In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Options
Stem Cell Breakthrough!!
meunke
Member Posts: 1,407 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
This is something I've been saying for a LONG time. There's no proof that embryonic stem cells offer anything that umbilical cord blood stem cells won't.
The entire pro-embryonic stem cell stance is nothing more than a front for the pro-abortion brigade.
It was umbilical cords, not embryos. Embryos from births of live, healthy babies.
So all the hoopla is bs.
It is the private funded research that finds cures for diseases and discovers new drugs. Government funded research is basically wacking off in a $500,000,000 petri dish.
It is a waste of money.
Can something be discovered by adult/umbilical cord, embrionic stem cell research? Sure, but my tax money is not going to help the situation.
Name any government funded research that amounted to more than disposable diaper material.
It is all Bush's fault.
Watch, you'll see that government-funded research (Congressional Impeachement Hearings) will arrive at that conclusion sometime early next year.
---Well, the Manhattan Project produced a revolutionary weapon that brought WWII to an end and saved countless American lives. DARPA does amazing work, and the GPS they largely developed has greatly benefited anyone who has hopped on a plane in the last 15 or so years. In addition, government research and disease erradication efforts have greatly improved public health over the years.
Name any government funded research that amounted to more than disposable diaper material.
---Well, the Manhattan Project produced a revolutionary weapon that brought WWII to an end and saved countless American lives. DARPA does amazing work, and the GPS they largely developed has greatly benefited anyone who has hopped on a plane in the last 15 or so years. In addition, government research and disease erradication efforts have greatly improved public health over the years.
The atomic bomb. I stand corrected.
Who is DARPA again?
Now that I think of it there is also the cordless drill, velcro, and tang. All developed through the need by NASA.
Its original name was simply Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA), but it was renamed DARPA (for Defense) on March 23, 1972, then back to ARPA on February 22, 1993, and then back to DARPA again on March 11, 1996
DARPA was established in 1958 in response to the Soviet launching of Sputnik in 1957, with the mission of keeping the US's military technology ahead of its enemies. DARPA is independent from other more conventional military R&D and reports directly to senior Department of Defense management. DARPA has around 240 personnel (about 140 technical) directly managing a $3.2 billion budget. These figures are "on average" since DARPA focuses on short-term (two to four-year) projects run by small, purpose-built teams.
(Taken from Wikipedia.)
quote:Don't get me wrong: The breakthrough described in the fictional headlines is real. British scientists have created an artificial liver--from scratch--using stem cells. The research does offer tremendous hope for the alleviation of human suffering. But you probably didn't hear about this amazing achievement because the stem cells the scientists used to build a human liver did not come from embryos: They came from umbilical cord blood.
This is something I've been saying for a LONG time. There's no proof that embryonic stem cells offer anything that umbilical cord blood stem cells won't.
The entire pro-embryonic stem cell stance is nothing more than a front for the pro-abortion brigade.
Im not exactly sure if there is any benefit of cells taken from the umbelical cord over the embryo, except number and concentration.
It should be noted that any stem cell, even if it is not from the embryo, can be induced to form an embryo of its own.
Also in theory, when you scrape your knee, those cells that come off could be used to grow into anything, a new leg/liver/human.
Also note that an embryo can be created from an egg, without the traditional fusion of an egg and a sperm (removal of egg nucleus and addition of a nucleus from an adult human-- this is a type of cloning procedure)
All the cells are "alive", but whether each cell constitutes an individual human life is pretty blurry.
What about removing some cells from an embryo before it reaches the point of differentiation? The remaining stem cells will divide a few more times, and then be able to produce a perfectly normal fetus.
Also note after the first division of a fertilized egg, there are now two cells. Does it have a soul yet? What about the semi-rare cases where these two cells are seperated(sponaneously, they just dont stick together well enough) before the next division, and then you get identical twins... where did the extra soul come from? does one twin have no soul? what about the even more rare cases that occur between the 4 cell-8 cell division.
