Every Stem Cell's Sacred?

[Terra Nullius]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/25/AR2006082501257.html

Stem-cell firm optimistic on ethical concerns

By Jim Finkle
Reuters
Friday, August 25, 2006; 9:02 PM

WORCESTER, Massachusetts (Reuters) - A U.S. company that developed a way to make human embryonic stem cells without harming the original embryo said on Friday it was optimistic the technique would overcome ethical concerns that have held back funding for stem cell research.

California-based Advanced Cell Technology Inc. developed the technology to quell the raging ethical debate in the United States over the harvesting of embryonic stem cells, which under current methods results in destruction of human embryos.

"For most rational people this removes the last rational objection for opposing this research," Advanced Cell's chief scientist, Robert Lanza, said in an interview at the company's Worcester research center.

The White House on Thursday said it was encouraged by a new method and Bush believed it deserved a good look.

Bush last month vetoed an expansion of federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research, saying U.S. taxpayers who object to such research should not have to pay for it.

Opponents have a range of objections that include a distaste for manipulating or destroying what they see as a potential human life, and some experts said the technique announced on Wednesday would not resolve ethical debates and political battles that have divided the country for years.

Although he doubts Bush will support it, Lanza said he hoped the new method addressed the concerns of enough U.S. senators and representatives to generate a majority of votes in Congress to override the White House's veto.

[SlowwHand]

I don't have a problem with this, as long as used in disease control. If used in cloning or any other creative effort, nothing has changed.

[Ming]

Bush last month vetoed an expansion of federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research, saying U.S. taxpayers who object to such research should not have to pay for it.

Gee... too bad he doesn't feel the same way about those that oppose the war in Iraq

[Az]

@ Ming

Isn't it ( in simplistic terms ) the point of a liberal government? that often you pay for stuff you don't want to pay, so in general you get better living?

[Hueij]

"For most rational people this removes the last rational objection for opposing this research," Advanced Cell's chief scientist, Robert Lanza, said in an interview at the company's Worcester research center.

There you go...

[SlowwHand]

I don't know if it's a liberal outlook of government, but it's a point of democracy.

[Az]

liberal in the non-american definition, sloww.

[BlackCat]

I think thats called socialism in Slowws world.

Edit : forgot to say that I'm of course still Pro, and that Bushy's lame excuse is just a cover for the religious reasons he had for banning it.

[Winston]

It's an unethical procedure in my humble view, like the way I feel about organ transplants. I don't believe I could ever support it.

We're all going to die one way or another, it's not going to be helped by any of these increasingly inhuman ways of offering treatment.

[SlowwHand]

Wow, Winston. Against organ transplants?

Ok, you bastards. Now let's see you call me a ultra conservative.

[Terra Nullius]

Oh Sloww.

We'd never dream of insulting you like that.

[Terra Nullius]

I can't help feeling that the embryo is unlikely to develop normally after such a procedure. Epigenetic changes seem more than likely.

But then maybe I'm just being an hopeless Greenie.

https://notes.utk.edu/Bio/greenberg.nsf/0/b360905554fdb7d985256ec5006a7755?OpenDocument

Epigenetic inheritance has been associated with a number of other human health conditions, including some whose incidence is higher among babies born with the aid of assisted reproduction technology (ART). As Reik explains, embryos normally develop in a protective environment, the womb. When they are put into the suboptimal environment of a culture dish, many things can go wrong. Methylation sites initially established in the oocyte may not be maintained properly, and imprinting patterns may be lost during development. Individuals conceived by ART techniques have a higher risk of being born with BWS, Angelman syndrome (AS), and retinoblastoma (a tumor of the retina). Like BWS, AS has been linked to imprinting errors. Typical features of babies born with AS include developmental delay, absent speech development, and seizures.

[bipolarbear]

I think stem cell research has a lot of good possibilities, and a lot of bad ones.
Yeah, it would be awesome to be able to replace an arm if you lose one, or repair a damaged spine. However I find it to be absurd that people are looking for a "fountain of youth" still. I see death as a stark inevitability of life that we must eventualy come to terms with or die trying.

Cloning seems interesting, especially in terms of clearing up some questions regarding nature vs. nurture, however I'd rather that we left it in the realm of science fiction novels. And dismissing all of the major arguments against cloning, there is still one enduring reason why I oppose cloning (and thus kind of stem cell research). RICHARD SIMMONS.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Wow, Winston. Against organ transplants?

Ok, you bastards. Now let's see you call me a ultra conservative.

Well, it's difficult to see if you have found an ally in Winston or are schocked

Winston is of course right in that we probably all* are going to die one way or the other, and it's of course his right to do that screaming in pain or totally lost in Alzheimer fogs.

*) I intend to live forever - so far so good.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
I don't know if it's a liberal outlook of government, but it's a point of democracy.

No it isn't. In a democracy, you have to pay for stuff of which you don't approve, if a majority of your fellow citizens do approve.