Ben Carson Conducted Research on Aborted Fetuses

Well.

Imagine that.

Probably just about every med student has.

a reply to: Indigo5

Also...Fetal Tissue is not something you just take off the shelf...you apply for it, make your case for research etc. before being granted that tissue.

Can you assure all the folks buying from PP are following this same practice? I doubt the NIH and NCBI are buying from PP.

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
Well.

Imagine that.

Probably just about every med student has.

No..not every medical student works on Fetuses..

No..Carson was not a student he had been practicing medicine for over a decade at the time.

He was at the Department of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD
Here is the paper
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

a reply to: Indigo5

Okay...amending that to a lot of them probably have.

And also, I see nothing wrong with his having done this but his hypocrisy.

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
a reply to: Indigo5


And also, I see nothing wrong with his having done this but his hypocrisy.

Ditto here...It's the magnitude of the hypocrisy that shocks me.

I have no issue with people being homosexual, I have issue with Larry Kraig condemning homosexuality in the US Senate while soliciting sex from another man in an airport bathroom.

I am not opposed to fetal tissue research...I am opposed to people who condemn the same as "baby killing" when they themselves have conducted research on fetal tissue...and forgot to mention it.

originally posted by: retiredTxn
originally posted by: introvert

Does it matter where it came from? It's still fetal tissue.

Does it matter where it was studied? It's still fetal tissue.

The tissue still came from a fetus, correct? Is one more "moral" than the other?

Nowhere in Dr. Carson's remarks, or in the abstract linked in the CNN article, was dissection of fetal tissue mentioned.

Carsons research paper..

Obtained from two fetuses aborted at the 9th and 17th week of gestation

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
drjengunter.wordpress.com...

Gawker summed up Carson's defense in one line

Ben Carson Gives Himself Permission to Use Fetal Tissue, NO ONE ELSE
gawker.com...

originally posted by: retiredTxn
originally posted by: introvert

Nowhere in Dr. Carson's remarks, or in the abstract linked in the CNN article, was dissection of fetal tissue mentioned.

Just to be more specific to your statement..

from his paper

For comparison, normal fetal and adult choroid plexus, ependyma, and nasal mucosa were also examined.

The "Choroid Plexus" is located near the center of the brain..

So yes to both Fetal and yes to Dissection.

In 1992 I was pro-choice, now I despise the fact that we murder tens of millions of babies in the most grotesque human sacrifices the Earth has ever seen (Baal never could have imagined this!). Nothing wrong with evolving on issues, especially once you break away from the liberal brainwashing, propaganda and euphemisms.

Watching O'Reilly right Now...Interviewing Dr. Carson.
The host just asked him about this story and Carson absolutely denied it was true. Carson said he has only been involved with fetal tissue derived from surgery he was performing....and NOT aborted babies.

I will post the interview when it is posted online.


Mods: This should be moved to the HOAX bin now.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
Watching O'Reilly right Now...Interviewing Dr. Carson.
The host just asked him about this story and Carson absolutely denied it was true. Carson said he has only been involved with fetal tissue derived from surgery he was performing....and NOT aborted fetal tissue.

I will post the interview when it is posted online.


Mods: This should be moved to the HOAX bin now.

I watched it too, waiting for it to be available on line on line.

originally posted by: Indigo5

Carsons research paper..

Obtained from two fetuses aborted at the 9th and 17th week of gestation

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
drjengunter.wordpress.com...ben-carson-did-research-on-17-week-fetal-tissue

Have you ever heard of spontaneous abortion, or ectopic pregnancies? How about someone doing the actual elbow work, and another professional reviewing the information, comparing the results for accuracy?

from his paper



For comparison, normal fetal and adult choroid plexus, ependyma, and nasal mucosa were also examined.

It is not his paper, he is a contributor, in some fashion or other.

Also, why does every link only lead to the abstract, or to Dr. Gunter's blog. At the blog, we only see a few clips of the paper, and none of the meat and potato's?

originally posted by: IAMTAT
Watching O'Reilly right Now...Interviewing Dr. Carson.
The host just asked him about this story and Carson absolutely denied it was true. Carson said he has only been involved with fetal tissue derived from surgery he was performing....and NOT aborted babies.

I will post the interview when it is posted online.


Mods: This should be moved to the HOAX bin now.

What are you talking about?

He has already acknowledged it?

And his research paper..yes..you can not be listed as an author without being a primary part of the research..lists specifically Aborted Fetuses.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

drjengunter.wordpress.com...

originally posted by: retiredTxn


Have you ever heard of spontaneous abortion, or ectopic pregnancies? How about someone doing the actual elbow work, and another professional reviewing the information, comparing the results for accuracy?

His paper specified aborted fetuses.

No..with research publications you do not get to be a top-line author unless you drove and participated in the research.

a reply to: Stormdancer777

Here you go...His denial to O'Reilly

Read carefully...He claims he dissected the fetuses to obtain the relevant brain tissue and delivered it to the researchers..So technically he did not "research" the tissue...only "the operation and supply"..they had the neurosurgeon Ben bring them the relevant brain matter...how is this better?