Its just all a bit too fuzzy to me as to what is supposedly killing a life and what is not, especially when the embryos in many studies come from ones that would be discarded anyway by fertility clinics.
The line is way too blurry.
Name any government funded research that amounted to more than disposable diaper material.
It is the private funded research that finds cures for diseases and discovers new drugs. Government funded research is basically wacking off in a $500,000,000 petri dish.
It is a waste of money.
Can something be discovered by adult/umbilical cord, embrionic stem cell research? Sure, but my tax money is not going to help the situation.
Most private research is government funded.
it maybe futile work, but if there is a .ooooo1% chance that 10,000,000 eggs down the line may save lives it is worth it, because those 10,000,000 eggs would otherwise be in the trash
brings hope to me, and I'm sure many others. Personaly I can see
absolutely nothing wrong with this research..at this time.
Can you say TANG?? [:o)]
i cannot pass judgement on whether stem cells are better or worse than any other research, because i am not a scientist, it is nice to know there are so many of the worlds greatest scientist on this board who know 100% what they are talking about
it maybe futile work, but if there is a .ooooo1% chance that 10,000,000 eggs down the line may save lives it is worth it, because those 10,000,000 eggs would otherwise be in the trash
Bull.
This is no different than saying, "If we ban guns and it saves one innocent child's life, isn't it all worth it?"
quote:Originally posted by 1911a1fan
i cannot pass judgement on whether stem cells are better or worse than any other research, because i am not a scientist, it is nice to know there are so many of the worlds greatest scientist on this board who know 100% what they are talking about
it maybe futile work, but if there is a .ooooo1% chance that 10,000,000 eggs down the line may save lives it is worth it, because those 10,000,000 eggs would otherwise be in the trash
Bull.
This is no different than saying, "If we ban guns and it saves one innocent child's life, isn't it all worth it?"
I don't see the comaprison, but it's early yet.[B)]
quote:Originally posted by spanielsells
quote:Originally posted by 1911a1fan
i cannot pass judgement on whether stem cells are better or worse than any other research, because i am not a scientist, it is nice to know there are so many of the worlds greatest scientist on this board who know 100% what they are talking about
it maybe futile work, but if there is a .ooooo1% chance that 10,000,000 eggs down the line may save lives it is worth it, because those 10,000,000 eggs would otherwise be in the trash
Bull.
This is no different than saying, "If we ban guns and it saves one innocent child's life, isn't it all worth it?"
I don't see the comaprison, but it's early yet.[B)]
He's saying that fetal/embryonic stem cell research is good because even if there is the most minute chance on the planet that it may save lives down the road, it will all be worth it.
However, it is adult/umbilical cord stem cell research that is making scientific breakthroughs. Embryonic/fetal stem cell research cannot make that claim.
If it were a situation where embryonic stem cells were capable of addressing diseases/defects in a way that cord/adult stem cells could not, there might be some validity to making the statement that embryonic/fetal stem cell research is worthwhile.
So, the connection is as follows. There is probably some likelihood (I'd say it is probably around 0.0000001%) that banning guns would end much of the violence in this world and could lead to saving the life of one innocent child. That's about the same as embryonic/fetal stem cell research saving the life of one innocent child.
Assumption A: If we engage in embryonic/fetal stem cell research, we might one day save the life of an innocent child.
Assumption B: If we engage in banning guns, we might one day save the ofe of an innocent child.
Conclusion C: We must engage in both of these activities.
If A = B, then C.
quote:Don't get me wrong: The breakthrough described in the fictional headlines is real. British scientists have created an artificial liver--from scratch--using stem cells. The research does offer tremendous hope for the alleviation of human suffering. But you probably didn't hear about this amazing achievement because the stem cells the scientists used to build a human liver did not come from embryos: They came from umbilical cord blood.
This is something I've been saying for a LONG time. There's no proof that embryonic stem cells offer anything that umbilical cord blood stem cells won't.
The entire pro-embryonic stem cell stance is nothing more than a front for the pro-abortion brigade.
