Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 22

Thread: Stem Cell Research Success

  1. #1
    flushingjet
    Guest

    Stem Cell Research Success

    But not the Quack Embryonic kind

    [url="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=413551&in_page_id=1770&ico=Homepage&icl=TabModule&icc=NEWS&ct=5"]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=413551&in_page_id=1770&ico=Homepage&icl=TabModule&icc=NEWS&ct=5[/url]

  2. #2
    [QUOTE=flushingjet]But not the [B]Quack[/B] Embryonic kind

    [url="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=413551&in_page_id=1770&ico=Homepage&icl=TabModule&icc=NEWS&ct=5"]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=413551&in_page_id=1770&ico=Homepage&icl=TabModule&icc=NEWS&ct=5[/url][/QUOTE]

    This is a very interesting article.

    But calling Embryonic Stem Cell Research "Quackery" just shows your ignorance of the topic. I supose you also are against "AIDS Research" b/c you believe God sent us "The AIDS" to punish homosexuals and fornicators so there is no way to stop it.

    Tell me , is this a moral issue for you as well? i can respect that, so long as you are consistant, that is you are also against private funding for embryonic stem cell research and are also agains in vitro fertilization as a means for couples who otherwise cant have children to have kids. You are also pushing to shut down IVF clinics all over the country and bring criminal charges against all of them since they dispose of human embryos all the time, right?

  3. #3
    flushingjet
    Guest
    [QUOTE=kennyo7]This is a very interesting article.

    But calling Embryonic Stem Cell Research "Quackery" just shows your ignorance of the topic. I supose you also are against "AIDS Research" b/c you believe God sent us "The AIDS" to punish homosexuals and fornicators so there is no way to stop it.

    Tell me , is this a moral issue for you as well? i can respect that, so long as you are consistant, that is you are also against private funding for embryonic stem cell research and are also agains in vitro fertilization as a means for couples who otherwise cant have children to have kids. You are also pushing to shut down IVF clinics all over the country and bring criminal charges against all of them since they dispose of human embryos all the time, right?[/QUOTE]

    Why are we talking about AIDS here?
    And why are you ascribing any beliefs to me that I dont hold?
    Too much MSM exposure/Libtard Blogging?
    Sorry, I dont have to pass any ass-backwards lib litmus test of what I think is right or wrong here

    But, since you asked,
    I'm not against private funding for anything as long as its legal
    Whatever's legal is not criminal, until its illegal
    If a state does change its laws to make embryonic research illegal-too darn bad-do it elsewhere

    I'm not against IVF for loving heterosexual married parents each of whom
    is the "donor"-not any other weirdo permuation of IVF
    (surrogate mothers, other/anonymous participants)

    Disposal of embryos was already discussed, it would be more
    humane to develop a standard for disposal, yes we know
    some end up down a sink drain

    Embryonic research is just an excuse to perpetuate
    abortion, cloning, etc-of which, except in certain, clear cut situations, should not be legal, and not be funded by my tax dollars

    All of this justification reminds me of people justifying slavery
    Slavery was legal but obviously not moral/ethical

    The crux of the matter is here
    [url="http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/editorialsletters/story.html?id=9eeae5c9-c9ff-4eab-8ef1-907ae94b1326"]http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/editorialsletters/story.html?id=9eeae5c9-c9ff-4eab-8ef1-907ae94b1326[/url]

    which closes:
    Everyone, including Republicans, supports the many new treatments emerging for Parkinson's patients that promise far more immediate application than do stem cells. Republicans also support stem cell research when it comes from ethically sound sources, such as adult tissues and umbilical cord blood. Ironically, these forms of stem cells have had greater success to date than the embryonic-source stem cells lionized in the Michael J. Fox TV ad.

  4. #4
    I really don't get why stem cell research is associated with cloning. I think when people hear the word cloning they get scared and think about crazy scientiest duplicating human beings or genetically engineering for desired traits.

    This has nothing to do at all with stem cell research and is a big factor in the ignorance of many about the subject.

    I think the opponents to the research like it that way because polls show that those who really understand what is happening support it. They put the word clone out there and people get frightened.

