Log In Sign Up

Stem Cell Research


Forum: Heated Debates

Notices

Welcome to the JustMommies Message Boards.

We pride ourselves on having the friendliest and most welcoming forums for moms and moms to be! Please take a moment and register for free so you can be a part of our growing community of mothers. If you have any problems registering please drop an email to [email protected].

Our community is moderated by our moderation team so you won't see spam or offensive messages posted on our forums. Each of our message boards is hosted by JustMommies hosts, whose names are listed at the top each board. We hope you find our message boards friendly, helpful, and fun to be on!

Reply Post New Topic
  Subscribe To Heated Debates LinkBack Topic Tools Search this Topic Display Modes
  #1  
July 20th, 2006, 11:50 AM
kadydid
Guest
Posts: n/a
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Health/story?id=2210355


Where do you stand on cell stem research? The above link has an article about Michael J Fox and there is a video (news clip) it shocked me how far along his Parkinson’s has come.


I think this is very valuable research and I think Bush is wrong for trying to veto it.


http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2214471
Reply With Quote
  #2  
July 20th, 2006, 12:05 PM
Super Mommy
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Overland Park, Kansas
Posts: 717
I was waiting for the debate on this to get started!! LOL!!

I think Bush is wrong to veto it as well.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
July 20th, 2006, 12:11 PM
Platinum Supermommy
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,120
I think he is dead wrong too....

(**waiting for the hardcore republican pro-lifers with baited breath **)
__________________
Those who love me know how to reach me...it's been real ladies, peace and love!!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
July 20th, 2006, 12:21 PM
Boxerlove1's Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,299
Wrong to veto...
__________________


<div align="center"></div>
Agatha Christie</span>
Reply With Quote
  #5  
July 20th, 2006, 02:50 PM
CBMS
Guest
Posts: n/a
Why kill a viable embryo when stem cells can be found in cord blood and would otherwise be thrown out with the trash?

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7864

http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/units/stemcells/sctoday/

http://www.marchofdimes.com/professionals/681_1160.asp

I just don't understand why someone would want to kill an embryo when the same materials can be obtained from what's thrown out as biohazards in masses.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
July 20th, 2006, 03:07 PM
mrobinson
Guest
Posts: n/a
Source
Basic Questions
Where do stem cells come from?
Pluripotent stem cells are isolated from human embryos that are a few days old. Cells from these embryos can be used to create pluripotent stem cell "lines" —cell cultures that can be grown indefinitely in the laboratory. Pluripotent stem cell lines have also been developed from fetal tissue obtained from fetal tissue (older than 8 weeks of development).

Why do scientists want to use stem cell lines?
Once a stem cell line is established from a cell in the body, it is essentially immortal, no matter how it was derived. That is, the researcher using the line will not have to go through the rigorous procedure necessary to isolate stem cells again. Once established, a cell line can be grown in the laboratory indefinitely and cells may be frozen for storage or distribution to other researchers.

Stem cell lines grown in the lab provide scientists with the opportunity to "engineer" them for use in transplantation or treatment of diseases. For example, before scientists can use any type of tissue, organ, or cell for transplantation, they must overcome attempts by a patient's immune system to reject the transplant. In the future, scientists may be able to modify human stem cell lines in the laboratory by using gene therapy or other techniques to overcome this immune rejection. Scientists might also be able to replace damaged genes or add new genes to stem cells in order to give them characteristics that can ultimately treat diseases.



