Originally posted by jacquio999
Originally posted by obsidian468
this discovery could circumvent all of Bush's bans on embryonic stem cell research, and actually allow our medical researchers to explore this side
of medical technology.
Absolutely untrue. There is no ban on stem cell research. He just doesnt want to provide federal funding for it. If there were any way of using
embryonic stem cells (not possible now because of the rejection problem), drug companies would be putting their own money into the research. There is
also no evidence embryonic cells are any more useful than those found in your own pelvis, which, btw, are used all the time to heal spinal injuries.
You wouldn't have guessed that from this article which implies that only embryonic cells are useful. The reality is almost completely the
And again, there is NO BAN ON EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH so please you guys quit saying that.
Bush's lack of federal funding has effectively banned stem cell research, without saying as much. Many of the firms that want to do such research
need very expensive equipment that isn't readilly available. Several states, including Maryland, where I live, have approved state funding, but the
budgets are far less than the feds could provide.
And yes, scientific evidence does suggest that embryonic stem cells are better suited to stem cell research than other forms of stem cells because of
their lack of pre-designation. The aborted fetuses that these cells are often harvested from are those that have yet to really develop. They're
often from aborted fetuses from within the first three months of pregnancy, where the fetus is still just a clump of cells, and shows no real human
form. This means that the cells are still at a point where they could become any cell needed. They have not been pre-disposed to be cells in the
heart, lungs, bones, skin, brain, etc. In essence, they're still a blank slate. This is why embryonic cells work better for this research than
If this study can prove that basic skin cells can actually be made into embryonic stem cell equivalents, then this means great advances for medicine,
without having to harvest from a single fetus. Some of the advances that could be achieved would be cloned parts with a person's own DNA, thereby
simplifying organ transplants, and negating the rejection risks (since the DNA is the same). It could also lead to great advances in disease
treatment, treatment and correction of birth defects, not to mention giving a greater insight into the basic workings of the human body, allowing
medical technology to actually cure far more problems than it does now. It would lessen treatment, and increase cures.
Also, for your information, I'm not coming into this debate with only the information presented in this article. My girlfriend works as a medical
researcher, is in process of getting a job working with stem cell reserach, and knows quite a bit on the subject. In addition to that, I've also
done quite a bit of my own reading on the subject, in an effort to better understand the issue, so as to make a more informed decision on it.
In my opinion, it's silly to deny this research, because of the great benefit it could have for humanity. If the government doesn't want to approve
funding for research on cells gained from aborted fetuses, that's fine, so long as this study proves fruitful, and can circumvent the need for fetus