    Is such a crock.

  5. #5
    [QUOTE=Queens Jet Fan]I really don't get why stem cell research is associated with cloning. I think when people hear the word cloning they get scared and think about crazy scientiest duplicating human beings or genetically engineering for desired traits.

    [B]This has nothing to do at all with stem cell research and is a big factor in the ignorance of many about the subject.[/B]

    I think the opponents to the research like it that way because polls show that those who really understand what is happening support it. They put the word clone out there and people get frightened.

    Is such a crock.[/QUOTE]


    You hit it on the nail, QJF!
    Its all about fear stemming from ignorance.

  6. #6
    [QUOTE=Queens Jet Fan]I really don't get why stem cell research is associated with cloning. I think when people hear the word cloning they get scared and think about crazy scientiest duplicating human beings or genetically engineering for desired traits.

    This has nothing to do at all with stem cell research and is a big factor in the ignorance of many about the subject.

    I think the opponents to the research like it that way because polls show that those who really understand what is happening support it. They put the word clone out there and people get frightened.

    Is such a crock.[/QUOTE]

    People bring it up because it is a clear-cut part of the topic of Embryonic Stem Cell research. All I can say is check some of the bills currently floating around, and what they allow. Cloning is a part of that.

    And the fear, as always, is the "slippery slope", you know, like the ones many get worked up about regarding their freedoms and rights. Same basic premise, lose (or give in) to one small item, and next comes a bigger item, till you've slipped all the way down the slope. That is the major fear on these types of issues.

  7. #7
    [QUOTE=Warfish]People bring it up because it is a clear-cut part of the topic of Embryonic Stem Cell research. All I can say is check some of the bills currently floating around, and what they allow. Cloning is a part of that.

    And the fear, as always, is the "slippery slope", you know, like the ones many get worked up about regarding their freedoms and rights. Same basic premise, lose (or give in) to one small item, and next comes a bigger item, till you've slipped all the way down the slope. That is the major fear on these types of issues.[/QUOTE]
    Warfish are you even aware of what you are talking about when you say cloning is part of embryonic stem call research? When most people hear the word [I]cloning[/I] they think of duplicating individual. That is not what therapuetic cloning is about. Those against the research seem to be very happy keeping the public confused.

    This might help you and others.

    [QUOTE]14. Why is stem cell research confused with cloning?

    Stem cell research is often confused with cloning because both areas involve the use of embryonic cells. The public and the media often equate "cloning" with the manipulation of embryonic cells to produce an organism, and stem cell research was first brought to the spot light when human stem cells were isolated from human "embryonic tissues". Both fields got even more confused when the term therapeutic cloning was introduced as a means to produce embryonic stem cells. But stem cell research does not always involve embryonic stem cells.

    While reproductive cloning (the production of a whole new individual from one original cell by cloning technology) and therapeutic cloning (the use of cloning for the isolation of stem cells) both use techniques involving embryos, stem cell research involves the use of several different types of cells besides embryonic stem cells, such as adult stem cells from humans or animals, or stem cells from fetuses, umbilical cord or amniotic fluid.

    Thus, a clear line should be drawn between cloning for the production of a cell or organism with the same nuclear genome as another cell or organism and stem cell research, which is based on the isolation of adult and embryonic stem cells in order to find cures for many degenerative diseases. [/QUOTE]
    [URL]http://www.isscr.org/science/faq.htm#14a[/URL]

  8. #8
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    [QUOTE=Queens Jet Fan]Warfish are you even aware of what you are talking about when you say cloning is part of embryonic stem call research? When most people hear the word [I]cloning[/I] they think of duplicating individual. That is not what therapuetic cloning is about. Those against the research seem to be very happy keeping the public confused.

    This might help you and others.


    [URL]http://www.isscr.org/science/faq.htm#14a[/URL][/QUOTE]
    QJF, Kenny -

    People know exactly what they are talking about and still disagree with you. Yes, as crazy as it seems to you, people actually do know what they are talking about yet disagree with liberal positions. Theraputic cloning is most certainly part of the process for embryonic stem cell research, as your paste job demonstrates. But you assume that people who oppose theraputic clonong and embryonic stem cell research are obviously moronic idiots who clearly think of something else whenever the word "cloning" is uttered.