Embryonic stem cells don't come from abortions, gentleman. Get educated and get your facts straight. You are trying to muddy the waters by introducing abortion, abortion has NOTHING to do with embryonic stem cell research. Those stem cells come from unused embryos at fertility clinics, not a single pregnancy is terminted for scientists to obtain embryonic stem cells.
And since you are such an expert on the issue, maybe you can tell me where you got your science education and background from. And I'm talking about degrees here, not what you read on freerepublic.com.
quote:Originally posted by spryor
quote:Originally posted by spanielsells
quote:Originally posted by 1911a1fan
i cannot pass judgement on whether stem cells are better or worse than any other research, because i am not a scientist, it is nice to know there are so many of the worlds greatest scientist on this board who know 100% what they are talking about
it maybe futile work, but if there is a .ooooo1% chance that 10,000,000 eggs down the line may save lives it is worth it, because those 10,000,000 eggs would otherwise be in the trash
Bull.
This is no different than saying, "If we ban guns and it saves one innocent child's life, isn't it all worth it?"
I don't see the comaprison, but it's early yet.[B)]
He's saying that fetal/embryonic stem cell research is good because even if there is the most minute chance on the planet that it may save lives down the road, it will all be worth it.
However, it is adult/umbilical cord stem cell research that is making scientific breakthroughs. Embryonic/fetal stem cell research cannot make that claim.
If it were a situation where embryonic stem cells were capable of addressing diseases/defects in a way that cord/adult stem cells could not, there might be some validity to making the statement that embryonic/fetal stem cell research is worthwhile.
So, the connection is as follows. There is probably some likelihood (I'd say it is probably around 0.0000001%) that banning guns would end much of the violence in this world and could lead to saving the life of one innocent child. That's about the same as embryonic/fetal stem cell research saving the life of one innocent child.
Assumption A: If we engage in embryonic/fetal stem cell research, we might one day save the life of an innocent child.
Assumption B: If we engage in banning guns, we might one day save the ofe of an innocent child.
Conclusion C: We must engage in both of these activities.
If A = B, then C.
I still don't see the comparison, as these guns wouldn't be going
down the drain as trash anyway.
In some cases they do fund the University research, which is what gives them the patents.
the comparison of guns to research is not even close in so many ways
warriorsfan, you are throwing to much fact into it, members heads will explode if you keep it up
the comparison of guns to research is not even close in so many ways
Exactly, I've never seen so much misinformation in my life. Nearly every person on this thread lacks even a basic understanding of what embryonic stem cells are, where they come from, and what they can do. They don't understand the science, they haven't reviewed the research, they are simply parroting what they've read on ultra Right-Wing websites and what their fundamentalist Christian leaders have been telling them.
1) Stem cells derived from cord blood CANNOT do everything that embryonic stem cells can. Cord blood stem cells are more versatile than adult stem cells, but LESS versatile than embyronic stem cells. Cord blood and adult stem cells can do a lot of things, but there are some conditions that only embryonic stem cells have the potential to treat.
2) Embryonic stem cell research IS promising and that's why our nation's most prestigious medical schools and universities (Harvard, Cornell, MIT, Univ of California, etc) are conducting embryonic stem cell research using whatever meager private funds they can scrape up. Many of our top scientists in the field have already fled to Great Britain or South Korea where the governments are more science-friendly. Believe it or not, the Biologists and medical scientists at Harvard and other schools do know more about the merits of embryonic stem cell research than a bunch of Right-Wing nuts on a message board who struggled to pass their high school biology class. These scientists don't enjoy wasting their lives on dead-end research, they do embryonic stem cell research because they believe it has promise.
3) There is no "atheist communist conspiracy" among scientists because we love abortions and hate God. That is something you all conjured up in your damaged brains. My medical school has a student pro-life organization and several student Christian organizations and we do embryonic stem cell research here (on animals, can't do it on human cells anymore since Bush cut the funding in 2001).
besides rush says it is bad, therefore it is