JTF.ORG Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: muman613 on March 10, 2009, 03:00:17 PM
-
Im pretty upset with the lifting of the ban on embryonic stem cell research. The loss in the value of life is immense. Now people may kill unborn children in order to harvest cells which will extend their lives. There are serious moral and ethical issues which are being completely ignored by an administration and a profession which intends to deny the existence of the Creator of the Universe.
It is especially important for Jews who read this to realize that the aspect of Haman which causes him to hate the Jew is the fact that Amalek denies Hashem and tries to prove that everything that happens in this world is a result of nature. A true servant of Hashem can see through the veil that everything that happens is because of Hashem. This Embroynic Stem cell research is a way to test us, do we see the beauty of life and value it, or do we just see life as genetic material which can be used as if we were animals.
-
Im pretty upset with the lifting of the ban on embryonic stem cell research. The loss in the value of life is immense. Now people may kill unborn children in order to harvest cells which will extend their lives. There are serious moral and ethical issues which are being completely ignored by an administration and a profession which intends to deny the existence of the Creator of the Universe.
It is especially important for Jews who read this to realize that the aspect of Haman which causes him to hate the Jew is the fact that Amalek denies Hashem and tries to prove that everything that happens in this world is a result of nature. A true servant of Hashem can see through the veil that everything that happens is because of Hashem. This Embroynic Stem cell research is a way to test us, do we see the beauty of life and value it, or do we just see life as genetic material which can be used as if we were animals.
To be accurate, there was never a ban on stem cell research. There was a ban on government funding of stem cell research, but there was certainly no legal prohibition on it. Private companies were allowed and are allowed to do it. Obama's lifting of this so-called ban, will now have government fund it. Personally, I'm undecided on this issue. A stem cell is not a life (I don't think), it's a potential life, so I have trouble equating it with abortion. The other thing to consider is that these stem-cells are donated to fertility clinics and most will be discarded anyway. Given that they are going to be discarded, isn't it better that they are used for research which will potentially lead to cures of things like multiple sclerosis? I'm not set in my opinion. I've had a hard time with this issue.
-
Im pretty upset with the lifting of the ban on embryonic stem cell research. The loss in the value of life is immense. Now people may kill unborn children in order to harvest cells which will extend their lives. There are serious moral and ethical issues which are being completely ignored by an administration and a profession which intends to deny the existence of the Creator of the Universe.
It is especially important for Jews who read this to realize that the aspect of Haman which causes him to hate the Jew is the fact that Amalek denies Hashem and tries to prove that everything that happens in this world is a result of nature. A true servant of Hashem can see through the veil that everything that happens is because of Hashem. This Embroynic Stem cell research is a way to test us, do we see the beauty of life and value it, or do we just see life as genetic material which can be used as if we were animals.
To be accurate, there was never a ban on stem cell research. There was a ban on government funding of stem cell research, but there was certainly no legal prohibition on it. Private companies were allowed and are allowed to do it. Obama's lifting of this so-called ban, will now have government fund it. Personally, I'm undecided on this issue. A stem cell is not a life (I don't think), it's a potential life, so I have trouble equating it with abortion. The other thing to consider is that these stem-cells are donated to fertility clinics and most will be discarded anyway. Given that they are going to be discarded, isn't it better that they are used for research which will potentially lead to cures of things like multiple sclerosis? I'm not set in my opinion. I've had a hard time with this issue.
To be even more accurate... there was a ban on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research other than the 20 or so lines that already had existed when the ban was enacted.
Regardless this is all a moot point... as Embryonic stem cell research is a farce... since there is FAR more promise and potential in tweaking adult stem cells into a omnipotent state.
-
The issue in Jewish thought seems to me to be very explicit. I have read that organ donation is approved by several prominent Rabbis and I understand this, again because it will save lives. But in the case of Embryonic Stem Cell research it is not proven that anything special will result. The reason that this material will be discarded is not very relevant in my opinion. Every part of us is special, from our souls to our bodies. The principle which makes this research un-kosher, in my opinion, is that all life is like animal life. I believe every cell in my body is a part of me and should be removed from the world when I pass. All human life is precious and if this research causes destruction of potential human beings then I question its ethical foundation. It is scary when people like Hissler Yemach Shemo used such technologies to experiment on Jews and racial theories such as Eugenics. Younger people may not remember that the most intelligent and cultured people can turn into barbarians in a moment.