My basic issue with this bill is that it stem cells that are not even kinda a fetus seem to be emcompassed with GWB ban.

~~~~~~~~~~

"I think that to make a choice to protect millions of cells that are going to be destroyed over protecting millions of living … human beings and citizens of this country is hard to get around it," Fox said. "I mean, I know I can't quite understand the reasoning behind it."

The celebrated actor said he is "respectful of those who oppose this research and their reasoning for it, but they do represent a minority."


MJF..
Reply With Quote
  #7  
July 20th, 2006, 03:21 PM
CBMS
Guest
Posts: n/a
Totipotent cells are also in cord blood. Viable embryos can live AND we can have stem cells. Especially if they're implanted into women who would otherwise not be able to have children, and then the cords and placentas are kept. I mean, how many babies are born a day? 100's of thoussands? How many of the people that have babies actually keep the cord blood themselves? Not nearly that many. That's a lot of wasted stem cell research right there..... but I don't hear a lot of people complaining about that.

Quote:
we used single cell cultures to show that human cord blood (CB) contains totipotent CD34(+) cells capable of T, B, natural killer, and granulocytic cell differentiation.[/b]
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...9&dopt=Abstract
Reply With Quote
  #8  
July 20th, 2006, 03:27 PM
mrobinson
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Totipotent cells are also in cord blood. Viable embryos can live AND we can have stem cells. Especially if they're implanted into women who would otherwise not be able to have children, and then the cords and placentas are kept. I mean, how many babies are born a day? 100's of thoussands? How many of the people that have babies actually keep the cord blood themselves? Not nearly that many. That's a lot of wasted stem cell research right there..... but I don't hear a lot of people complaining about that.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE
Quote:
we used single cell cultures to show that human cord blood (CB) contains totipotent CD34(+) cells capable of T, B, natural killer, and granulocytic cell differentiation.[/b]
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...9&dopt=Abstract
[/b][/quote]
Right now there is no alternative.. no way to work with those same cells you're referring to. They can't be used. He just vetod it.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
July 20th, 2006, 04:26 PM
Platinum Supermommy
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,120
Quote:
Totipotent cells are also in cord blood. Viable embryos can live AND we can have stem cells. Especially if they're implanted into women who would otherwise not be able to have children, and then the cords and placentas are kept. I mean, how many babies are born a day? 100's of thoussands? How many of the people that have babies actually keep the cord blood themselves? Not nearly that many. That's a lot of wasted stem cell research right there..... but I don't hear a lot of people complaining about that.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE
Quote:
we used single cell cultures to show that human cord blood (CB) contains totipotent CD34(+) cells capable of T, B, natural killer, and granulocytic cell differentiation.[/b]
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...9&dopt=Abstract
[/b][/quote]

I'm not 100% sure but I THINK the veto affects those too....
__________________
Those who love me know how to reach me...it's been real ladies, peace and love!!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
July 20th, 2006, 04:44 PM
LouLouMom's Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: NY
Posts: 4,435
Stemcellresearch.org.


Benefits of Stem Cells to Human Patients
Adult Stem Cells v. Embryonic Stem Cells
Download This List
Peer-Reviewed References (not a complete listing, sample references)

Adult Stem Cells


Cancers:
1. Brain Cancer
2. Retinoblastoma
3. Ovarian Cancer
4. Skin Cancer: Merkel Cell Carcinoma
5. Testicular Cancer
6. Tumors abdominal organs Lymphoma
7. Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma
8. Hodgkin’s Lymphoma
9. Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia
10. Acute Myelogenous Leukemia
11. Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia
12. Juvenile Myelomonocytic Leukemia
13. Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia
14. Cancer of the lymph nodes: Angioimmunoblastic Lymphadenopathy
15. Multiple Myeloma
16. Myelodysplasia
17. Breast Cancer
18. Neuroblastoma