    Yet, you seem to not care about the verbal sleight of hand used by liberals, when they refer to generic "stem cell research" as if conservatives are opposed to it generally. Michael J Fox was on TV talking to Katie Couric and was described with text that appeared undreneath him as a "stem cell research advocate." However, that description would also be accurate to describe the Pope, George Bush and Catholic Charities, even though such a description implies that those who disagree with the actor oppose ALL stem cell research. The issue is [I]embryonic[/I] stem cell research and the extent to which we, as a society, want to create embryos only to destroy them. It is a difficult, multi-facted, complex moral issue that has costs and benefits. I bet if Fox News showed the same clip of Michael J Fox and yet described him as a "cloning advocate" you'd be up in arms about their deception, even though that description is also technically accurate.

    Both sides use language and obfuscation to promote their viewpoint. Both sides overhype and exaggerate the positions of their opponents. But rest assured that many, many, many people know EXACTLY what the differences are between reproductive and theraputic cloning and [I]still[/I] do not support creationg embryos for the sole purpose of destroying them. Many people have moral objection to that which is NOT borne from ignorance.

    The smugness of liberals knows no bounds. "This may help you and others" as is YOU are some sort of authority on this subject. You honestly and truly seem to think that people can only disagree with you if they are stupid or less informed than you. Don't you seem how f*cking arrogant that is? John Edwards says that if Kerry and he are elected Christopher Reeve will walk again? You guys are medical men - creating false hope is one of the worst things people can do and the success to date of embryonic stem cell research is quite small and, currently, lagging far behind adult stem cells.

    More perspective is needed by both sides. But this notion that your position, the liberal position, is the only position that intelligent, informed people should have is just par for the course. Liberals always think that people only disagree with them because they are less intelligent than liberals. As if taking a contrary view on any issue is just de facto proof of bad faith. It gets old, it really does. It is especially laughable on moral issues. Remember when Bill Bennett caught flack for saying on the radio that you could reduce crime rates by aborting all black babies? Liberals all over the place called for his head. The irony is that Bennet actually is against aborting black babies, whereas the liberals who attacked him support it!

    On and on we go. You guys do realize how ridiculous you look to most normal people, right? Why no politician will willingly call himself a liberal these days, right? I mean, if someone like kenny didn't exist I'd have to invent him.
    Last edited by jets5ever; 10-31-2006 at 03:06 PM.

  9. #9
    [QUOTE=Queens Jet Fan]Warfish are you even aware of what you are talking about when you say cloning is part of embryonic stem call research? When most people hear the word [I]cloning[/I] they think of duplicating individual. That is not what therapuetic cloning is about. Those against the research seem to be very happy keeping the public confused.

    This might help you and others.


    [URL]http://www.isscr.org/science/faq.htm#14a[/URL][/QUOTE]

    With all due respect my friend, I don't need "help" on the issue. Part of the core of the controversy on this issue is that the aim of many is cloning (the creation of embryos) purely for destruction/manipulation/testing purposes.

    Your quote doesn't even contradict that point, merely getting worked up over semantics and terminology (and discussing ALL stem Cell Reasearch, not specificly Embryonic, the contentious issue). Be it one cell, or one person, it is still the same concept, with the same moral objections for those who argue that side of things (not me particularly).

    [QUOTE=Wikipedia]Cloning is the process of creating an identical copy of an original organism or thing. A cloning in the biological sense, therefore, is a molecule, single cell (like bacteria, lymphocytes etc.) or multi-cellular organism that has been directly copied from and is therefore genetically identical to another living organism.

    ----

    Somatic cell nuclear transfer can also be used to create a clonal embryo. The most likely scenario for this is to produce embryos for use in research, particularly stem cell research. This process is also called "research cloning" or "therapeutic cloning."

