PDA

View Full Version : The Stem Cell Issue


Kate
08-08-2004, 11:53
Here's a thread where we can discuss our different opinions on the Stem Cell issue as well as debate the possible pros and cons of Stem Cell research!

For those who are not mediacal experts, here's a simplistic diagram briefly explaining what stem cells are: http://img53.exs.cx/img53/5089/Whatareembryonicstemcells.jpg

And here's a recent news article on the political/ethical issues associated with the stem cell research:

Kerry Calls for More Stem-Cell Funding
By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent

LA JUNTA, Colo. - John Kerry said Saturday the restriction on stem cell research imposed by President Bush was a triumph of ideology over science and "only adds to the loss and pain" of millions suffering from potentially curable diseases.

"At this very moment, some of the most pioneering cures and treatments are right at our fingertips, but because of the stem cell ban, they remain beyond our reach," the Democratic presidential candidate said in his party's weekly radio address.

Kerry renewed a previous pledge to reverse Bush administration policies on stem cells if he should win the White House and said he would increase funding for stem cell research by federal agencies.

"We're going to listen to our scientists and stand up for science. We're going to say yes to knowledge, yes to discovery, and yes to a new era of hope for all Americans," he said. :done:

Bush announced strict limits three years ago on federal support for embryonic stem cell research, which many abortion rights opponents claim involves the taking of nascent human life.

Since ensuring himself the Democratic presidential nomination last spring, Kerry has delivered the party's radio address frequently as a way to expand his reach to voters who will choose between him and Bush this fall.

His comments, two days before the third anniversary of Bush's stem cells order, aired as the Massachusetts senator and his running mate, Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, pushed westward on a postconvention swing through 22 states.

The ticket-mates arrived in Colorado after traveling overnight from Kansas City, Mo., aboard their campaign train.

In a decision that underscored the reality of the race for the White House, their train rolled without stopping through the heavily Republican state of Kansas. It was near midnight when the Democratic entourage crossed into the state from Missouri — and near dawn when it rolled out again and into contested Colorado.

Once during the night, a crowd gathered beside the track hoping to catch a glimpse of Kerry. The train rumbled past, though, evidence of Kansas' existence as a nonbattleground state. Kansas chose Bush over Al Gore by 21 percentage points in 2000, and Democrats are not contesting it this year.

Despite that, campaign officials said they were chagrinned that they had failed to slow the train enough to acknowledge the crowd that had gathered on Friday night. Edwards will make a hastily arranged stop in Lawrence, Kan., on Sunday, they said.

Colorado, like Missouri to the east of Kansas, is a different matter.

Bush won Colorado by 9 percentage points, but Kerry has decided to challenge the president this year for its eight electoral votes.

Chris Gates, the state Democratic chairman, said Republicans outnumber Democrats by 190,000 registered voters in Colorado, but he said many are moderates ready to reject Bush's conservatism. He also said Kerry can appeal successfully to independents, who outnumber Democrats.

At his first stop in the state, Kerry spoke briefly from the bunting-draped back of his train. "We're taking your hopes, your dreams, your standards ... to the White House," he said.

And in a hurried, private moment, Pat Winsor of Lamar, Colo., urged to him to enact policies that would reduce the cost of prescription drugs. "He said I assure you we're going to work on it," she said in an interview afterward.

Winsor said she is on Medicare and has a son-in-law with leukemia. The cost of six pills recently prescribed for him was $600, she said.

In his radio address, Kerry pointed out that three years have passed since Bush announced on Aug. 9, 2001, that he would limit federal spending for stem cell research to lines then in existence.

"Those affected by this decision already mark so many hard anniversaries of their own," he said. "Marking today's anniversary only adds to the loss and the pain."

Embryonic stem cells can morph into any cell of the body. Many scientists say that opens the possibility of finding treatments or cures for conditions including diabetes, Alzheimer's disease and Parkinson's disease.

Many abortion rights opponents oppose the use of embryonic stem cells for research because they come from human embryos a few days old. The embryo must be destroyed to obtain the stem cells, opposed by many people who consider life to begin at conception. :bum:

"In America, we don't sacrifice science for ideology," Kerry said. "People of good will and good sense can resolve the ethical issues without stopping lifesaving research."
_____________________

So, what's your stand on this matter? :)

DAZ
08-08-2004, 12:26
When it comes to curing diseases and the like i have to say i'm all for it.If you can ease peoples suffering by doing this type of stuff how can we object?
HOWEVER i draw the line at cloning humans.
Cloning cells..fair enough but when it comes down to chosing looks and the cosmetic side of it comes in..NO

haku
08-08-2004, 15:42
I have no problem with anything really.