19. Renal Cell Carcinoma
20. Various Solid Tumors
21. Soft Tissue Sarcoma
22. Ewing’s Sarcoma
23. Waldenstrom’s macroglobulinemia
24. Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis
25. POEMS syndrome
26. Myelofibrosis

Auto-Immune Diseases
27. Systemic Lupus
28. Sjogren’s Syndrome
29. Myasthenia
30. Autoimmune Cytopenia
31. Scleromyxedema
32. Scleroderma
33. Crohn’s Disease
34. Behcet’s Disease
35. Rheumatoid Arthritis
36. Juvenile Arthritis
37. Multiple Sclerosis
38. Polychondritis
39. Systemic Vasculitis
40. Alopecia Universalis
41. Buerger’s Disease

Cardiovascular
42. Acute Heart Damage
43. Chronic Coronary Artery Disease

Ocular
44. Corneal regeneration

Immunodeficiencies
45. Severe Combined Immunodeficiency Syndrome
46. X-linked Lymphoproliferative Syndrome
47. X-linked Hyper immunoglobulin M Syndrome

Neural Degenerative Diseases and Injuries
48. Parkinson’s Disease
49. Spinal Cord Injury
50. Stroke Damage

Anemias and Other Blood Conditions
51. Sickle Cell Anemia
52. Sideroblastic Anemia
53. Aplastic Anemia
54. Red Cell Aplasia
55. Amegakaryocytic Thrombocytopenia
56. Thalassemia
57. Primary Amyloidosis
58. Diamond Blackfan Anemia
59. Fanconi’s Anemia
60. Chronic Epstein-Barr Infection

Wounds and Injuries
61. Limb Gangrene
62. Surface Wound Healing
63. Jawbone Replacement
64. Skull Bone Repair

Other Metabolic Disorders
65. Hurler’s Syndrome
66. Osteogenesis Imperfecta
67. Krabbe Leukodystrophy
68. Osteopetrosis
69. Cerebral X-Linked Adrenoleukodystrophy

Liver Disease
70. Chronic Liver Failure
71. Liver Cirrhosis

Bladder Disease
72. End-Stage Bladder Disease


Embryonic Stem Cells


NONE

and Nationalreview.com

Claim: ”Time wasted on exploring speculative methods of derivation delays the research even more, which holds up treatments.”

Fact: This is far truer of embryonic stem cells themselves, which have been found in animal trials to be prone to uncontrolled growth, tumor formation, and other problems. All the stem-cell treatments currently in use, and currently being tested in hundreds of clinical trials (see the NIH website www.clinicaltrials.gov), use stem cells that are not from embryos.
__________________










Angel~9/12/05~with us for 5 weeks</span></span></span>
Reply With Quote
  #11  
July 20th, 2006, 05:07 PM
CBMS
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Quote:
Totipotent cells are also in cord blood. Viable embryos can live AND we can have stem cells. Especially if they're implanted into women who would otherwise not be able to have children, and then the cords and placentas are kept. I mean, how many babies are born a day? 100's of thoussands? How many of the people that have babies actually keep the cord blood themselves? Not nearly that many. That's a lot of wasted stem cell research right there..... but I don't hear a lot of people complaining about that.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE
<div class='quotemain'>we used single cell cultures to show that human cord blood (CB) contains totipotent CD34(+) cells capable of T, B, natural killer, and granulocytic cell differentiation.[/b]
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...9&dopt=Abstract
[/b][/quote]

I'm not 100% sure but I THINK the veto affects those too....
[/b][/quote]


No; he vetod the use of human embryos, not the use of cord blood. The REASON he vetoed is because cord blood can and is used to cure things NOW. They just need to do even more research with it to figure out what else can be done with it. But to use cord blood doesn't compromise any living, growing, embryo.

Quote:
The Senate is expected today to approve the bill, which would allow federal funding to go to research that uses embryos left over from fertility procedures. The Senate also is expected to approve two other research bills, one that would encourage stem-cell research methods that don't harm embryos and the other that would make it illegal to initiate and then abort human pregnancies in women or animals to obtain research tissue.
The administration strongly supports the two other bills but said additional federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research is unnecessary because the private sector and some states are contributing several billion dollars over the next few years for such studies.

...

"There is not one cure in this country today from embryonic stem cells," said Mr. Coburn, a physician, but treatments for eye problems and illnesses such as juvenile diabetes have been derived from adult stem cells and cord blood. [/b]
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20...5733-7123r.htm

If we already KNOW that cord blood works, why kill embryos to further unnecessary research instead of put more money into the cord blood stem cells?
Reply With Quote
  #13  
July 20th, 2006, 06:47 PM
CBMS
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
What is the source of embryos used for making embryonic stem cells?

The human embryonic stem cell lines that have been created at Harvard are derived from frozen embryos left over after in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment. These early stage embryos were donated, with informed consent, by patients who had completed their treatment. In the future, Harvard researchers also hope to derive embryonic stem cells by somatic cell nuclear transfer.

http://stemcell.harvard.edu/faq#FAQ3[/b]

So... animal testing would be okay as long as I give my consent to kill my dog?

Additionally, if they are more primitive and useful, then why haven't they been used to CURE anything while cord blood has? Things that make you go, "hmmmmmmmmm."
Reply With Quote
  #14  
July 20th, 2006, 06:47 PM
Boxerlove1's Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,299
So if someone wants to volunteer their (for lack of a better word) 'spare' embryos after IVF they can't b/c of this. Is that what I'm understanding?

So what happens to these embryos then? Do they just sit in deep freeze? Until when? Are they eventually destroyed? Can they expire?

I guess it really is a pro-life/pro-choice issue. Assuming that life begins at conception than either a woman has or doesn't have a choice of what to do with her embryo.

I don't see the downside in anyone volunteering their embryos but I can see why some do.

It just seems like there is still so much we can learn from stem cells. This research is really in its infancy. Who knows what may be possible.
__________________


<div align="center"></div>
Agatha Christie</span>
Reply With Quote
  #15  
July 20th, 2006, 06:55 PM
Platinum Supermommy
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,120
Quote:
So if someone wants to volunteer their (for lack of a better word) 'spare' embryos after IVF they can't b/c of this. Is that what I'm understanding?

So what happens to these embryos then? Do they just sit in deep freeze? Until when? Are they eventually destroyed? Can they expire?

I guess it really is a pro-life/pro-choice issue. Assuming that life begins at conception than either a woman has or doesn't have a choice of what to do with her embryo.

I don't see the downside in anyone volunteering their embryos but I can see why some do.

It just seems like there is still so much we can learn from stem cells. This research is really in its infancy. Who knows what may be possible.[/b]
I agree. And if they aren't used for this research, they will be thrown away anyways...why not use them if it has potential to save lives??
__________________
Those who love me know how to reach me...it's been real ladies, peace and love!!
Reply With Quote
  #16  
July 20th, 2006, 08:17 PM
Platinum Supermommy
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 5,109
I'm not following this too much in the news since I'm Canadian...But did he veto ALL stem cell research or just stem cells derived from embryos?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #17  
July 21st, 2006, 10:45 AM
LouLouMom's Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: NY
Posts: 4,435
Quote:
Quote:
I just don't understand why someone would want to kill an embryo when the same materials can be obtained from what's thrown out as biohazards in masses.[/b]
The newly discovered human cells, named “cord-blood-derived embryonic-like stem cells” or CBEs, are not quite as primitive as embryonic stem cells, which can give rise to any tissue type of the body.
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7864


Quote:
Stemcellresearch.org.


Benefits of Stem Cells to Human Patients
Adult Stem Cells v. Embryonic Stem Cells
Download This List
Peer-Reviewed References (not a complete listing, sample references)

Adult Stem Cells


Cancers:
1. Brain Cancer
2. Retinoblastoma
3. Ovarian Cancer
4. Skin Cancer: Merkel Cell Carcinoma
5. Testicular Cancer
6. Tumors abdominal organs Lymphoma
7. Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma
8. Hodgkin’s Lymphoma
9. Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia
10. Acute Myelogenous Leukemia
11. Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia
12. Juvenile Myelomonocytic Leukemia
13. Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia
14. Cancer of the lymph nodes: Angioimmunoblastic Lymphadenopathy
15. Multiple Myeloma
