I Agree With........Kerry! (Stem Cell Research)

This is a rare moment when i agree with Kerry. Should we put aside money for Stem cell Research? I think we should, it may be taking a life but it will save millions. That is way i look at it. But here is part of the story.

The Democratic presidential candidate, with actor and activist Michael J. Fox, promised to fund more embryonic stem cell research with federal money if elected. A new campaign ad says it's time to "lift the political barriers" blocking the exploration of stem cell therapies.

Kerry says "The hard truth is that when it comes to stem cell research, this president is making the wrong choice to sacrifice science for extreme right-wing ideology,"

Bush Team says "the president's decision represents a federal commitment to using the promise of stem cell research in an ethical way.

Kerry promises $100 million a year.
www.cnn.com...

I definatly agree with you, this is something that must be done, reguardless of one's religious beliefs. There is to much, and to many lives at stake not to explore this are of medicine...

But, (just my opinion here) I don't see it as taking a life. No one's actively searching out newly pregnant women and either forcing or coercing them into an abortion. They are simply making use of tissue that would otherwise be discarded as Bio-waste..

Some people had being mislead by religious fundamentalist and given pictures of fetuses that are used for this type of research and that is not true we have to educate our nation of the advantage of this type of research and tell them the truth. This type of research is needed and necessary.


Thanks Antipolitrix we may not agree on other things but on this one I agree with you 100%.

TextQuite simply, cord blood is the remaining blood from your baby's umbilical cord and placenta after birth. Cord blood is loaded with our "stem cells" which are orgins of the body's immune and blood system and may be the origin of other organs and important systems in the body. Stem cells are important because they have the ability to regenerate into other types of cells in the body.

TextA few years ago, cord blood was simply discarded as medical waste after a birth. However in the past few years doctors have recognized that the stem cells have unique qualities which can be used in treatment of certain cancers. The most common medical use is for transplantation in many situations where bone marrow is considered. In the future, it is possible that scientists will discover more diseases that can be cured with cord blood.

www.cord-blood.org...

[edit on 4-10-2004 by marg6043]

I am an ardent Bush supporter and will vote for him. With that said I think he is dead wrong on this issue. The United States putting a ban on Stem Cell research will not halt stem cell research it just puts the US in the back seat. We have already been passed by researchers in South Korea, Japan, and Germany in this area that we pioneered.

So if Kerry doesn't flip flop on this issue before election time I agree with him on this one issue.

Stem cell research is not illegal, it just isn't legal to use public money (tax dollars).

There is no research that suggests it is feasable. The evidence of this is the fact that the private sector is not pouring money into it. If it were promising, don't you think they'd be investing time and research in order to make a huge, huge profit?

Originally posted by marg6043
In the future, it is possible that scientists will discover more diseases that can be cured with cord blood.

Good to hear from you. It is nice to agree every now and then. But yea, this is a very important issue because it may help us in the fight against cancer. Cancer takes too many lives a year and something must be done.

Another thing is that most research done in this country are with tax payer money specially the cancer research but most people does not know about that.

And yes we are still paying high prices for cancer related medications. My father have protate cancer and thanks to medicines is under control, but at a very high cost.

I suffer from diabetes, so I guess I would like this research to go ahead. I think it has to many benefits to ignore it.

The stem cells used in stem cell research aren't from the unbilical cords of happy bouncing babies, but from quick frozen unwanted embryos. This is a travesty honestly.

Looking at firstly the commonly perceived idea of stem cell research:

"Stem cells can be extracted from brains of cadavers, from bone marrow of living patients, from umbilical cords, and from human placentas. Unfortunately, such extraction is more difficulty, and gives smaller yields. Also, its cells have limited potential."

Now at what the argument is REALLY about.

"Stem cells are commonly extracted from unwanted embryos. These are typically surplus embryos that are created during medical procedures which help infertile couples conceive. When a woman undergoes in-vitro fertilization, she is given medication that causes her to produce perhaps two dozen mature ova. These are then fertilized, usually with sperm provided by her husband. About three days later, each embryo is at the blastocyst stage -- a collection of 4 to 10 cells.

This photograph shows a seven-cell embryo which is fixed in position between two pipettes. Portions of six cells can be seen; the seventh is out of view behind the remaining cells. Two to five days after fertilization, two to four embryos are implanted in the woman's womb, in the hope that one or two will develop into a single newborn or twins. The rest are quickly deep frozen in liquid nitrogen for potential future use.

These are sometimes called "pre-embryos." They have no brain, central nervous system, mouth, heart, lungs, or other internal organs. They have no organs to see, hear, touch, taste; they lack a body, head, arms, legs; they have no self awareness, memory, thought processes, or consciousness. They are smaller than a pin-prick. They consist of a number of identical, undifferentiated cells containing human DNA. They do have the potential to grow into fetuses and become newborn babies. Many, probably most, pro-lifers believe that they are human persons with souls. Skeptics feel that souls do not exist -- in embryos or people.

There is no simple way to dispose of the excess embryos. Occasionally, a couple will need to go back for a second try at achieving a pregnancy. Two to four additional embryos are removed from storage, thawed out, and implanted. But even when that happens, perhaps 16 of the couple's ova will remain in storage. There is currently no simple way of handling the unneeded embryos"

www.religioustolerance.org...

[edit on 4-10-2004 by Mynaeris]

It is very sad that in the name of reproduction we are harvesting human embryos for fertilization like they were rat labs, and that is ok for most people in desperate need of children and its also ok for christian fundamentalist too.

