Stem Cell Research. The Real Deal and the Hype. - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-14-2004, 11:32 AM   #31
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
oliveu2cm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Live from Boston
Posts: 8,334
Local Time: 09:07 PM
Oh, God not that I have time to reply to this, but........

Gibson You nailed it. Every point. I'll add more support to the final point about the need for research. See below:

In response to the question during the 2nd debate “Senator Kerry, thousands of people have already been cured or treated by the use of adult stem cells or umbilical-cord stem cells. However, no one has been cured by using embryonic stem cells. Wouldn’t it be wise to use stem cells obtained without the destruction of an embryo?” -

Scientest PZ Myers explains:

Quote:
That “no one has been cured by using embryonic stem cells” line has become one of the most common criticisms of embryonic stem cell research. What it is, though, is pure anti-science drivel. No one has been to Mars, anti-missile defenses don’t work, and we aren’t all driving around in hydrogen powered cars, but Republicans aren’t shutting down those research programs. It is in the nature of science that we endeavor to do things that have never been done before. When you start demanding that we only do that which we have already done, you are advocating the destruction of science. This doesn’t mean that everything that hasn’t been done is equally valuable to science; I don’t think we should sponsor pie-powered mole machines that will dig down to the center of the earth to find the Lost Tribe of Israel, for instance. But embryonic stem cell research has been fruitful in the lab, has much promise for the future, and is based on solid, demonstrable science. The question is also poor because it presents a false dichotomy. Of course it would be wise to continue adult stem cell research; no one is arguing otherwise. This isn’t an either/or situation, and all the researchers in the field are saying we need to do both.
__________________

__________________
oliveu2cm is offline  
Old 10-14-2004, 11:38 AM   #32
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 06:07 PM
Hi Olive-
well the reason we "aren’t shutting down those research programs"..

is becuz it has to do w/snuffing out innocent life in the name of expirimenting w/prolonging another.

we are ok w proven methods ie-adult stem cells.
we're results oriented when it comes to prolonging all life.

db9
__________________

__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 10-14-2004, 11:43 AM   #33
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
oliveu2cm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Live from Boston
Posts: 8,334
Local Time: 09:07 PM
Hi Diamond.

Why isn't it a priority to do everything we can to protect the innocent lives that are already born? There's a big difference between an alive, functioning human being and a blob of cells.

And if someone believes that blob has a soul and will be a human, it doesn't not mean those faith-based beliefs should govern the country, or impede science.
__________________
oliveu2cm is offline  
Old 10-14-2004, 11:46 AM   #34
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 06:07 PM
but, im a blob and have a soul

seriously Olive, im concern that it can become a slippery slope that's all.

db9
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 10-14-2004, 12:05 PM   #35
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
oliveu2cm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Live from Boston
Posts: 8,334
Local Time: 09:07 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by AvsGirl41
It's really interesting to me that people who believe an embryo is just an embryo (as I do) are the minority in the abortion thread.

Or you were just smarter than I was, and simply stayed away.
heh. I've been screamed at and my thoughts ridiculed in previous abortion threads, and all the time my well thought-out posts were ignored and questions not answered. I guess it's easier to cry "you support killing!" than thinking intellectually, with compassion, and discussing. I do have a boat load of arguments, as I've been educating myself more and more (like how the countries w/ the lowest rates of abortion haven't made it illegal, they've compensated in other ways) but I can't particpate in these discussions anymore. So yeah, I for one stayed away.
__________________
oliveu2cm is offline  
Old 10-14-2004, 03:11 PM   #36
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,685
Local Time: 07:07 PM
Since when is a clump of cells in a test tube considered human life?
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 10-14-2004, 03:19 PM   #37
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,294
Local Time: 08:07 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
Since when is a clump of cells in a test tube considered human life?
If that's the case, I killed many people today.
__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 10-14-2004, 03:25 PM   #38
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,685
Local Time: 07:07 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram


If that's the case, I killed many people today.
Watch your back some are gonna want to sick capital punishment on your ass.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 10-15-2004, 06:37 AM   #39
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 06:07 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram


And in my professional scientific opinion, you are wrong.