16. Myelodysplasia
17. Breast Cancer
18. Neuroblastoma
19. Renal Cell Carcinoma
20. Various Solid Tumors
21. Soft Tissue Sarcoma
22. Ewing’s Sarcoma
23. Waldenstrom’s macroglobulinemia
24. Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis
25. POEMS syndrome
26. Myelofibrosis

Auto-Immune Diseases
27. Systemic Lupus
28. Sjogren’s Syndrome
29. Myasthenia
30. Autoimmune Cytopenia
31. Scleromyxedema
32. Scleroderma
33. Crohn’s Disease
34. Behcet’s Disease
35. Rheumatoid Arthritis
36. Juvenile Arthritis
37. Multiple Sclerosis
38. Polychondritis
39. Systemic Vasculitis
40. Alopecia Universalis
41. Buerger’s Disease

Cardiovascular
42. Acute Heart Damage
43. Chronic Coronary Artery Disease

Ocular
44. Corneal regeneration

Immunodeficiencies
45. Severe Combined Immunodeficiency Syndrome
46. X-linked Lymphoproliferative Syndrome
47. X-linked Hyper immunoglobulin M Syndrome

Neural Degenerative Diseases and Injuries
48. Parkinson’s Disease
49. Spinal Cord Injury
50. Stroke Damage

Anemias and Other Blood Conditions
51. Sickle Cell Anemia
52. Sideroblastic Anemia
53. Aplastic Anemia
54. Red Cell Aplasia
55. Amegakaryocytic Thrombocytopenia
56. Thalassemia
57. Primary Amyloidosis
58. Diamond Blackfan Anemia
59. Fanconi’s Anemia
60. Chronic Epstein-Barr Infection

Wounds and Injuries
61. Limb Gangrene
62. Surface Wound Healing
63. Jawbone Replacement
64. Skull Bone Repair

Other Metabolic Disorders
65. Hurler’s Syndrome
66. Osteogenesis Imperfecta
67. Krabbe Leukodystrophy
68. Osteopetrosis
69. Cerebral X-Linked Adrenoleukodystrophy

Liver Disease
70. Chronic Liver Failure
71. Liver Cirrhosis

Bladder Disease
72. End-Stage Bladder Disease


Embryonic Stem Cells


NONE

and Nationalreview.com

Claim: ”Time wasted on exploring speculative methods of derivation delays the research even more, which holds up treatments.”

Fact: This is far truer of embryonic stem cells themselves, which have been found in animal trials to be prone to uncontrolled growth, tumor formation, and other problems. All the stem-cell treatments currently in use, and currently being tested in hundreds of clinical trials (see the NIH website www.clinicaltrials.gov), use stem cells that are not from embryos.
[/b]
Your information came from a biased website...Try this website: http://stemcell.harvard.edu/faq#FAQ3
What is the difference between embryonic and adult stem cells?

Some organs contain stem cells that persist throughout adult life and contribute to the maintenance and repair of those organs. Not every organ has been shown to contain stem cells, however, and generally adult stem cells have restricted developmental potential, in that their capacity for proliferation is limited and they can give rise only to a few cell types. Embryonic stem cells, by contrast, can divide almost indefinitely and can give rise to every cell type in the body, suggesting that they may be the most versatile source of cells for transplantation therapy.


Quote:
<div class='quotemain'>
Quote:
Totipotent cells are also in cord blood. Viable embryos can live AND we can have stem cells. Especially if they're implanted into women who would otherwise not be able to have children, and then the cords and placentas are kept. I mean, how many babies are born a day? 100's of thoussands? How many of the people that have babies actually keep the cord blood themselves? Not nearly that many. That's a lot of wasted stem cell research right there..... but I don't hear a lot of people complaining about that.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE
<div class='quotemain'>we used single cell cultures to show that human cord blood (CB) contains totipotent CD34(+) cells capable of T, B, natural killer, and granulocytic cell differentiation.[/b]
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...9&dopt=Abstract
[/b]
I'm not 100% sure but I THINK the veto affects those too....
[/b][/quote]


No; he vetod the use of human embryos, not the use of cord blood. The REASON he vetoed is because cord blood can and is used to cure things NOW. They just need to do even more research with it to figure out what else can be done with it. But to use cord blood doesn't compromise any living, growing, embryo.

Quote:
The Senate is expected today to approve the bill, which would allow federal funding to go to research that uses embryos left over from fertility procedures. The Senate also is expected to approve two other research bills, one that would encourage stem-cell research methods that don't harm embryos and the other that would make it illegal to initiate and then abort human pregnancies in women or animals to obtain research tissue.
