then when they create an idea they PROFIT from that idea and NEVER pay back the money to the government.

A chickens egg is not fertilized for they are , for the most part, kept in cages away from roosters so insemination can't ever happen as you think it does. Big Deal !

Point is , is the embryo suffering more than the suffering or disabled people ,

cosmictraveler U r from the lost generation and Ur ego will never let U change Ur views on this. U should find out if the embryo suffers and after what stage of development before or after development of nerves.

Talk about this U big mouth.

you can also get stem cells from hair follicles and baby teeth. keep em coming. :m:


alright, here's the short and skinny of embryonic stem cells.

embryonic stem cells are the first cells that the fertilized egg devides into. they are completely generic, identical cells, that absolutely have the potential to become correctly functionioning cells of any other type in the body because they eventually DO produce and become all those tissues. They are not arrested in a stem cell state, and they are not influenced or regulated by other factors in the body like stem cells found within more developed tissues are.

cell biologists are still trying to come to grips with what makes different cell types act so differently - they all have the same chromosomes, the same DNA. somehow the DNA in chromosomes is tweaked during 'differentiation' - the process of stem cells becoming specific cell types - so that different patterns of DNA/gene expression become dominant -yeilding the tissue-specific behavior. understanding this process is inherantly very interesting - fundamental almost. and as such, harbors some very revolutionary potential for medicine.

of course, studying the biological aspects can be explored with animal models. However, animal biochemistry is too different if we ever want to use the knowledge for medical advancement - of which I dont think I have to go into; the potential is simply enormous.

but that is why human embryonic stem cells are such a hot issue. there is no substitute.

<P>embryonic stem cells are the first cells that the fertilized egg devides into.

No, that statement is not technically correct. ES cells do not arise until the blastocyst stage. Before the blastocyst stage, the fertilized zygote divides and develops into a solid ball of cells (the “morella”). The cells of the morella are not ES cells. ES cells, when they do first appear, are present in the inner cell mass of the blastocyst. Furthermore, I do not think that all the cells of the inner cell mass are ES cells.<P>

<P>

No, that statement is not technically correct. ES cells do not arise until the blastocyst stage. Before the blastocyst stage, the fertilized zygote divides and develops into a solid ball of cells (the “morella”). The cells of the morella are not ES cells. ES cells, when they do first appear, are present in the inner cell mass of the blastocyst. Furthermore, I do not think that all the cells of the inner cell mass are ES cells.<P>

Ok, caught me, Im a biochemist, not a developmental biologist (havent had a course on biology above the single-cell level since high school). But the explanation about the differentiation and chromatin structure is accurate.

Stem cell research is being done by the private sector already and what everyone is complaining about is that they want more-----> M O N E Y<---- to do research with the governments ----> M O N E Y <---- not using their own money in case it doesn't actually work as they say it will. It seems that BUSINESSES want free money then when they create an idea they PROFIT from that idea and NEVER pay back the money to the government.

The money they get back, is the completed research that benefits human life, and quality of life for those people affected by what the stem cell research ends up curing. It comes in the form of less Medicare bills, less disability payments, less unemployment payments. It comes in building a stronger set of humans and one that suffers from less disease and less hereditary problems like Parkinsons, MS, Spina Bifida, and many other nervous system problems. It comes in the form of the boy who has his hand severed in an accident, and they grow a new one instead of having him live his whole life with no hand. It's about the human condition getting better using volunteered embryos that were never viable because they never had a host.

Same as my views on abortion. Unless you can give a clear reason why killing it's different than killing your appendix, go for it.
There is evidence that shows that the stem cells are not true or rather complete organisms. The cells have the potential of becoming a human, but can be compared to an incomplete entity. Everything has potentiality, but what it ultimately becomes determines its fate of existance....but abortion is comparibly different from stem cell research. Other than stem cells potentiality to cure many diseases that have perplexed scientists for ages, it has the potential of being regenerated....but all in all, knowing all of the facts helps

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/041128/1/3ovex.html

Paralyzed woman walks again after stem cell therapy

A South Korean woman paralyzed for 20 years is walking again after scientists say they repaired her damaged spine using stem cells derived from umbilical cord blood.