And most of the scientific community would agree.

And quoting MDs is weak. MDs are not research scientists and unless they have an accompanying PhD in the field, they know no more about the subject than an undergraduate biology student.

Frankly, the main problem with this issue is that the people fired up most about it are completely uneducated when it comes to what stem cells are, what cloning is, what undergoing selection means, what differentiation is, what terminal differentiation is, the difficulties of growing stem cells in culture and the fact it is impossible to keep lines going indefinitely (they have a defined lifespan, beyond which they are no longer considered pluripotent). This is a question of high academia, and it's not about being elitist or implying people are stupid, but it's something that you need many years of advanced (beyond a bachelor's degree) education or hands on experience to understand. Yet the people who crow about this to the heavens have never seen a stem cell under the microscope, have not an iota of practical knowledge about it, don't know how to culture it, don't know what it really does and how, etc.

Then what you hear is "morality" as a defense for ignorance.
anitram,

I've always appreciated that you are an intelligent person.

People have core beliefs regardless if they have 10 years of formal schooloing or 6 months of formal schooling.

Some of us common lugs still have a litmus test, if it works let's and is for the betterment of all life let's do it.
If it's only a pipe dream and your taking out innocent life on theory we have a problem with it.
It's that simple.

If you're ok with what a Professor from Princton that he's educated enough and what has to say about this issue here are his words-

The Big Lie
An inhumane platform.

By Robert P. George

Every reporter covering the election should, after the second presidential debate in St. Louis, be demanding of Kerry an answer to the following question: Who are the scientists who told you that "we have the option" of curing Parkinson's, diabetes, spinal-cord injuries, or any other disease using embryonic stem cells? If they won't ask him, the Bush campaign should defy him to name the names. He won't be able to do it. No scientists — even those most pro-Kerry and aggressively in favor of the federal funding of embryo-destructive research — ever told Kerry any such thing.

What Kerry has done here is told the big lie about embryonic stem cells. The claim that "we have the option" of curing Parkinson's disease, diabetes, etc. with embryonic stem cells is outrageous. No one knows when — or even whether or not — human embryonic stem cells will be therapeutically useful in treating any major disease or injury. There are profound — perhaps insuperable — problems with the therapeutic use of these cells. So, despite the fact that there is no federal ban on embryonic-stem-cell research, and that such research can be funded with state money and is being publicly funded in various places abroad, no embryonic-stem-cell-based therapy is even in clinical trials.

For months now, the Kerry campaign and its surrogates, such as Ron Reagan Jr., have cruelly led suffering people to believe that cures for their diseases are just around the corner. All we have to do is replace Bush with Kerry, open the federal funding spigot, and presto! The blind see and the lame walk! The Kerry campaign's hyping of embryo-destructive research for political gain is the cruelest and most shameful episode in the story of the 2004 election.

What Elizabeth Long (the woman who asked Kerry the stem-cell question) said is true: "Thousands of people have already been cured or treated by the use of adult stem cells or umbilical-cord stem cells. However, no one has been cured by using embryonic stem cells. Wouldn't it be wise to use stem cells obtained without the destruction of an embryo?"

Kerry answered with a lie. A lie that will falsely inflate the hopes of countless people who would dearly love to believe that "we have the option" of curing them.

The Big Lie
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 10-15-2004, 08:01 AM   #40
ONE
love, blood, life
 
namkcuR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Kettering, Ohio
Posts: 10,290
Local Time: 08:07 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond

anitram,

I've always appreciated that you are an intelligent person.

People have core beliefs regardless if they have 10 years of formal schooloing or 6 months of formal schooling.

Some of us common lugs still have a litmus test, if it works let's and is for the betterment of all life let's do it.
If it's only a pipe dream and your taking out innocent life on theory we have a problem with it.
It's that simple.