I support research on embryos. Embryos made up of only a few cells are not people, that's ridiculous.

I have no problem with human cloning either, especially when it would be used as a mean of reproduction. People could get a clone of themselves instead of a child, parents could get a clone of a deceased child. I have no problem with that.
Cloning would also solve the problem of organ transplants. Millions of people are waiting for transplants they will never get because there is not enough compatible donors. With cloning, we could just clone the person who needs a transplant and grow the organ they need. I have no problem with that either.

OkashiNaYume
08-08-2004, 20:06
My grandmother and I had a discussion about this, and as I may have said before in other topics, growing up my family's religious belief has been of Jehovah's Witnesses, so obviously she was against it, and personally, I am, too. An embryo, although it cannot contribute to this world, is still a human being. It's murder regardless. I mean, just think about it: This embryo could have grown up and discovered a cure for AIDS, or cancer. I don't know, just my two cents.. I'm too tired to read the entire article(s) at the moment. :(

thegurgi
08-08-2004, 20:13
i always felt that the issue of Stem Cells was more of an issue about abortion...
but that's the main misconception isn't it?

The miracle of birth, new life is created. a potential human. But there are so many factors that go into this

Misconception 1. New Life. Pah! What crap is this? This Egg was alive, the sperm was alive. So exactly what's new? Tell me? Just a recombination of DNA and that's it.

Misconception 2. Potential human. Many women have miscarriages. i mean, Really... there is a period of time in the 1st trimester when this can just happen, spontaneously. It's like natures abortion... so what's the point in all the uproar. Why not then, donate that blastocyst of stem cells to a lab where they can develope this technology? I mean, not ALL of the stem cells are coming from girls having a casual abortion.

And what's this Okashi? Murder of a blasticyst that MIGHT become someone great, or help someone who can't walk of paralysis? i mean, there are a myriad of other diseases inflections and other problems that are rampant around the world. And it's a POINTLESS debate... really, cause nothing will stop the progression of this science, despite any tries by governments to stop it.

i just get so Peeved when the religious communities and the government try to step into this. I'd like anyone against stem cells to spend 6 years in a childrens hospital and watch kids suffer of paralysis and MS and cancers and deny them a cure because you think it's unethical... because i think it's unethical to be against it.

oh and Kat, that article alone has changed my vote this November to a definite Kerry vote :D

:: will still be grumbling to himself about this for awhile, cause it really does anger me ::

haku
08-08-2004, 22:32
An embryo, although it cannot contribute to this world, is still a human being. It's murder regardless.
It's NOT murder, let's be serious. Otherwise each time i ejaculate in a condom or a tissue i'm committing mass murder of millions of potential people.

An embryo that is only a few days old is not a person! It's only a few dozen cells, you have to use a microscope to see it, it's a bunch of undifferentiated cells, it has no form, no organs, no nervous system, no nothing. It's just a fertilized egg whose cell has divided a few times, it's just one step above the egg and the spermatozoon, but nothing more. It's in no way a human being, it's not even a fetus yet!

goku
09-08-2004, 04:43
Aye, what happened to the good old days when a papercut was fatal and a cough was as good as a death sentence. :p

But since we have evolved our technology, it's no use turning back. I'm for stem cell research. And thegurgi, yes, the progression of science can be stopped. Human will (see The Village) and extinction are a few ways.

thegurgi
09-08-2004, 04:51
goku... ok, yes it will be stopped in THAT way... but i was making a social point. Every time that the goverment stuck it's head into science it never worked. Remember who they sent to jail for saying that the earth revolved around the sun? and all those other scientists who were killed or persecuted for saying things that we now state as scienctific fact. it didn't really work now did it? So, that's just how it will be...

but i guess scientific research will end when the human race goes extinct... whenever that will be and by what, i'm not going to see the Village but i am curious... PM and tell me what it's about... hahahaa

kishkash
09-08-2004, 05:39
It's NOT murder, let's be serious. Otherwise each time i ejaculate in a condom or a tissue i'm committing mass murder of millions of potential people.
LMAO! :lol: :eek: how could u....