    Therapeutic cloning, also called "embryo cloning," is the production of human embryos for use in research. The goal of this process is not to create cloned human beings, but rather to harvest stem cells that can be used to study human development and to treat disease. Stem cells are important to biomedical researchers because they can be used to generate virtually any type of specialized cell in the human body. Stem cells are extracted from the egg after it has divided for 5 days. The egg at this stage of development is called a blastocyst. The extraction process destroys the embryo, which raises a variety of ethical concerns. Many researchers hope that one day stem cells can be used to serve as replacement cells to treat heart disease, Alzheimer's, cancer, and other diseases.

    Scientists believe that cloning may be used to create stem cells genetically compatible with the somatic cell donor. Cloning in stem cell research, called research cloning or therapeutic cloning, has not yet been successful: no embryonic stem cell lines have been derived from clonal embryos. The process might provide a way to grow organs in host carrier, which become completely compatible with the original. Host carrier growing poses a risk of trans-species diseases if the host is of a different species (e.g., a pig).

    In human beings, this is a highly controversial issue for several reasons. It involves creating human embryos in vitro and then destroying them, attempting to obtain embryonic stem cells. But proposals to use cloning techniques in human stem cell research raise a set of concerns beyond the moral status of the embryo. These have led a number of individuals and organizations who are not opposed to human embryonic stem cell research to be concerned about, or opposed to, human research cloning. One concern is that cloning in human stem cell research will lead to the reproductive cloning of humans. A second concern is the appropriate sourcing of the eggs that are needed. Research cloning requires a large number of human eggs, which can only be obtained from women. A third concern is the feasibility of developing stem cell therapies from cloning.[/QUOTE]

    And for the record, the "public" doesn't need help being confused, most are pretty damn confused from the start. Ignorance is bliss, eh.

  10. #10
    Jets5ever your whole rant did not dispute that people are confused when they hear the word [I]cloning[/I] but you equate it to the confusion of others to the different types of stem cell research.

    What a crock of sh*t I will say. If people are confused about the different types then they are at fault. There is plenty of information about it around. You have posted before something that is completely wrong that embryonic stem cell research is not the most promising of the different types. Well maybe here your significant bias has obscured the facts in your mind but the consensus of the scientists doing the research do not agree with you. Oh I'm sure that Hannity can find one who does but that doesn't make it true. I understand that you are a lawyer and an economist, but Kenny and I are in the medical field and just might have more of an understanding of embryology than you do. I am not saying this to put you down but you write these posts on your high horse as if you are stating facts - but your statements are in error.

    I don't think any liberal wants people not to understand the difference between embryonic and other stem cell research. I do think that many opponents of embryonic stem cell research do want people to be confused about cloning to scare people and to keep their argument lines of destroying a life when in fact the embryo was going to be destroyed anyway.

    You are equating 2 lines of confusion that the public has in a way that has no validity.

  11. #11
    [QUOTE=Queens Jet Fan]I don't think any liberal wants people not to understand the difference between embryonic and other stem cell research. [/QUOTE]

    Now you're simply being intellectually dishonest. The MJF ads were SPECIFICLY and INTENTIONALLY misleading. They claimed the Democrat "favored Stem Cell Research" and the Republicna "was against it". Neither statement is true in fact. In effect, the MJF ads were designed to mislead people into believeing the right is against all Stem Cell research, and the Left for all research.

    In MD the TRUTH is the Democrat voted AGAINST funding Stem Cell Research becuase it didn't give enough for the Embryonic type, instead funding Adult and Cord Blood. And in truth, the Republican fully supports federal funding for Adult and Cord Blood research.

    Now, you tell me who is trying to mislead, trying to confuse, trying to be dishonest, when it comes to the MJF ads.

    Again, if you really think the Abortion Issue and the Cloning issue are unrelated to this, I don't what what to tell you.....you can choose to ignore these aspects of the overall topic, but that does not remove them from being a part of the issue.

  12. #12
    [QUOTE=Warfish]With all due respect my friend, I don't need "help" on the issue. Part of the core of the controversy on this issue is that the aim of many is cloning (the creation of embryos) purely for destruction/manipulation/testing purposes.

