Uncle Martin Posted June 16, 2004 Report Share Posted June 16, 2004 Stem cells look to hold the promise of being the "holy grail" of bioengineering. Hopes for the future include cures for spinal cord injury and new skin for burn patients, even grow organs!...... to name just a few. Stem cells are harvested from human embryonic tissue. Groups exist that claim this practice is analogous to abortion. In my opinion there are no moral/ethical considerations in using a very small group of non-sentient living cells to make the lives of millions of people and other species better. This is a heated debate. What are your thoughts? Is it right or wrong? There is a link on Hypography's front page that is very informative and hundreds more on the links page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted June 16, 2004 Report Share Posted June 16, 2004 A very interesting topic. I support stem cell research and think it has incredible potential. However, I also think it is important to listen to the objectors because, as you point out, it is a difficult issue for many. To make it easier for folks to catch up: follow this link for lots of articles about stem cells: http://www.hypography.com/cgi-bin/search/search.pl?Terms=stem%20cells&Realm=Hypography Tormod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freethinker Posted June 16, 2004 Report Share Posted June 16, 2004 I don't care how "difficult" it is for narrow minded ignorant people. This same mentality found vivisection, cleaniness, anesthesia, blood transfusions, vaccinations, in vitro fertilization, .... "difficult" and fought as hard as they could against them. Once they were forced to accept them, most made a quick 180 and now want to claim their religious orgs helped provide the solution. They have no valid scientific facts for their stance. They are harming society as they have done for thousands of years. It's time for society to stand up against forced ignorance and assaults on scientific advancements by those addicted to antiquated superstitions. There is not a single valid scientific reason to stop theraputic stem cell research. There is not a single valid factual bit of support to allow a claim of a single cell deserving protection based on a claim of personhood. "The 'biological' argument that a human being is created at fertilization," says embryologist Charles Gardner, "contradicts all that [we] have learned in the past few decades." First of all, as embryologist C. R. Austin notes, fertilization does not confer genetic uniqueness — this is achieved as a consequence of the first meiotic division, which takes place just before ovulation." Secondly, while all the necessary DNA is indeed present for the first time at conception, "the information required to make an eye or a finger does not exist in the fertilized egg. It exists in the positions and interactions of cells and molecules that will be formed only at a later time." http://www.karawynn.net/ru486/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Martin Posted June 17, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2004 Is it possible that Dubya is the only one that objects to stem cell research? Surely someone else has differing views they wish to express. I posted this topic in hopes of reading and responding to replies from all camps. Everyone is encouraged to post their views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freethinker Posted June 17, 2004 Report Share Posted June 17, 2004 OK, here's another POV. I don't see how anyone can support Stem Cell Research. Think of what yoou have to kill in order to do the research. I mean how many flowers will lose their stems! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Martin Posted June 18, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 18, 2004 Exactly, Few people are aware of studies that indicate plants may sense danger, feel pain, and even scream in an inaudible frequency when their little stems are cut off for inhumane research on their cells. This practice is absolutely unacceptable!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Martin Posted June 25, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 25, 2004 Is there anybody out there? I'm just bumping this, hoping for some opposing views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted July 13, 2004 Report Share Posted July 13, 2004 Seems a bit quiet right now... The problem is I think the three of us who have posted here tend to agree on this issue - so we need to get more input. Tormod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
katesisco Posted July 14, 2004 Report Share Posted July 14, 2004 Well, all that is good, but remember how unintended consequences come along with intended consequences. I have an interest in ADHD and the various theories that attend its origin but I found the most interesting web site that has to do with stem cells. At http://www.cordcutting.com, a retired doctor has a lot to say about the dangers of cutting the umbilical cord before the cord has ceased infusing. It began, it seems, when Moms were alarmed at the appearance of newborns tinged yellow--a temporary pehnomena but with the dissemination of information after the ww11, the jaundiced condition was something to be feared, not tolerated, so the drs began to cut early to keep the blood from saturation and make the (temporary) jaundiced condition a non-event. Later, it seems like a good idea when drugs that eased the delivery saturated the infant also. So, here we are at a time when most cords are cut before infusing is finished and now the blood is in demand. Quite a serendipitous event if it were not for the fact that the early cutting caused serious problems. Only lately have studies been done to demonstrate that as long as three years later, the babies still had insufficient iron levels. And, at the time of birth, serious complications can arise caused by insufficient oxygen. The doctor speculates cerebal palsy is the direct result of insufficient oxygen due to early cord cutting. Very frightening, especially now so, since the blood is in demand and pressure will be to obtain even more than previous. Quite a lot to