-
The issue in Jewish thought seems to me to be very explicit. I have read that organ donation is approved by several prominent Rabbis and I understand this, again because it will save lives. But in the case of Embryonic Stem Cell research it is not proven that anything special will result. The reason that this material will be discarded is not very relevant in my opinion. Every part of us is special, from our souls to our bodies. The principle which makes this research un-kosher, in my opinion, is that all life is like animal life. I believe every cell in my body is a part of me and should be removed from the world when I pass. All human life is precious and if this research causes destruction of potential human beings then I question its ethical foundation. It is scary when people like Hissler Yemach Shemo used such technologies to experiment on Jews and racial theories such as Eugenics. Younger people may not remember that the most intelligent and cultured people can turn into barbarians in a moment.
It's a good point. It could lead to something far worse.
-
The issue in Jewish thought seems to me to be very explicit. I have read that organ donation is approved by several prominent Rabbis and I understand this, again because it will save lives. But in the case of Embryonic Stem Cell research it is not proven that anything special will result. The reason that this material will be discarded is not very relevant in my opinion. Every part of us is special, from our souls to our bodies. The principle which makes this research un-kosher, in my opinion, is that all life is like animal life. I believe every cell in my body is a part of me and should be removed from the world when I pass. All human life is precious and if this research causes destruction of potential human beings then I question its ethical foundation. It is scary when people like Hissler Yemach Shemo used such technologies to experiment on Jews and racial theories such as Eugenics. Younger people may not remember that the most intelligent and cultured people can turn into barbarians in a moment.
Muman, with all due respect, this nation WILL come under the WRATH of G-d.
-
Don't 'omnipotent' cells also have the potential to become a person ?
-
What is so very sad about this is that ESC research is no longer viewed amongst many scientists as being a needed area of study, and in fact, is irrelevant.
There are about 200 different types of cells in the human body. The signals that cause these cells to become specialized are being worked out and the complete language of these signals will be known in just a few years. Once that information is at hand there will not be a need for ESCs
Instead, if a organ needs to be replaced, all that will need to be done is to take a cell from that person, any cheek or skin cell will do just fine. That cell will be sent the chemical signals that are the code for the needed cell, say a heart muscle cell. Once this cell has been re-programed, it will divide and a whole batch of heart muscle cells will be sitting in a petri dish waiting to be implanted. Any cell can be re-programed to become any other type of cell in this way. Because the inital cell is from the person who will be getting the newly minted cells, there are no rejection or other issues. Stem cells no longer hold the only, or even the best way to improve medicine.
So, we are killing babies for no reason at all, only to preserve the funding and Jobs of those who would murder a whole generation of children so they can get their fat grants.
-
Very interesting article which states what I was just saying above. I just read this article about ten minutes ago...
http://www.aish.com/spirituality/philosophy/Can_Intellect_Replace_Morality$.asp (http://www.aish.com/spirituality/philosophy/Can_Intellect_Replace_Morality$.asp)
"
Can Intellect Replace Morality?
by Jeff Jacoby
Intelligence is no guarantee of goodness.
Peter Singer has written a new book. The prominent Australian philosopher, a professor of bioethics at Princeton University, argues in The Life You Can Save that residents of the affluent West have it within their power to eradicate extreme Third World poverty and its attendant suffering. By donating money to charity instead of spending it on things we don't really need, he writes, everyone can save lives -- and when you fail to do so, he suggests, "you are leaving a child to die, a child you could have saved."
Singer told the Wall Street Journal last week that he tries to practice what he preaches by giving one-third of his income to "Oxfam and other organizations working in the field." Few of us can give away that much of our earnings, but Singer urges most people to donate between 1 percent and 5 percent of what they make to help the destitute, with those who earn more digging even deeper.
You don't have to be a disciple of Singer's philosophy to admire his commitment to charity, especially when you consider the tightfistedness of some of our leading public figures. I salute Singer's generosity, and sincerely hope that his new book prompts many readers to do more for the needy than they have ever thought about doing before.
And yet I can't help wondering which will ultimately prove more influential -- Singer's efforts to save lives through charity, or the role he has played as an intellectual enabler for the modern culture of death.
In 2005, Foreign Policy marked its 35th anniversary by asking several thinkers to speculate on what ideas or values taken for granted today will vanish in the next 35 years. "The sanctity of life," answered Singer, looking forward to the day when "only a rump of hard-core, know-nothing religious fundamentalists will defend the view that every human life, from conception to death, is sacrosanct." A year earlier, pronouncing "the whole edifice of Judeo-Christian morality . . . terminally ill," Singer had elaborated on his notorious view that it ought to be lawful to kill severely disabled infants. "All I am saying," he told The Independent, "is, why limit the killing to the womb? Nothing magical happens at birth. Of course infanticide needs to be strictly legally controlled and rare -- but it should not be ruled out, any more than abortion."