Hwang Mi-Soon, 37, had been bedridden since damaging her back in an accident two decades ago.

Last week her eyes glistened with tears as she walked again with the help of a walking frame at a press conference where South Korea researchers went public for the first time with the results of their stem-cell therapy.
The relentless march of scientific progress continues...

so for now, thats saying that you can used the specialized cells to repair nerve damage, which means... :m:

I am writing a paper on stem cell research for my english class.

All my friends from my church are against embryonic stem cell research. I have read many articles by conservatives and Christians who claim embryonic stem cell research is "morally wrong" and "destroying lives." I am confused!!!! I am a Christian I even believe that embryos are human being BUT STEM CELL RESEARCH IS NOT KILLING EMBRYOS! What in the world are all my friends making such a big deal about? Aren't most of the embryonic stem cells from abortions and "left overs" from in vitro fertilization? People aren't having the abortions just so someone can use the stem cells. Young human beings are not dying because of stem cell research. No one is dying from this. I am a Christian and I dont even understand why my friends are against this. Aren't most embryonic stem cells from abortions and "extras" from in vitro fertilization?

I am confused!!!! I am a Christian I even believe that embryos are human being BUT STEM CELL RESEARCH IS NOT KILLING EMBRYOS!

The isolation of embryonic stem (ES) cells from a blastocyst (ie. an early stage embryo) does destroy the embryo. The embryo needs to be disassociated into single cells.

Aren't most of the embryonic stem cells from abortions and "left overs" from in vitro fertilization?

ES cells are not isolated from abortion tissue. There is only one very specific source of ES cells – a blastocyst. This is an early stage embryo (about 7 days development after fertilization) that consists of only about 100 cells inside an outer “shell”. Blastocysts used for ES cell isolation are obtained from excess embryos left over from IVF procedures. Such left-over embryos are destined for destruction. The use of embryos for the purpose of isolating ES cells does not cause the destruction of any embryos that would not otherwise be destroyed by incineration. My question to the fundy religiously brainwashed is: how is destroying an embryo for the purpose of creating medical strategies that could help countless people with terrible genetic diseases any worse than destroying an embryo by throwing it into an incinerator? I have never heard anyone complaining about the latter.

People aren't having the abortions just so someone can use the stem cells.

That’s right because abortion tissue is not used for ES cell isolation in the first place.

Young human beings are not dying because of stem cell research. No one is dying from this.

Right. The “moral” objection of the religiously brainwashed is based around the belief that life begins at conception. They consider a single celled embryo to be a human being with all the same attached rights and privileges as an adult. This patently absurd viewpoint is without any biological basis. A blastocyst cannot survive by itself. It is merely a ball of undifferentiated cells. A blastocyst is no more a human being than a pile of bricks and shingles is a house.

Just my opinion.<P>

Personally I believe that stem-cell research should continue. Not only for the sake of science, but also because we may become behind in the worldwide intelligence race. what are your opinions on stem cell research? :m:

im totally for stemcells....having presented a paper on the topic,i feel thrs nothin wrong in stemcell research and me thinks ppl who r against it actually dono wht they r talkin abt! wht say?

this thread is weird. I made it a long time ago, and it will randomly pop up again at times. Its our FDR during our Science and Society depressions. :m:

this thread is weird. I made it a long time ago, and it will randomly pop up again at times. Its our FDR during our Science and Society depressions. :m:

:D i cudnt help but post my view!!!!!!!

I'm all for stem cell research that uses zygotes that will be destroyed otherwise. It makes sense to not let them go to waste. But if we could get these stem cells from other sources, that would be best, lest we anger anyone that would accuse us of being "immoral".

hmm. What about using the ES from a rape "child"? If a woman checked herself in, they could pop it on out, and put 'em onthe freeze, or immediately to work. how about that? :m:

hmm. What about using the ES from a rape "child"? If a woman checked herself in, they could pop it on out, and put 'em onthe freeze, or immediately to work. how about that? :m:

not a bad idea but how many women will agree to it? also i think there are lots of unused embroys at the fertility clinics which can be used with the donors consent....wht say?