consider in this time of making a profit out of anything you can and the babies can't speak for themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freethinker Posted July 14, 2004 Report Share Posted July 14, 2004 I found your post of great interest Katesisco. Many possible subjects for discussion if you are interested. I'd love to join you in a thread about ADHD. Why don't you start one for us? Just click on the "New Topic" button at the top of the page. A new window will open. Just fill in a Title, Like "ADHD", and then give us some of the details you have in the Message Text area to help get us started. Then there is www.cordcutting.com! And having had 4 kids, well my ex did, I was there... anyway, is this what the Apgar Test is all about? Perhaps cutting the cord earlier gives a lower number? It would seem to have a direct correlation. Another interesting topic to start! You have a lot to share with us! Does Stem Cell research have potential benefit to ADHD or recovery from early cord cutting? Or what was the intent of Originally posted by: katesiscoWell, all that is good, but remember how unintended consequences come along with intended consequences. ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted July 14, 2004 Report Share Posted July 14, 2004 katecisco, two tips for you: 1) Please use the "Enter" key now and then to put some line breaks in your posts. If this doesn't work please let me know since we've had some members who had problems with this. It makes your posts more readable, and that is a good things because you write about very interesting stuff. 2) Make sure you start your URLs with "http://" - this will make them clickable! I agree with FT - start a thread on ADHD! Very interesting stuff. Tormod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nemo Posted August 5, 2004 Report Share Posted August 5, 2004 Perhaps I'm mistaken... I thought stem cells were currently being used to repair spinal injuries in adults; the only difference being that the cells in question were harvested from the sinus cavity of the adult in need of repair. Additionally, I have read that it is possible to harvest stem cells from the umbilical cord - wouldn't either of these possibilities negate any ethical objection to stem cell research? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freethinker Posted August 5, 2004 Report Share Posted August 5, 2004 There is a difference between embryonic/ foetal stem cells and adult stem cells. NONE are as flexible in application as embryonic stem cells. Embryonic stem cells can be adapted to any application while stem cells from other sources can often only be used in physiology similar to that which they came from. e.g. the recent report of success in using embryonic stem cells in strokes. "Stem cells promise stroke therapy A team from Stanford University injected foetal stem cells into stroke-damaged rats' brains....They found the cells could migrate to the damaged areas, and turn into the right type of brain cell. ...Dr Michael Marks, of the Stanford Stroke Center, said there was currently no way to treat patients who had lost brain function after a stroke. He said: "A therapy like this has tremendous potential." Stem cells can be taken from adult tissue, as well as foetal tissue. But the Stanford team found that when these cells were injected into areas of stroke damage did not survive long, or migrate to the correct location. " http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3926815.stm On top of which the only ETHICAL objections are RELIGIOUS and based on ignorace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nemo Posted August 7, 2004 Report Share Posted August 7, 2004 Here's an ethical objection: humanity's ability to extend life exponentially outpacing the deaths of those among us who, for whatever reason, should have died a natural death. Every so often, I will read in the paper or online about a pond that had to be drained to kill some asian ninjitsu fish that could have destroyed the environment because it had no natural predetor in the area to counter its population growth. We, as a species, are doing everything we can to ensure that someone who spends their life smoking, drinking, eating Big Macs and mating with anything that walks upright lives just as long as the person who will eventually find an efficient way to implement desalinization techniques to the worlds oceans and rid the world of drought. Having said that, I would - as a father - be willing to try anything from science to waving a dead chicken over the head of any of my children if I thought it would fix some grevious condition they had. My original objection was based on logic, my objection was based upon emotion. I believe we started to touch on this topic in an AI string over in the Computer Programming forum. Interesting quote at the bottom of your post FT - I had no idea Frank Lloyd Wright was a religious man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Martin Posted August 7, 2004 Author Report Share Posted August 7, 2004 Nemo,Some of your above post touches on a subject that is overdue for being resurrected. Dysgenics, in the evolution category. I would enjoy your comments on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nemo Posted August 7, 2004 Report Share Posted August 7, 2004 I apologize for the format of my posts. The post above looked good when I submitted it as several distinct paragraphs, and looked exactly as I wanted it when I opened it with the 'Edit' button. Unfortunately, my posts seem to end up being smashed together into one long string when they actually hit the site. I'm new to the site and hope to be able to converse without the format of my message attracting more attention than the information within. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Martin Posted August 7, 2004 Author Report Share Posted August 7, 2004 You could have just told me that dysgenics doesn't interest you,...I'd understand. Try the preview, what you see there, is what you get. This does take a bit of trial and error to figure out, but trust me,... if I did it,.. anyone can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts