Doctors inject potential cure for paralysis into patient

[badbullgator]

Where do embryonic stem cells come from?

Hint--Key word is embryo...

Have you ever seen an embryo? I am afraid you do not have an understanding of what you are talking about. You, and many others, like to make this sound like people are aborting “embryos” to do this. You are in fact very wrong. These are made in IVF and left over after the couple who they belong to is done creating their family. These embryo are NEVER going to become children, they are going to be destroyed anyway you look at it. I can wash them down the drain or I can use them to train other people in the lab, and about 2% of the people who have them will donate them to other couples OR I can send them to one of the universities we work with for stem cell research. With the exception of donating them to other couples they are all destroyed. Personally I prefer donation to others OR embryonic stem cell research.
Let me tell you, I work with these every day. They are not “children”, they are a mass of cells with the potential to become children…key word potential. Embryos deserve a higher level of respect than say kidney cells, skin cells…but not the same level as a human. Even in nature far more embryos are created (sperm fertilizes egg) that do not attach then do attach (implant and gestate). The universities we work with also accept abnormal embryos that would NEVER be used for anything at all.
This is a topic, like so many others (oil spills, national security, economy…) that everyone becomes an expert on even though they know absolutely NOTHING about what they speak.
The politics involved in this whole issue would take pages to lay out, I know I live it every day and the vast majority is propaganda. This is a major issue that pushes me away form the GOP because their agenda is to tie this with abortion and that is just wrong. Abortion and using embryos are two different animals. The people who create and use these embryos devote their lives to creating families and have NOTHING to do with abortions, Our goal is to make families and as a byproduct of that there is also an opportunity to help advance medicine in way that cannot be imagined. This will be my only post on the matter, but if any of you want to put your ass where your mouth is I invite you to come to my lab anytime and I will give you a through education on embryology and stem cells.

[badbullgator]

Also, there was federal funding available for research of other types of stem cells. Is there something that embryonic stem cells can do that others can't?

Yes, maybe before you form an opinion you should do some research (oh and read real peer reviewed stuff not opinion)

[YardleyLabs]

Bush did not ban embryonic stem cell research, he banned Federal funding for embryonic stem cell research involving cell lines other than those developed before the policy was put into effect. The number of such lines was very small and generally considered to be not useful from a research perspective. Bush did nothing to limit other types of stem cell research. However, the general scientific view is that, while these types of stem cells will be valuable, that they will not be able to perform all the things that can be done with embryonic stem cells.

No one can "prove" this one way or the other since we are talking about basic research. What is clear is that without Federal funding, research to determine the potential value of embryonic stem cells will move more slowly than it would with such funding. The money itself is not even the primary problem. The breadth of the ban makes it almost impossible for a lab to research both embryonic cells and non-embryonic stem cells at the same time if any Federal funds are being received. The types of controls required to segregate funding are simply impractical.

There is no evidence at all that the use of embryonic stem cells in research has resulted in the destruction of embryos that would otherwise have been implanted to become infants. While there is no question that an embryo may be "living" and contains the innate potential of becoming a human being, most are simply the leftovers from artificial fertilization and will never be implanted in anyone. They are not viable without costly facilities to preserve them and even more costly procedures to implant them. They are typically simply destroyed as a matter of routine procedure.

Ultimately, embryonic stem cell research will progress with or without Federal funding. However, much less of it wil happen in America. Other countries around the world have encouraged such development and have been able to use the ban to improve their competitive positions in developing what are seen as some of the more promising lines of research. It's just one more example of a Federal government over reaching to undermine the future competitive position of our country as a scientific center.

[ducknwork]

BBG,
Thanks for the scolding.

I respect your right to an opinion, but I deserve to have mine as well without being belittled for it.

I don't understand the rudeness of your comments, especially putting 'my ass where my mouth is'. I would like the opportunity to see what you do (if I lived in FL), but I don't know if I could stand to be around you very long if you are as big of an uncalled-for d bag in real life as you were in your response. Don't really know what I said to warrant your temper...