The administration strongly supports the two other bills but said additional federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research is unnecessary because the private sector and some states are contributing several billion dollars over the next few years for such studies.

...

"There is not one cure in this country today from embryonic stem cells," said Mr. Coburn, a physician, but treatments for eye problems and illnesses such as juvenile diabetes have been derived from adult stem cells and cord blood. [/b]
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20...5733-7123r.htm

If we already KNOW that cord blood works, why kill embryos to further unnecessary research instead of put more money into the cord blood stem cells?
[/b][/quote]

What is the source of embryos used for making embryonic stem cells?

The human embryonic stem cell lines that have been created at Harvard are derived from frozen embryos left over after in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment. These early stage embryos were donated, with informed consent, by patients who had completed their treatment. In the future, Harvard researchers also hope to derive embryonic stem cells by somatic cell nuclear transfer.

http://stemcell.harvard.edu/faq#FAQ3
[/b][/quote]


Oh right, that information is all made up crap I guess I could scan the entire article in my Time magazine that I read this morning. They say the same. I'll try to find it online.

I read that harvard website. It is purely a suggestion, not a definitive answer, that embryonic stem cells are better. Embryonic cells also have huge risks associated with them. Tumors, uncontrolled growth...some embryos, upon being thawed, are no longer viable because they have been frozen. It's a slippery slope. Who's to say that if we allow this, we won't have clinics "farming" cells for $$? That's a potential risk. Do we want scientists growing embryos simply to harvest them? It's easy to forget the we all started that small.


News This section of that same stem cell webpage is stricly unbiased news articles. Unless we want to start caloing every magazine and newspaper biased.


Here's the page from Time magazine. Page 3 of 4 pages.

Feelings run so strong on this issue that opponents have built a practical case to bolster the ethical one. The promise of embryonic stem cells has been oversold, they argue, while actual progress using adult stem cells has been overlooked. Though advocates talk longingly about the 400,000 frozen embryos in fertility clinics, a Rand Corp. study in 2003 found that 86% of them have been designated by patients for their future use or someone else's--there are approximately 100 "snowflake kids," children born from adopted frozen embryos--and only 2.8% for research. Even if that number rose with the release of federal funds, the healthiest embryos are the ones that get implanted, and the act of freezing and thawing embryos may do damage as well. Rand estimated that at best perhaps 275 viable lines would become available. That's 10 times the number now being studied using federal funds, but they would not provide the quality, quantity and genetic diversity that scientists seek.

The good news for all sides is that over the course of this long argument, researchers have learned more about how stem cells work, and the science has outrun the politics. Adult cells, such as those found in bone marrow, were thought to be less valuable than embryonic cells, which are "pluripotent" master cells that can turn into anything from a brain cell to a toenail. But adult cells may be more elastic than scientists thought, and could offer shortcuts to treatment that embryonic cells can't match.

Researchers have discovered that many tissues and organs contain precursor cells that act in many ways like stem cells. The skin, intestines, liver, brain and bone marrow contain these stem cell-- mimicking cells, which could become a reservoir of replacement cells for treating diseases such as leukemias, stroke and some cancers. "Brain stem-cells can make almost all cell types in the brain, and that may be all we need if we want to treat Parkinson's disease or ALS," says Dr. Arnold Kriegstein, who directs the University of California at San Francisco's Institute for Regeneration Medicine. "Embryonic stem cells might not be necessary in those cases." When it comes to treating heart disease, "if you could find a progenitor cell in the adult heart that has the ability to replicate," says Douglas Melton, co-director of the Harvard Stem Cell Institute, "then it's likely easier to start with that cell than begin with an embryonic stem cell, which has too many options."

