NationStates Jolt Archive

Stem Cell Research..

Yes or no?

yes

Stem Cell Research..

Yes or no?Unequivocally yes. It'll save lives, reduce pain and eliminate diseases. There is no logical reason for stopping it.

definitely, for both adult and embryonic
I mean, we're not doing anything else with those embryos I promise

on the last stem cell thread I heard a lot of people talking about how stem cell research was immoral because abortion is immoral and you have to have an abortion to get the embryos
well...no...

"Stem cells can be extracted from very young human embryos -- typically from surplus frozen embryos left over from in-vitro fertilization procedures at fertility clinics. There are currently about 100,000 surplus embryos in storage. However, a minority of pro-lifers object to the use of embryos. They feel that a few-days-old embryo is a human person. Extracting its stem cells kills the embryo -- an act that they consider murder. Stem cells can now be grown in the laboratory, so (in a pinch) some research can be done using existing stem cells. No further harvesting needs to be made from embryos. However, existing stem cell lines are degrading and will soon be useless for research."

http://www.religioustolerance.org/res_stem2.htm
and if you don't think that site is reliable, perhaps this one is:
http://www.genome.gov/10004765

Oh just get on with it and use the embryos...make Christopher Reeve walk again...along with alot of other people

This is one of the few areas where I disagree with the Bush Administration. I believe in the betterment of the human genome, and the only way to achieve a society where genetic diseases are wiped out is through the advancement of science and/or the implementation of Eugenic Breeding. Stem Cell research is a very viable way of curing many diseases, and a scientific must. I say yes to stem-cell research, even though I am for the most part pro-life.

And the way Bush has handled this issue recently has just been crazy--Ronald Reagan's funeral and Nancy Reagan has just asked--again--for stem cell research restriction to be lifted. It would have been a PR bonanza for Bush to relent, even if it's just a little.

His base has got to understand that he's in trouble right now and that he'll have to compromise on something or he'll go down in flames, and Bush has got to realize it as well, or he's dumber than anyone ever imagined. But he doesn't budge.

Normally, I'd be overjoyed at yet another dumb political move by Bush, but this issue is personal, because my dad's got Alzheimers, and it runs in my family, so I'm a little nervous to say the least.

I'm for it. Yeah yeah yeah, all the conservatives label it as 'abortion.' Well what I say is to set up a program which lets pregnant mothers VOLUNTARILY donate an embryo for stem cell research; that way there will be a moderate supply of stem cells and we can quell the conservative rage about harvesting lab-grown embryos (with the donations there would be no need for labs to grow them)

Even the National Institutes of Health admit all stem cells are taken in donated embryos that were in cold storage, where they were supposed to remain indefinetly.

Stem Cell use is showing a way to repair heart and nerve cells without actual operation.

I think that stem cells need to be researched, and they are. However, there is a question of ethics that comes to play here. I believe that if the cloning legislation weren't stalled in the Senate by various Senators, then existing stem cell lines could be cloned, and the question of funding shouldn't be a problem.
In the meantime, however, adult stem cells and those from umbilycal cords should be looked at more closely. Even if they are a bit less potent, as some researchers say, they skip around the sticky ethical issues.
If anything, I feel sorry that Bush had to reduce funding so drastically. He had to walk a fine line between a wacko group of pro lifers and bioethicists, and an equally wacko group of researchers. This is one of the stickiest issues facing American politics today. He had to walk a fine line, and it'll be no different if Kerry was elected. Otherwise, both groups have the power to rip politicians to shreds.

Even the National Institutes of Health admit all stem cells are taken in donated embryos that were in cold storage, where they were supposed to remain indefinetly.
Indefinitely meaning until they're thrown in the trash. heh...wish someone who is against ES research would come around and argue his ignorance so we could help someone out. I know you guys are there! Come out! I want to help!
oh, and PE...can't quite tell, are you supporting cloning? It seems the government has issues with cloning for stem cells, but not with harvesting them from the leftovers in the freezer...but I could be wrong about that...

depends on how its done, the creation and killing of embryos for medical research is immoral

non embrionic sources of stem cells for research are fine by me

depends on how its done, the creation and killing of embryos for medical research is immoral


Why? We do the same thing to poor little bacteria all the time. Or do helpless little baceteria not count in the grand scheme of things?

Use the embryos, no one else is. And create more if they run out. Their just non-sentient flesh.

Stem cell research? Yes, definatly.

does stem cell research actually hurt anyone? It can save someone. My answer is yes

depends on how its done, the creation and killing of embryos for medical research is immoral

non embrionic sources of stem cells for research are fine by me
The embryos are not created for research. They are created in fertility clinics and are not used. They're left in the freezer...never to be used.

Are you against this type of embryonic stem cell research?

This is one of the few areas where I disagree with the Bush Administration. I believe in the betterment of the human genome, and the only way to achieve a society where genetic diseases are wiped out is through the advancement of science and/or the implementation of Eugenic Breeding. Stem Cell research is a very viable way of curing many diseases, and a scientific must. I say yes to stem-cell research, even though I am for the most part pro-life.

When did Francis Galton get a nation? Let's be careful throwing words like "eugenics" around. We don't need to escalate this into a "Hitler-was-just-misunderstood" thread.

Why do we even need embryonic stem cells? Adults can produce any stem cells they need. I don't think it's right to kill a baby so an adult can have a better quality of life.

Unequivocally yes. It'll save lives, reduce pain and eliminate diseases. There is no logical reason for stopping it.

agreed. what he said, basically

Why do we even need embryonic stem cells? Adults can produce any stem cells they need. I don't think it's right to kill a baby so an adult can have a better quality of life.
No, actually, they cannot.

Most adult stem cells are extremely hard to find, and we don't know where they even come from. Furthermore, most of them do not transdifferentiate into other types of cells, where as embryonic stem cells, by their nature, can become any type of cell availible.

Also, one blastocyst (3-7 day old collection of cells, an embryo, really), can yield millions of stem cells with the proper equipment. So the number of people helped can far outweigh the number of 'people killed'.

I'd like to ask you what else these 'babies' are doing in cold storage.

I'd like to ask you what else these 'babies' are doing in cold storage.

quite. they aren't babies, they're tissue that might be able to save thousands of lives.