If you're ok with what a Professor from Princton that he's educated enough and what has to say about this issue here are his words-

The Big Lie
An inhumane platform.

By Robert P. George

Every reporter covering the election should, after the second presidential debate in St. Louis, be demanding of Kerry an answer to the following question: Who are the scientists who told you that "we have the option" of curing Parkinson's, diabetes, spinal-cord injuries, or any other disease using embryonic stem cells? If they won't ask him, the Bush campaign should defy him to name the names. He won't be able to do it. No scientists — even those most pro-Kerry and aggressively in favor of the federal funding of embryo-destructive research — ever told Kerry any such thing.

What Kerry has done here is told the big lie about embryonic stem cells. The claim that "we have the option" of curing Parkinson's disease, diabetes, etc. with embryonic stem cells is outrageous. No one knows when — or even whether or not — human embryonic stem cells will be therapeutically useful in treating any major disease or injury. There are profound — perhaps insuperable — problems with the therapeutic use of these cells. So, despite the fact that there is no federal ban on embryonic-stem-cell research, and that such research can be funded with state money and is being publicly funded in various places abroad, no embryonic-stem-cell-based therapy is even in clinical trials.

For months now, the Kerry campaign and its surrogates, such as Ron Reagan Jr., have cruelly led suffering people to believe that cures for their diseases are just around the corner. All we have to do is replace Bush with Kerry, open the federal funding spigot, and presto! The blind see and the lame walk! The Kerry campaign's hyping of embryo-destructive research for political gain is the cruelest and most shameful episode in the story of the 2004 election.

What Elizabeth Long (the woman who asked Kerry the stem-cell question) said is true: "Thousands of people have already been cured or treated by the use of adult stem cells or umbilical-cord stem cells. However, no one has been cured by using embryonic stem cells. Wouldn't it be wise to use stem cells obtained without the destruction of an embryo?"

Kerry answered with a lie. A lie that will falsely inflate the hopes of countless people who would dearly love to believe that "we have the option" of curing them.

The Big Lie
Oh sure, I've had my beliefs about the absolute and unequivocal need for federal funding for embryonic stem cell research for three years, oh, but one guy's OBVIOUSLY conservatively biased opinion is gonna change my mind.
__________________
namkcuR is offline  
Old 10-15-2004, 08:38 AM   #41
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 06:07 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by namkcuR


Oh sure, I've had my beliefs about the absolute and unequivocal need for federal funding for embryonic stem cell research for three years, oh, but one guy's OBVIOUSLY conservatively biased opinion is gonna change my mind.
namkcur-
All we are saying is we want it to work and not have a bunch of dead rats on the floor as net end of your experiments.
Frankly it's kinda scary to sensible folks.

Here's another persons thoughts in case you overlooked it.-
Spinning Stem Cells
A damning reporting pattern.

By Wesley J. Smith



he pattern in the media reportage about stem cells is growing very wearisome. When a research advance occurs with embryonic stem cells, the media usually give the story the brass-band treatment. However, when researchers announce even greater success using adult stem cells, the media reportage is generally about as intense and excited as a stifled yawn.


As a consequence, many people in this country continue to believe that embryonic stem cells offer the greatest promise for developing new medical treatments using the body's cells — known as regenerative medicine — while in actuality, adult and alternative sources of stem cells have demonstrated much brighter prospects. This misperception has societal consequences, distorting the political debate over human cloning and embryonic-stem-cell research (ESCR) and perhaps even affecting levels of public and private research funding of embryonic and adult stem-cell therapies.

This media pattern was again in evidence in the reporting of two very important research breakthroughs announced within the last two weeks. Unless you made a point of looking for these stories — as I do in my work — you might have missed them. Patients with Parkinson's disease and multiple sclerosis received significant medical benefit using experimental adult-stem-cell regenerative medical protocols. These are benefits that supporters of embryonic-stem-cell treatments have yet to produce widely in animal experiments. Yet adult stem cells are now beginning to ameliorate suffering in human beings.