Cheerleaders for adult stem-cell research point to progress on everything from spinal-cord injuries to diabetes. Scientists at the University of Minnesota have used umbilical-cord-blood stem cells to improve some neurological function; in a paper published last month, Dr. Carlos Lima in Portugal wrote about restoring some motor function and sensation in a few paralyzed patients. At a recent conference of researchers from around the world, a team from Kyoto University in Japan reported success in taking a skin cell, exposing it to four key growth factors and turning it into an embryo-like entity that produced stem cells--all without using an egg. The Kyoto group has submitted its work for publication, after which it will be open to the scrutiny of the scientific community. If successful, it could turn stem-cell science from a tedious, finicky process into a relatively straightforward chemistry project.

Time magazine
__________________










Angel~9/12/05~with us for 5 weeks</span></span></span>
Reply With Quote
  #18  
July 21st, 2006, 01:10 PM
mrobinson
Guest
Posts: n/a
<div class=\'quotetop\'>QUOTE(LouLouMom @ Jul 21 2006, 11:45 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class=\'quotemain\'>Cheerleaders for adult stem-cell research point to progress on everything from spinal-cord injuries to diabetes. Scientists at the University of Minnesota have used umbilical-cord-blood stem cells to improve some neurological function; in a paper published last month, Dr. Carlos Lima in Portugal wrote about restoring some motor function and sensation in a few paralyzed patients. At a recent conference of researchers from around the world, a team from Kyoto University in Japan reported success in taking a skin cell, exposing it to four key growth factors and turning it into an embryo-like entity that produced stem cells--all without using an egg. The Kyoto group has submitted its work for publication, after which it will be open to the scrutiny of the scientific community. If successful, it could turn stem-cell science from a tedious, finicky process into a relatively straightforward chemistry project.
Time magazine[/b][/quote]

So this paragraph is about work that hasn't even been looked at.. We can't take this research yet.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
July 21st, 2006, 01:58 PM
LouLouMom's Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: NY
Posts: 4,435
Quote:
"There are 400,000 embryos languishing in storage tanks at fertility clinics; only a very small number are candidates for adoption. “Even with federal funding available to encourage adoption, the number [of pregnancies from these embryos] is 128, which makes it conclusive that these 400,000 embryos will either be used for scientific research or thrown away,” said Republican Sen. Arlen Specter, who supports expanded research. The legislation, which passed by wide margins in the Republican-controlled House and Senate but fell short of a vetoproof two-thirds majority, would only use embryos that would otherwise be discarded, and then only with the written consent of the couple that created them." Source

400,000?? In storage? How is that doing anybody and good???????[/b]

Here's the page from Time magazine. Page 3 of 4 pages.

Though advocates talk longingly about the 400,000 frozen embryos in fertility clinics, a Rand Corp. study in 2003 found that 86% of them have been designated by patients for their future use or someone else's--there are approximately 100 "snowflake kids," children born from adopted frozen embryos--and only 2.8% for research. Even if that number rose with the release of federal funds, the healthiest embryos are the ones that get implanted, and the act of freezing and thawing embryos may do damage as well. Rand estimated that at best perhaps 275 viable lines would become available. That's 10 times the number now being studied using federal funds, but they would not provide the quality, quantity and genetic diversity that scientists seek.

This is where I agree to disagree. Until it is proven without a doubt that using stem cells WILL save lives, I will be against it. It's easy to say it's not a life, until one of those parents wants to use one I don't believe in taking a life if we only have the "potential" to save a life.
__________________










Angel~9/12/05~with us for 5 weeks</span></span></span>
Reply With Quote
Reply

Topic Tools Search this Topic
Search this Topic:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:11 AM.