    Your quote doesn't even contradict that point, merely getting worked up over semantics and terminology (and discussing ALL stem Cell Reasearch, not specificly Embryonic, the contentious issue). [B]Be it one cell, or one person, it is still the same concept, with the same moral objections for those who argue that side of things (not me particularly).[/B]



    And for the record, the "public" doesn't need help being confused, most are pretty damn confused from the start. Ignorance is bliss, eh.[/QUOTE]
    With all due respect cloning one cell or one indidvidual is not the same thing and by equating the two people get all worked up about the slippery slope whereas if they truly understood the process and maybe if there was a different word used other than cloning they wouldn't be as frightened.

    If people are worried how these embryos might be created for just this purpose, there are ways to deal with it legally without banning the whole process. Right now and everybody should be aware of these embryos are being discarded anyway.

  13. #13
    [QUOTE=Queens Jet Fan]With all due respect cloning one cell or one indidvidual is not the same thing and by equating the two people get all worked up about the slippery slope whereas if they truly understood the process and maybe if there was a different word used other than cloning they wouldn't be as frightened.

    If people are worried how these embryos might be created for just this purpose, there are ways to deal with it legally without banning the whole process. Right now and everybody should be aware of these embryos are being discarded anyway.[/QUOTE]

    *sigh* Again Queens, I understand the subject just fine. I am well read, and well versed in the topic as a layman (since I am not a scientist, nor do I play one on TV). You're constant refrain of "if they (meaning me or Jets5) truly understood" plays as simple arrogance, as if no one could understand the issue as you do. Sorry bro, but I do understand it quite well, as does Jets5.

    And you again mix your issues. The embryos being "thrown out anyway" as of today are REPRODUCTIVE Cloning. The ones many scientists want to have, and many oppose or moral grounds, is THERAPUTIC cloning, the specific creation of a cloned embryo for use as a lab experiment related to Embryonic Stem Cells.

  14. #14
    [QUOTE=Warfish]Now you're simply being intellectually dishonest. The MJF ads were SPECIFICLY and INTENTIONALLY misleading. They claimed the Democrat "favored Stem Cell Research" and the Republicna "was against it". Neither statement is true in fact. In effect, the MJF ads were designed to mislead people into believeing the right is against all Stem Cell research, and the Left for all research.

    In MD the TRUTH is the Democrat voted AGAINST funding Stem Cell Research becuase it didn't give enough for the Embryonic type, instead funding Adult and Cord Blood. And in truth, the Republican fully supports federal funding for Adult and Cord Blood research.

    Now, you tell me who is trying to mislead, trying to confuse, trying to be dishonest, when it comes to the MJF ads.

    Again, if you really think the Abortion Issue and the Cloning issue are unrelated to this, I don't what what to tell you.....you can choose to ignore these aspects of the overall topic, but that does not remove them from being a part of the issue.[/QUOTE]
    I just went to youtube and watched the MJF add. He said that Bush and Michael Steel would put limits on "the most promising form of stem cell research." That is absolutely correct. Embryonic is the most promising form. I would not call that misleading at all. By saying, "most promising" he is saying there are other forms that there is no disagreement on.

    If you want to call me intellectually dishonest then go ahead but I don't see how that language is misleading.
    [list][/list][URL]http://youtube.com/watch?v=OGFsH5GCLG0[/URL]

  15. #15
    [QUOTE=Warfish]*sigh* Again Queens, I understand the subject just fine. I am well read, and well versed in the topic as a layman (since I am not a scientist, nor do I play one on TV). You're constant refrain of "if they (meaning me or Jets5) truly understood" plays as simple arrogance, as if no one could understand the issue as you do. Sorry bro, but I do understand it quite well, as does Jets5.

    And you again mix your issues. The embryos being "thrown out anyway" as of today are REPRODUCTIVE Cloning. The ones many scientists want to have, and many oppose or moral grounds, is THERAPUTIC cloning, the specific creation of a cloned embryo for use as a lab experiment related to Embryonic Stem Cells.[/QUOTE]
    Ok I think I see what the differences are here. When you say "creation of a cloned embryo" are you talking about taking an egg from a woman just for the purpose of the research and then fertlizing it? I can see why some might not like this idea.