Celebrity Parkinson's disease victims such as Michael J. Fox and Michael Kinsley regularly tout ESCR as the best hope for a cure of their disease. Indeed, the Washington Post recently published a Kinsley rant on the subject in which the editor and former Crossfire co-host denounced opponents of human cloning as interfering with his hope for a cure. Yet as loudly as Fox and Kinsley promote ESCR in the media or before legislative committees, both have remained strangely silent about the most remarkable Parkinson's stem-cell experiment yet attempted: one in which researchers treated Parkinson's with the patient's own adult stem cells.

Here's the story, in case you missed it: A man in his mid-50s had been diagnosed with Parkinson's at age 49. The disease grew progressively, leading to tremors and rigidity in the patient's right arm. Traditional drug therapy did not help.

Stem cells were harvested from the patient's brain using a routine brain biopsy procedure. They were cultured and expanded to several million cells. About 20 percent of these matured into dopamine-secreting neurons. In March 1999, the cells were injected into the patient's brain.

Three months after the procedure, the man's motor skills had improved by 37 percent and there was an increase in dopamine production of 55.6 percent. One year after the procedure, the patient's overall Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale had improved by 83 percent — this at a time when he was not taking any other Parkinson's medication!

That is an astonishing, remarkable success, one that you would have thought would set off blazing headlines and lead stories on the nightly news. Had the treatment been achieved with embryonic stem cells, undoubtedly the newspapers would have screamed loudly enough to be heard. Unfortunately, reportage about the Parkinson's success story was strangely muted. True, the Washington Post ran an inside-the-paper story and there were some wire service reports. But the all-important New York Times — the one news outlet that drives television and cable news — did not report on it at all. Nor did a search of the Los Angeles Times website yield any stories about the experiment.

Human multiple-sclerosis patients have now also benefited from adult-stem-cell regenerative medicine. A study conducted by the Washington Medical Center in Seattle involved 26 rapidly deteriorating MS patients. First, physicians stimulated stem cells from the patients' bone marrow to enter the bloodstream. They then harvested the stem cells and gave the patients strong chemotherapy to destroy their immune systems. (MS is an autoimmune disorder in which the patient's body attacks the protective sheaths that surround bundles of nerves.) Finally, the researchers reintroduced the stem cells into the patients, hoping they would rebuild healthy immune systems and ameliorate the MS symptoms.

It worked. Of the 26 patients, 20 stabilized and six improved. Three patients experienced severe infections and one died.

That is a very positive advance offering great hope. But rather than making headlines, the test got less attention than successful animal studies using embryonic cells. The Los Angeles Times ran a brief bylined description, while the New York Times and Washington Post only published wire reports. Once again, the media's almost grudging coverage prevented society at large from becoming acutely aware of how exciting adult-cell regenerative medicine is fast becoming.

Meanwhile in Canada, younger MS patients whose diseases were not as far advanced as those in the Washington study have shown even greater benefit from the same procedure. Six months after the first patient was treated, she was found to have no evidence of the disease on MRI scans. Three other patients have also received successful adult-stem-cell grafts with no current evidence of active disease.

It's still too early to tell whether the Canadian patients have achieved permanent remission or a cure, but there can be no question that the research is significant. Yet the story was only publicized in Canada's Globe and Mail and in reports on Canadian television. American outlets did not mention the experiments at all.

These Parkinson's and MS studies offer phenomenal evidence of the tremendous potential adult cell regenerative medicine offers. At the same time, the unspectacular coverage these breakthroughs received highlights the odd lack of interest in adult stem-cell research exhibited by most mainstream media outlets. Nor are these stories the only adult-stem-cell successes to have gotten the media cold shoulder.