Perhaps it seems odd that the same individual can be a champion of both saving life through philanthropy and ending life through legalized infanticide. Yet if morality is merely a matter of opinion and preference -- if there is no overarching ethical code that supersedes any value system we can contrive for ourselves -- then why not value the lives of the impoverished above the lives of the disabled? Singer accepts that some of what he says "seems obscene and evil if you are still looking at it through the prism of the old morality." But give up that "old morality," and the objections are easily resolved.
In his Wall Street Journal interview, Singer spoke of dilemmas that may arise in the future when parents are able to select the genetic traits of their offspring. "I would not oppose selecting for intelligence," he says. "We could assume that people of higher intelligence would have good consequences for society."
Could we, though? Does higher intelligence always, or even usually, lead to "good consequences?" Like strength or agility or attractiveness, intelligence is only a gift, not a guarantee -- an asset that can as readily be used to harm others as to help them. Singer's faith in intelligence is consistent with his own life's work, but highly intelligent people are perfectly capable of monstrousness. Reason, education, and intellectual quickness are to be prized, but they are no substitute for good character, kindness, and ethical values. In the 20th century, after all, it was learned intellectuals who signed newspaper ads supporting Stalin, and men with PhDs who planned Hitler's Final Solution.
Intelligence alone will not make the world a better place, and if anyone's career proves the point, it is Singer's. Over the years, he has turned his skill to rationalizing bestiality, proposing a 28-day period during which newborns could be killed, and concluding that breeding children for spare parts is "not . . . something really wrong in itself." And why not? Once you've jettisoned the "old morality," good and evil become just a matter of opinion. "Man without G-d is a beast," wrote Whittaker Chambers, "never more beastly than when he is most intelligent about his beastliness."
This article originally appeared in the Boston Globe.
"
-
The issue in Jewish thought seems to me to be very explicit. I have read that organ donation is approved by several prominent Rabbis and I understand this, again because it will save lives. But in the case of Embryonic Stem Cell research it is not proven that anything special will result. The reason that this material will be discarded is not very relevant in my opinion. Every part of us is special, from our souls to our bodies. The principle which makes this research un-kosher, in my opinion, is that all life is like animal life. I believe every cell in my body is a part of me and should be removed from the world when I pass. All human life is precious and if this research causes destruction of potential human beings then I question its ethical foundation. It is scary when people like Hissler Yemach Shemo used such technologies to experiment on Jews and racial theories such as Eugenics. Younger people may not remember that the most intelligent and cultured people can turn into barbarians in a moment.
To me stem cell research is a bit evil. Firstly it is potential life, secondly if G-d wanted man to have a cure for people with neck injuries, it would have happened already. G-d allowed man to come up with penicillin, G-d allowed man to go to the moon, G-d allowed men to learn how to give life saving surgeries.
Organ transplants, chemo therapy to save cancer victims. Muman, I do agree about G-d testing man, G-d wants to see if man's greed is more powerful than his sense of compassion and morals.
G-d may be watching and thinking; " Yeah, keep it up..I gave you brains to create cures, but those were not enough, you want more and more! "
-
Im pretty upset with the lifting of the ban on embryonic stem cell research. The loss in the value of life is immense. Now people may kill unborn children in order to harvest cells which will extend their lives. There are serious moral and ethical issues which are being completely ignored by an administration and a profession which intends to deny the existence of the Creator of the Universe.
It is especially important for Jews who read this to realize that the aspect of Haman which causes him to hate the Jew is the fact that Amalek denies Hashem and tries to prove that everything that happens in this world is a result of nature. A true servant of Hashem can see through the veil that everything that happens is because of Hashem. This Embroynic Stem cell research is a way to test us, do we see the beauty of life and value it, or do we just see life as genetic material which can be used as if we were animals.
To be accurate, there was never a ban on stem cell research. There was a ban on government funding of stem cell research, but there was certainly no legal prohibition on it. Private companies were allowed and are allowed to do it. Obama's lifting of this so-called ban, will now have government fund it. Personally, I'm undecided on this issue. A stem cell is not a life (I don't think), it's a potential life, so I have trouble equating it with abortion. The other thing to consider is that these stem-cells are donated to fertility clinics and most will be discarded anyway. Given that they are going to be discarded, isn't it better that they are used for research which will potentially lead to cures of things like multiple sclerosis? I'm not set in my opinion. I've had a hard time with this issue.