    When I think of therapeutic cloning I think of the unused embryo from the invitro process being cloned to have its stem cells extracted for research purposes. Isn't there a difference? What objection should there be with this? Unfortunately it's still called cloning but what is morally wrong with this?

    Edit: The [I]they [/I] I was refering to was not you and Jets5ever. It was the average person that politicians and anti-abortion people are trying to scare to be against the research. I honestly feel that you and George both are very well informed on the subject and not prone to be scared by those trying to confuse.
    Last edited by Queens Jet Fan; 10-31-2006 at 03:48 PM.

  16. #16
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    [QUOTE=Queens Jet Fan]Jets5ever your whole rant did not dispute that people are confused when they hear the word [I]cloning[/I] but you equate it to the confusion of others to the different types of stem cell research.

    What a crock of sh*t I will say. If people are confused about the different types then they are at fault. There is plenty of information about it around. You have posted before something that is completely wrong that embryonic stem cell research is not the most promising of the different types. Well maybe here your significant bias has obscured the facts in your mind but the consensus of the scientists doing the research do not agree with you. Oh I'm sure that Hannity can find one who does but that doesn't make it true. I understand that you are a lawyer and an economist, but Kenny and I are in the medical field and just might have more of an understanding of embryology than you do. I am not saying this to put you down but you write these posts on your high horse as if you are stating facts - but your statements are in error.

    I don't think any liberal wants people not to understand the difference between embryonic and other stem cell research. I do think that many opponents of embryonic stem cell research do want people to be confused about cloning to scare people and to keep their argument lines of destroying a life when in fact the embryo was going to be destroyed anyway.

    You are equating 2 lines of confusion that the public has in a way that has no validity.[/QUOTE]


    What have I posted that is wrong about embryonic stem cell research? So, the succes in clinical trials to date [I]is[/I] higher in adult stem cells and not embryonic stem cells. That's a fact. When did I say adult was more promising? It has been more successful, to date. Highly so. That is a fact, that's what I said. Whatever.

    OF COURSE it refuted the charge that most people are confused by cloning. I said REPEATEDLY that people know exactly what is meant and STILL oppose it. My God, you don't even read what you reply to.

    Yes, the consensus of scientists is that embryonic stem cells hold more potential due to the fact that they are undifferentiated, whereas adult cells are not. However, to date, in practice, embryonic stem cells have not had as much success as adult stem cells in clinical trials. Studies have also shown that adult cells don't suffer from "transplant rejection" at the rates embryonic cells do and haven proven to be stronger and more relilient. The ONLY way for embryonic stem cells to get around the transplant rejection problem is cloning and adult stem cells could be taken from the same host who is sick, greatly lessening the steps in the process and reducing the likilihood that tissue will be rejected.

    There have been almost 1200 clinical trials involving adult stem cells

    [url]http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct/search;jsessionid=514DFF775B35F02A469A55E31FBA2D7C?term=stem+cells&submit=Search[/url]

    And adult cells are already being used to treat dieseases like sickle cell anemia.

    [url]http://www.corcell.com/expectant/diseases_treated.html#current[/url]

    Like I said, I have no problem with embryos from fertility clinics that would be otherwise destroyed being used for research. However, I do have a moral objection to creating an embryo just for research purposes.
    Last edited by jets5ever; 10-31-2006 at 04:15 PM.

  17. #17
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    [QUOTE=Queens Jet Fan]I just went to youtube and watched the MJF add. He said that Bush and Michael Steel would put limits on "the most promising form of stem cell research." That is absolutely correct. Embryonic is the most promising form. I would not call that misleading at all. By saying, "most promising" he is saying there are other forms that there is no disagreement on.

    If you want to call me intellectually dishonest then go ahead but I don't see how that language is misleading.
    [list][/list][URL]http://youtube.com/watch?v=OGFsH5GCLG0[/URL][/QUOTE]


    That IS debatable. He's "framing" the message, like in every election season. It has not proven to be the most promsing, it only is in theory. Adult stem cells have had the most succes to date in reality. That is likely why he didn't say Bush opposes "the most [I]successful [/I] form" because Bush doesn't. This is a deceitful thing, as is the characterization fo Fox as merely a "stem cell research" advocate.