The left has put out information saying that I’ve done research on fetal tissues because my name appears on an article in which the pathologist compared specimens that I delivered from the operating room to some fetal tissues, in an attempt to decide which way the cells were being differentiated. You know, my part is to do the operation and supply the tissue. At that point, I move on to the next operation. So, to suggest that I’m in the laboratory actually doing the research, or retrieving fetal tissue, is nothing but propaganda.”

originally posted by: Indigo5


His paper specified aborted fetuses.

No..with research publications you do not get to be a top-line author unless you drove and participated in the research.

So, their is only one way for fetuses to be classified as "aborted"?

A research publication can't be a collaboration of several people? They all must be in there "slicing and dicing", or they don't get top billing?

Naivete is cute on you.

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: IAMTAT
Watching O'Reilly right Now...Interviewing Dr. Carson.
The host just asked him about this story and Carson absolutely denied it was true. Carson said he has only been involved with fetal tissue derived from surgery he was performing....and NOT aborted babies.

I will post the interview when it is posted online.


Mods: This should be moved to the HOAX bin now.

What are you talking about?

He has already acknowledged it?

And his research paper..yes..you can not be listed as an author without being a primary part of the research..lists specifically Aborted Fetuses.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

drjengunter.wordpress.com...

Waiting for the video of tonight's interview to be posted....soon, I hope.

Carson said it was someone else's paper COMPARING his study of fetal tissue from his own surgical operation...to another doctor's research using actual aborted fetal tissue.

Your title is blatantly wrong and misleading...as he categorically states the tissue he was referenced to have used was NOT from an abortion.

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: Stormdancer777

Here you go...His denial to O'Reilly

Read carefully...He claims he dissected the fetuses to obtain the relevant brain tissue and delivered it to the researchers..So technically he did not "research" the tissue...only "the operation and supply"..they had the neurosurgeon Ben bring them the relevant brain matter...how is this better?

The left has put out information saying that I’ve done research on fetal tissues because my name appears on an article in which the pathologist compared specimens that I delivered from the operating room to some fetal tissues, in an attempt to decide which way the cells were being differentiated. You know, my part is to do the operation and supply the tissue. At that point, I move on to the next operation. So, to suggest that I’m in the laboratory actually doing the research, or retrieving fetal tissue, is nothing but propaganda.”

Where is your link please?
O'reilly wasn't the host in the interview tonight.

a reply to: Indigo5

I think folks "get it"...

You want to ferment outrage on a low tier candidate who just happens to be in the field of medicine that happens to deal with tissues, fetal included...

Go for it, it doesn't in anyway soften what planned parenthood folks have been doing...

I am not here to say that they should lose funding, but I do want heads to roll, I want accountability...

If PP does so much more that is beneficial for our society, I would think that their proponents would want this "brushing up against the law" mentality, using their paid legal department, out on their collective asses...

I don't see that, all I see is support... If PP is worth saving, and they have values in tune with the climate of the day, then those who put PP at risk should be held accountable...

Despite the cries of edited videos, you cannot ignore what some folks in PP have said freely....

What Dr Carson did in the 90's.. in no way equates to what PP is dealing with...

Time to get PP back on track, and axe those who want to barter with what alot of folks consider to be a human life?

PP may do alot of good, perhaps those who defend it may reconsider what some in their org decided was acceptable?

I would suggest leaving the lawyers out of it... that's what got them to this point...

.02

HERE...As promised:

TONIGHT'S Carson video in the article link:

CARSON: ‘I HAVE NOT ACTUALLY WORKED WITH FETAL TISSUE’

Republican presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson responded to a report that he did medical research on aborted fetal tissue by stating, “I have not actually worked with fetal tissue” on Thursday’s broadcast of the Fox News Channel’s “O’Reilly Factor.”

Carson, after defending his argument on Planned Parenthood that “one of the reasons that you find most of their clinics in black neighborhoods is so that you can find way to control that population,” said, [relevant remarks begin around 4:20] “Well, I have not actually worked with fetal tissue.

The left has put out information saying that I’ve done research on fetal tissues because my name appears on an article in which the pathologist compared specimens that I delivered from the operating room to some fetal tissues, in an attempt to decide which way the cells were being differentiated. You know, my part is to do the operation and supply the tissue. At that point, I move on to the next operation. So, to suggest that I’m in the laboratory actually doing the research, or retrieving fetal tissue, is nothing but propaganda.”

Carson added, “all pathology departments will have a whole array of tissues, from day one of conception until 99 years old. And if you use the tissue — if you’re comparing or looking for a disease process in elderly people, does that mean you’re doing geriatric research on geriatric tissue? No. It means you’re looking at your tissue, and you’re making comparisons to derive information, and those fetal tissues, by the way, come from a variety of different places, ectopic pregnancies, spontaneous abortions, but just because they get the fetal tissue, does it mean they should throw it out? Of course they don’t. That’s how science is advanced.”

www.breitbart.com...

I'll wait for your reply.