|
Post by masterplan200 on Dec 14, 2005 0:47:48 GMT -5
What's everyone's take on Stem Cell research? Remember doing an essay on it last year, I was in the negative and said it was un-christian
|
|
Alexis
Oasis Roadie
beLIEve
Posts: 170
|
Post by Alexis on Dec 14, 2005 16:36:44 GMT -5
;D
|
|
|
Post by Dominic on Dec 14, 2005 17:19:46 GMT -5
it just reminds me of that story about the man on top of the house in the storm, who kept saying "my god will come and save me"
|
|
|
Post by nyr401994 on Dec 17, 2005 18:39:30 GMT -5
if there is a true "separation between church and state" then this should be allowed. the naysayers keep saying that we're trying to "play god", but if that point is brought up, then we should surely halt the production and sales of every medicine being made?
|
|
|
Post by wankinginthebushes on Dec 19, 2005 6:10:29 GMT -5
if there is a true "separation between church and state" then this should be allowed. the naysayers keep saying that we're trying to "play god", but if that point is brought up, then we should surely halt the production and sales of every medicine being made? couldnt agree more. I FUCKIN HATE the saying 'but thats not natural' So fuckin naive
|
|
|
Post by castlecraver on Dec 19, 2005 10:32:37 GMT -5
As a stem-cell researcher myself, I usually find it appaling how uninformed people are about the issue. Contrary to popular belief, stem cell research is going on, all over the world, at this very minute (some of it about 10 feet away from where I'm sitting now). The definition of stem cell is loosely functional, that is, there are a lot of different cells that can be considered stem cells because of what they have the potential to do when coaxed correctly -- embryonics aren't the only source. For example, we use stem cells from umbilical cord blood (harvested at no risk to the mother or baby after birth) which give rise to all cells of the blood and immune system for the treatment of leukemias and lymphomas.
That being said, embryonics have the best potential since they can theoretically be cloned by nuclear transfer and have totipotentiality -- that is they can potentially become every type of cell in your body if directed exactly right.
The largest source of embryonic stem cells available for research comes from fertility clinics which frequently bank fertilized eggs in cryo-freezers. These are generally leftovers from procedures performed and will otherwise be disposed of after several years of storage. When embryonic stem cells are harvested, the fertilized egg is allowed to grow into a small, hollow ball of cells, then the cells are separated and utilized. So any imagery of killing fetuses for research that people might try to put over on the public is completely wrong.
The state of affairs is such that even embryonic stem cell research can't be outlawed, only the governmental funding can be prohibited. The sanctity of science depends completely on this continuing to be the case -- the day they can outlaw specific fields and methods of research is a day our progress as humans is sent back hundreds of years. Privately-funded groups can still perform stem-cell research, as can groups in countries that do fund the contrivercial work. So, no matter how hard they try, they can't keep the lid on it.
Much of the stem cell debate is due to people not understanding what they're talking about. I sincerely doubt that George W Bush understands the science behind what he's pontificating against.
|
|
|
Post by Moorish on Dec 19, 2005 11:17:20 GMT -5
Excellent post, Castle.
|
|
|
Post by wankinginthebushes on Dec 19, 2005 15:42:52 GMT -5
Yeah, thanks for that Castle
|
|
|
Post by feckarse on Dec 19, 2005 18:15:43 GMT -5
i think it should be banned. It's the equivalent of murder.
Human life is sacred and we have no right to be messing around with it. Experiment on pig stem cells fair enough, but leave the human ones out of it.
|
|
|
Post by giggergrl on Dec 19, 2005 21:25:23 GMT -5
castle typed - Much of the stem cell debate is due to people not understanding what they're talking about. I sincerely doubt that George W Bush understands the science behind what he's pontificating against. 1.) thanks for the info castle...keep up the good work. we need ppl like you ! 2.) having lost a family member to pancreatic cancer last year and knowing ppl with diabetes etc.. I support this scientific research... I do 3.) my brother is an aids researcher and the amt of hassle they are getting now from this admin. is RIDICULOUS in terms of grants etc. ! now scientists/researchers are being "made to" "join up" with religious organizations in their research efforts ? like they know about the technical aspects of aids (even the social ones for that matter ) 4.) i respect other people's opinions if they are against it . I do..
|
|
|
Post by masterplan200 on Dec 19, 2005 21:27:14 GMT -5
As a stem-cell researcher myself, I usually find it appaling how uninformed people are about the issue. Contrary to popular belief, stem cell research is going on, all over the world, at this very minute (some of it about 10 feet away from where I'm sitting now). The definition of stem cell is loosely functional, that is, there are a lot of different cells that can be considered stem cells because of what they have the potential to do when coaxed correctly -- embryonics aren't the only source. For example, we use stem cells from umbilical cord blood (harvested at no risk to the mother or baby after birth) which give rise to all cells of the blood and immune system for the treatment of leukemias and lymphomas. That being said, embryonics have the best potential since they can theoretically be cloned by nuclear transfer and have totipotentiality -- that is they can potentially become every type of cell in your body if directed exactly right. The largest source of embryonic stem cells available for research comes from fertility clinics which frequently bank fertilized eggs in cryo-freezers. These are generally leftovers from procedures performed and will otherwise be disposed of after several years of storage. When embryonic stem cells are harvested, the fertilized egg is allowed to grow into a small, hollow ball of cells, then the cells are separated and utilized. So any imagery of killing fetuses for research that people might try to put over on the public is completely wrong. The state of affairs is such that even embryonic stem cell research can't be outlawed, only the governmental funding can be prohibited. The sanctity of science depends completely on this continuing to be the case -- the day they can outlaw specific fields and methods of research is a day our progress as humans is sent back hundreds of years. Privately-funded groups can still perform stem-cell research, as can groups in countries that do fund the contrivercial work. So, no matter how hard they try, they can't keep the lid on it. Much of the stem cell debate is due to people not understanding what they're talking about. I sincerely doubt that George W Bush understands the science behind what he's pontificating against. Excellent post
|
|
|
Post by feckarse on Dec 20, 2005 6:59:24 GMT -5
castle typed - Much of the stem cell debate is due to people not understanding what they're talking about. I sincerely doubt that George W Bush understands the science behind what he's pontificating against. 1.) thanks for the info castle...keep up the good work. we need ppl like you ! 2.) having lost a family member to pancreatic cancer last year and knowing ppl with diabetes etc.. I support this scientific research... I do 3.) my brother is an aids researcher and the amt of hassle they are getting now from this admin. is RIDICULOUS in terms of grants etc. ! now scientists/researchers are being "made to" "join up" with religious organizations in their research efforts ? like they know about the technical aspects of aids (even the social ones for that matter ) 4.) i respect other people's opinions if they are against it . I do.. for the record my above post was sarcastic, someone was meant to go on a mini-rant, but never did, lol!
|
|