    You think the word [I]cloning [/I] is misleading but won't even acknowledge that Democrats are framing this issue, like every party frames every issue?? Grow up.
    Last edited by jets5ever; 10-31-2006 at 04:16 PM.

  18. #18
    flushingjet
    Guest
    [QUOTE=jets5ever]What have I posted that is wrong about embryonic stem cell research? So, the succes in clinical trials to date [i]is[/i] higher in embryonic stem cells and not adult stem cells? When did I say it was more promising? It has been more successful, to date. Highly so. That is a fact, that's what I said.

    OF COURSE it refuted the charge that most people are confused by cloning. I said REPEATEDLY that people know exactly what is meant and STILL oppose it. My God, you don't even read what you reply to.

    Yes, the consensus of scientists is that embryonic stem cells hold more potential due to the fact that they are undifferentiated, whereas adult cells are not. However, to date, in practice, embryonic stem cells have not had as much success as adult stem cells in clinical trials. Studies have also shown that adult cells don't suffer from "transplant rejection" at the rates embryonic cells do and haven proven to be stronger and more relilient. The ONLY way for embryonic stem cells to get around the transplant rejection problem is cloning and adult stem cells could be taken from the same host who is sick, greatly lessening the steps in the process and reducing the likilihood that tissue will be rejected.

    There have been almost 1200 clinical trials involving adult stem cells, and zero for embryonic.

    [url="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct/search;jsessionid=514DFF775B35F02A469A55E31FBA2D7C?term=stem+cells&submit=Search"]http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct/search;jsessionid=514DFF775B35F02A469A55E31FBA2D7C?term=stem+cells&submit=Search[/url]

    And adult cells are already being used to treat dieseases like sickle cell anemia.

    [url="http://www.corcell.com/expectant/diseases_treated.html#current"]http://www.corcell.com/expectant/diseases_treated.html#current[/url]

    Like I said, I have no problem with embryos from fertility clinics that would be otherwise destroyed being used for research. However, I do have a moral objection to creating an embryo just for research purposes.[/QUOTE]

    Yup, premenopausal floozies will be lining up to sell their eggs for "mad money"
    (booze, drugs)
    Its in the name of (weird) science, and can help
    people economically to boot
    so it must be allowed.

    In the lib world of embryonic stem cell research, although
    completely flawed and failed its still the "most promising"
    because it has the dreamy imaginary potential to cure diseases and solve our Malthusian population problem simultaneously

    never mind the facts/stats

    Brilliant!

  19. #19
    Come on George. You are quick to throw around the insults but you and I well know that this therapy is just now in it's infancy and to say that to date in clinical trials that adult stem cell therapy is more effective is irrelevant. Yes, I am glad that you admitted that embryonic is more promising. Of course I think all types of this therapy should progress as rapidly as possible but we should not favor one over the other.

    Also I don't see how you say that this refutes the confusion over cloning. I would be very surpised if you took the man on the street and asked him to explain the difference between therapeutic cloning and reproductive cloning if you would get 10% of the people who knew the difference.

    Let me ask you this question. Do you think that it's wrong to clone an excess embryo for in vitro fertilization to extract it's stem cells? If so please explain why.

  20. #20
    [QUOTE=jets5ever]That IS debatable. He's "framing" the message, like in every election season. It has not proven to be the most promsing, it only is in theory. Adult stem cells have had the most succes to date in reality. That is likely why he didn't say Bush opposes "the most [I]successful [/I] form" because Bush doesn't. This is a deceitful thing, as is the characterization fo Fox as merely a "stem cell research" advocate.

    You think the word [I]cloning [/I] is misleading but won't even acknowledge that Democrats are framing this issue, like every party frames every issue?? Grow up.[/QUOTE]
    Come on. How is that deceitful. Promising is much more important that successful to date, and that is what they are trying to put limits on. Yes that is framing the question and what's wrong with that? Funding for embryonic stem cell research is what they were debating and that's why Fox took a position on that.

    Gosh you say you are independent but it's incredible how this is deceitful but yet Harold Ford being a playboy because he went to a Super Bowl party is not.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us