It's worth recapping just a few of the other advances made in adult-cell therapies and research in the last two years, all of which were significantly underplayed in the media:

Israeli doctors inserted a paraplegic patient's own white blood cells into her severed spinal cord, after which she regained bladder control and the ability to wiggle her toes and move her legs. (I only saw reporting on this case in the Globe and Mail, June 15, 2001.)
Immune systems destroyed by cancer were restored in children using stem cells from umbilical-cord blood. (There was a good story in the April 16, 2001 Time, but other than that I saw no reporting.)
At Harvard University, mice with Type I diabetes were completely cured of their disease. The experiment was so successful that human trials are now planned. (This was reported in the July 19, 2001, Harvard University Gazette, but I saw no coverage at all in the mainstream press.)
Diabetic mice treated with adult stem cells achieved full insulin production and all lived. This is in contrast to an experiment in which embryonic stem cells injected into diabetic mice achieved a 3 percent insulin production rate and all the mice died. (According to the May 2001 STATS, published by the Statistical Assessment Service, the embryo experiment made big news while the media ignored the adult cell experiment.)
How many humans have been treated by embryonic stem cells? Zero. Indeed, before human trials can even be safely undertaken researchers will have to overcome two serious difficulties that stand between patients and embryonic-cell regenerative medicine: 1) ES cells cause tumors, and 2) ES cells may be rejected by the immune system. Surmounting these difficulties — if they can be surmounted at all — will take a very long time and much expense. There is no risk of rejection with adult cells, by contrast, because they come from the patients' own bodies. Nor, at least so far, does adult-stem-cell therapy appear to cause tumors. This puts adult therapies years ahead of the game.

The media continue to imply that embryos hold the key to the future. But increasingly, it looks as if our own body cells offer the quickest and best hope for regenerative medicine. The time has come for the public to insist that the media stop acting as if adult stem cells are the "wrong" kind of stem cells, and report to the American people fully and fairly the remarkable advances continually being made in adult regenerative medicine

Let's reiterate-

How many humans have been treated by embryonic stem cells? Zero.

1) ES cells cause tumors, and 2) ES cells may be rejected by the immune system. Surmounting these difficulties — if they can be surmounted at all — will take a very long time and much expense. There is no risk of rejection with adult cells, by contrast, because they come from the patients' own bodies

thank u.

db9
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 10-19-2004, 03:41 PM   #42
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 05:07 PM
com' on

don't ba a girlie man

support the stem cells

Quote:
Schwarzenegger in stem cell call



Schwarzenegger says California should be a biotech industry leader
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has broken ranks with his party to back a proposal to fund embryonic stem cell research with California state money.

The initiative, known as Proposition 71, would provide scientists with about $3bn over 10 years and would cost the state a total of up to $6bn.

Residents will vote on the measure in November. Opinion polls suggest most Californians support the proposal.

But many Republicans oppose the science because it involves destroying embryos.

Mr Schwarzenegger's decision will put him on a collision course with his own party and the White House, says the BBC's Daniel Griffiths in Washington.

The issue has become increasingly important in the presidential election campaign, especially since the death of paralysed actor Christopher Reeve, a passionate supporter of the science.

President George Bush has already placed limits on federal spending on stem cell research. His Democratic opponent, John Kerry, says he will increase funding.

There is little doubt that the Democrats will seize on Mr Schwarzenegger's endorsement for their own political advantage, says our correspondent.

'Pioneer California'

"I am, of course, a supporter of stem cell research," Mr Schwarzenegger said in a statement.

"Research that we do now holds the promise of cures for tomorrow. California has always been a pioneer. We daringly led the way for the high-tech industry and now voters can help ensure we lead the way for the biotech industry."
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 10-19-2004, 03:49 PM   #43
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 05:07 PM
A couple of years from now, Californians will be kicking themselves for consenting to yet another tax to fund this proposition.

For a state with a deficit, Prop 71 makes absolutely no sense. It is pure abortion politics in miracle cure clothing.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 10-19-2004, 03:49 PM   #44
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 01:07 AM
Well made points, but my hat's off to Schwarzenegger. He's got a mind of his own, and that's rare as hen's teeth in politics these days.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 10-19-2004, 04:02 PM   #45
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 05:07 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
Californians will be kicking themselves

Did you vote for him?
__________________

__________________
deep is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:07 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com