*cries*

those innocent children...OH so innocent. You should be done in for mass genocide.... :mad:

denial
09-08-2004, 10:04
Thanks Kate.

That is very interesting to read (Whatareembryonicstemcells.jpg).

Actually I'm reading an alternative book from religion perspective that is called "Souls Travelling through 7 destinations" ..( I read it halfway... as usual ).. the is absorb from the Quran . the step of the creation of the human .. so this book said its started from a sperm .. then it become blood and the bone were developed and the the bones were wrapped with muscles and it become a shape. Then after 4 months (120 days), only a soul was blew into the baby and a new life begin.

Many abortion rights opponents oppose the use of embryonic stem cells for research because they come from human embryos a few days old. The embryo must be destroyed to obtain the stem cells, opposed by many people who consider life to begin at conception.

But I am still very very very lack of knowledge from religion perspective, that I am not sure what is God stand on this issue. But abortion is still no no to God even within the 4 months period...... but God encourages us knowledges and science discovery and development ..

...just what would happened to human society if abortion is allowed? ..will we be killing a baby just because we disgaree after we found out that the sex of the baby is not what we want or from the scanning we figured that the baby is not perfect?

I still think there is an escape to this issue ... maybe somewhere out there ..someone knows the answer. :dknow:

thegurgi
09-08-2004, 10:08
...just what would happened to human society if abortion is allowed? ..will we be killing a baby just because we disgaree after we found out that the sex of the baby is not what we want or from the scanning we figured that the baby is not perfect?

that's why abortion should be regulated. It should only be preformed in those extreme circumstances. If the mother is full adequate in keeping the baby financially and emotionally to keep the baby... it shouldn't be allowed. In fact, i think it should only be in use for when the pregnancy is the result of a rape, or if the pregnancy is potentially fatal to the woman and the children [either one or the other or both]... but if abortion is regulated and all aborted cells are sent to clinics for stem cell research... i think it could work very well.

but i'll shut up here, cause i know the rule: no uterus, no opinion

denial
09-08-2004, 10:23
okay .. I agree it should be regulated and allowed in extreme circumstances... I shut up too .. because seems like the more I know .. the more I don't know .. lol

goku
09-08-2004, 10:45
thegurgi, the government DOES assist sometimes by giving important grants to scientists and funding for projects. However I do agree that they butt in, sometimes for the worse (from a scientific standpoint).

As for abortion, I'm all for it. We need to start soon taking some action to combat our over-population problem.

denial
09-08-2004, 10:58
over population? then we would develope robot and make clone ...

Well Singapore last time tried to combat the over population, because they think thier country is small and someday it will be over pupulated .. so they only allowed each married couple to max 2 kids .. then what happened now is .. when they grow old ..and die... they don't have enough people to support the development of country .. so they looking for people from outside to work for them.

Well that was a converstation I had with a taxi driver in Singapore few years back.

Kate
09-08-2004, 11:53
My opinion is that over population is caused by several million of disabled, sick people that serve no purpose to the population and are just feeding off of everyone. I know that getting rid of them will be cruel, but that's how it is intended by nature. We say we should temper with nature when it comes to genetic engeneering etc, what about supporting sick people? That's tempering with nature, alright. :(

I dunno what I'm talking about any more. Lol.

denial
09-08-2004, 12:04
I dunno what I'm talking about any more. Lol.
LoL

population is caused by several million of disabled, sick people that serve no purpose to the population and are just feeding off of everyone

I know that getting rid of them will be cruel, but that's how it is intended by nature.

and ... what about love? Love will elliminates what ever feeling you have about this. And you can't fight love. Someone who love would do anything to the love one .. even any of the above you mention...

Kate
09-08-2004, 12:12
denial, then same goes to gene therapy and stem cell research. Won't you do anything if there was a chance to cure a paralised relative?

denial
09-08-2004, 12:38
of course I would! .. oh I even read somewhere that they already have the cure for cancer without have to go thru chemo and all those painful and expensive treatement .. but it was banned by US goverrment .. and kept secret.. I dont know how true is this... I read this long time ago .. but if the mind set of some people would said that population is a problem .. and cancer is one of the top killer in the world .. what do you think they would do?