[road kill]

Bush did not ban embryonic stem cell research, he banned Federal funding for embryonic stem cell research involving cell lines other than those developed before the policy was put into effect. The number of such lines was very small and generally considered to be not useful from a research perspective. Bush did nothing to limit other types of stem cell research. However, the general scientific view is that, while these types of stem cells will be valuable, that they will not be able to perform all the things that can be done with embryonic stem cells.

No one can "prove" this one way or the other since we are talking about basic research. What is clear is that without Federal funding, research to determine the potential value of embryonic stem cells will move more slowly than it would with such funding. The money itself is not even the primary problem. The breadth of the ban makes it almost impossible for a lab to research both embryonic cells and non-embryonic stem cells at the same time if any Federal funds are being received. The types of controls required to segregate funding are simply impractical.

There is no evidence at all that the use of embryonic stem cells in research has resulted in the destruction of embryos that would otherwise have been implanted to become infants. While there is no question that an embryo may be "living" and contains the innate potential of becoming a human being, most are simply the leftovers from artificial fertilization and will never be implanted in anyone. They are not viable without costly facilities to preserve them and even more costly procedures to implant them. They are typically simply destroyed as a matter of routine procedure.

Ultimately, embryonic stem cell research will progress with or without Federal funding. However, much less of it wil happen in America. Other countries around the world have encouraged such development and have been able to use the ban to improve their competitive positions in developing what are seen as some of the more promising lines of research. It's just one more example of a Federal government over reaching to undermine the future competitive position of our country as a scientific center.

The fundamental difference!!



RK

[badbullgator]

BBG,
Thanks for the scolding.

I respect your right to an opinion, but I deserve to have mine as well without being belittled for it.

I don't understand the rudeness of your comments, especially putting 'my ass where my mouth is'. I would like the opportunity to see what you do (if I lived in FL), but I don't know if I could stand to be around you very long if you are as big of an uncalled-for d bag in real life as you were in your response. Don't really know what I said to warrant your temper...

sorry it is a personal issue for me. you are entilted to your opinion, just please try to be informed in your opinion

[Hew]

Let me tell you, I work with these every day. They are not “children”, they are a mass of cells with the potential to become children…key word potential. Embryos deserve a higher level of respect than say kidney cells, skin cells…but not the same level as a human.

To play devil's advocate ...

I would think a cell is a cell is a cell, and as you've pointed out, a cell is not a human. However, once you start assigning higher values to some cells over other cells then logically your argument isn't a whit different than Ducknwork's...you're just differing on where each of you draws the line as to when life begins and what constitutes a human.

Personally, I think what ultimately happens to unused fertilized embryos is between the donors and their doctor. I would rather them be used for science than disposed, but I can understand and respect the arguments of those who are against that. To me, the slippery slope in the IVF process is not the fertilzation and storage of eggs, but "selective reduction." Now that's were some gut-wrenching, life/death decisions are made.

[dixidawg]

?? Embryonic Stem cell research was banned by the Bushies. What part of that don't you get. To answer the original post. No I don't think it made much difference. The rest of the planet went ahead with the research. The US contribution also continued. Pharma is global and what the US does or doesn't allow isn't much of a factor anymore.

No, it wasn't banned. It was the federal funding that was banned. Big difference.

[ducknwork]

sorry it is a personal issue for me. you are entilted to your opinion, just please try to be informed in your opinion

I don't believe I said anything that was wrong. Maybe some things that were against the opinion of others, but not factually incorrect.

I am trying to read some stuff on it right now. Other than the ease of reproduction of the cells, the limited vs unlimited number of times each can reproduce, and the differentiation issues (which seems solvable) what can embryonic stem cells do that others can't? From what I have read so far, stem cells from amniotic fluid seems to have as much potential as ESCs, without the controversy.

[ducknwork]

I would think a cell is a cell is a cell, and as you've pointed out, a cell is not a human. However, once you start assigning higher values to some cells over other cells then logically your argument isn't a whit different than Ducknwork's...you're just differing on where each of you draws the line as to when life begins and what constitutes a human.

Beat me to it...