I think is inmoral and wrong.

Originally posted by marg6043
It is very sad that in the name of reproduction we are harvesting human embryos for fertilization like they were rat labs, and that is ok for most people in desperate need of children and its also ok for christian fundamentalist too.

I think is inmoral and wrong.

Marg I am confused are you for or against stem cell research. Having taken in consideration my posting above. Its not from unbilical cords that they want to extract the stem cells , its from unwanted embryos???

I was trying to make a point, with that post, I am in favor of stem cell but the same way that people can freeze embryos for fertilization and discard the ones that are not in used, why is so wrong to used them for reserach to cure most birth defects and problems that full time babies can be born with.

See my point.

So do I understand correctly- the government should allow embryo farming as long as it's for the benefit of mankind? or how are we going to prove that these were 'unwanted embryos"? The term "unwanted embryos" offends me. The concept of farming with embryos nauseates me.



[edit on 4-10-2004 by Mynaeris]

So you agree that farming embryos for reproduction is ok, right? and to discard the ones that are not needed is ok, onces the person involve obtain their objective and that is having a baby, see is not difference here.

I have to agree - stem cell research is much too important to not invest in.

My one concern is what Thomas Crown has brought up: If it were so promising the private sector would be all over it. IMHO, if the private sector doesn't see the value in this then no one will, as it has been proven time and time again that private enterprise vastly outperforms federal programs.

Perhaps there is an initial hurdle that the private sector needs federal funding to overcome, but I believe public dollars should be used sparingly.

Embryonic stem cell research does show much more promise than "adult" stem cell research because ESC's can develop into virtually any cell in the body. There has been rapid progress using embryonic stem cells for Parkinson's and spinal cord injuries. Non-embryonic stem cells will not yield these cures because cell development is limited.

Other countries are making significant progress using embryonic stem cell research--cloning is going on worldwide and hundreds of millions of dollars have been invested by other nations and corporations in embryonic stem cell research. However in the U.S., there are state bans pending in 23 states, not to mention the stigma in addition to the lack of federal funding. There is also a federal ban on importing technologies developed outside the U.S. using human stem cell research. Corporations are certainly getting involved, but publicizing this fact in the U.S. isn't going to happen. What's worse, is that by moving it all but a tiny portion of it into the corporate arena, it is left virtually unregulated when it should be one of the most tightly regulated areas of enterprise.

However, my personal belief is that regardless of who wins the elections, embryonic stem cell research will be coming to the U.S. in a big way. Kerry is obviously a supporter, but should Bush be re-elected, he will support it also. He will do it in a sneaky way, like letting one of the 10 or so bills in Congress that call for overturning the ban go through, but because of the BILLIONS of dollars it will mean for his biotech and pharmaceutical company friends, it will become a reality.

www.washingtonpost.com...
www.iht.com...
www.biomedcentral.com...
library.lp.findlaw.com... filename/science,computers,andtechnology_1_989

The reason of the controversy of stem cell research is that we had to types you can obtain the cells from the umbilical cord or from embryos now the latest as mynaeris have said can be seen as the harvesting of embryos just for research and that does not look good for the religious fundamentalist.

Now I agree with mynaeris in the fact that it will be immoral to harvest embryos but we have many fertility clinics that discard embryos to be destroyed when they are not needed.

The cord cells take longer to harvest that the embryos making embryo cells better for research.

Sorry myneris I did not mean to sound like I am in favor of killing babies for these. I was trying to prove a point.

Originally posted by marg6043
The reason of the controversy of stem cell research is that we had to types you can obtain the cells from the umbilical cord or from embryos now the latest as mynaeris have said can be seen as the harvesting of embryos just for research and that does not look good for the religious fundamentalist.

Now I agree with mynaeris in the fact that it will be immoral to harvest embryos but we have many fertility clinics that discard embryos to be destroyed when they are not needed.

The cord cells take longer to harvest that the embryos making embryo cells better for research.

Sorry myneris I did not mean to sound like I am in favor of killing babies for these. I was trying to prove a point.

Unfortunately, stem cells from cord blood are not the same as those from frozen embryos. There is research going on to try and cultivate these cells in the same manner, but it is still in the nascent stages and there are still doubts as to whether or not they are pluripotent (able to be cultivated into any cell type as embryonic stem cells are.) But with the immense growth in IVF treatments, the availability of frozen embryos has increased and these embryos should be used for research instead of being discarded.

Originally posted by Mynaeris
So do I understand correctly- the government should allow embryo farming as long as it's for the benefit of mankind? or how are we going to prove that these were 'unwanted embryos"? The term "unwanted embryos" offends me. The concept of farming with embryos nauseates me.
[edit on 4-10-2004 by Mynaeris]

I don't think anybody should be offended by what they read on the internet.

Also, everybody has the right to believe in which ever invisible man they want. If they choose to be backwater and live in fairytale land, that's fine too. I won't. But, Stem Cell research might be able to cure diseases and save millions of lives. At some point we have to act like grown ups and get the knuckle draggers and cave dwellers out of policy making and back to fearing fire.

.
For the love of science and truth this nation must support anyone but Bush.

His administration has wrecklessly ignored all scientific criteria for decision making.

His administration is vile and mercenary. [which oddly enough, over the long run, is counter productive, even to mercantile interests]
.