To be even more accurate... there was a ban on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research other than the 20 or so lines that already had existed when the ban was enacted.
Regardless this is all a moot point... as Embryonic stem cell research is a farce... since there is FAR more promise and potential in tweaking adult stem cells into a omnipotent state.
I agree with the last part of your post 100%. From everything I hear on this issue adult cells are the way to go. I think the shvartza president just wanted to have it on record that he reversed President Bush's decision not to fund any new Embryonic cell research.
-
Im pretty upset with the lifting of the ban on embryonic stem cell research. The loss in the value of life is immense. Now people may kill unborn children in order to harvest cells which will extend their lives. There are serious moral and ethical issues which are being completely ignored by an administration and a profession which intends to deny the existence of the Creator of the Universe.
It is especially important for Jews who read this to realize that the aspect of Haman which causes him to hate the Jew is the fact that Amalek denies Hashem and tries to prove that everything that happens in this world is a result of nature. A true servant of Hashem can see through the veil that everything that happens is because of Hashem. This Embroynic Stem cell research is a way to test us, do we see the beauty of life and value it, or do we just see life as genetic material which can be used as if we were animals.
To be accurate, there was never a ban on stem cell research. There was a ban on government funding of stem cell research, but there was certainly no legal prohibition on it. Private companies were allowed and are allowed to do it. Obama's lifting of this so-called ban, will now have government fund it. Personally, I'm undecided on this issue. A stem cell is not a life (I don't think), it's a potential life, so I have trouble equating it with abortion. The other thing to consider is that these stem-cells are donated to fertility clinics and most will be discarded anyway. Given that they are going to be discarded, isn't it better that they are used for research which will potentially lead to cures of things like multiple sclerosis? I'm not set in my opinion. I've had a hard time with this issue.
To be even more accurate... there was a ban on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research other than the 20 or so lines that already had existed when the ban was enacted.
Regardless this is all a moot point... as Embryonic stem cell research is a farce... since there is FAR more promise and potential in tweaking adult stem cells into a omnipotent state.
yes.
-
What is so very sad about this is that ESC research is no longer viewed amongst many scientists as being a needed area of study, and in fact, is irrelevant.
There are about 200 different types of cells in the human body. The signals that cause these cells to become specialized are being worked out and the complete language of these signals will be known in just a few years. Once that information is at hand there will not be a need for ESCs
Instead, if a organ needs to be replaced, all that will need to be done is to take a cell from that person, any cheek or skin cell will do just fine. That cell will be sent the chemical signals that are the code for the needed cell, say a heart muscle cell. Once this cell has been re-programed, it will divide and a whole batch of heart muscle cells will be sitting in a petri dish waiting to be implanted. Any cell can be re-programed to become any other type of cell in this way. Because the inital cell is from the person who will be getting the newly minted cells, there are no rejection or other issues. Stem cells no longer hold the only, or even the best way to improve medicine.
So, we are killing babies for no reason at all, only to preserve the funding and Jobs of those who would murder a whole generation of children so they can get their fat grants.
yes again!
Let me add this, from Dr. Nancy, via Atlasshrugs.com http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2009/03/stem-cell-decision-predictable-and-unfortunate.html (http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2009/03/stem-cell-decision-predictable-and-unfortunate.html)
It's unnecessary cuz there's no change in this issue. Conservatives don't like embryos created for parts, for destruction, and libs love it because it justifies abortion and discarded fetal products adding some noble cause to their immorality (promiscuity and murder). The whole adult stem cell vs. embryonic is a debate that goes round and round with both sides dug in so you don't get anywhere with that although the greater success does seem to be with adult stem cells. Personally, I think this let's use life to advance life is like saying "they were just going to throw out those Holocaust victims anyway so why not use them for medical experiments...or at least to make a human-skin wallet, you were going to throw them out anyway." Maybe we shouldn't have created human embryos so lightly in the first place, instead of being so comfortable with the way we throw them out. Of course Obama jumped on this, he's a dedicated leftist and cannot advance their godless agenda fast enough. This type of research was already going on, we just didn't want to federally fund it, but we're throwing taxpayer dollars at everything else so...it's all predictable and unfortunate.
Like Ashedina said, "this nation WILL come under the WRATH of G-d."
-
Im pretty upset with the lifting of the ban on embryonic stem cell research. The loss in the value of life is immense. Now people may kill unborn children in order to harvest cells
I'm afraid you do not know what you are talking about. This is not what stem cell research is about AT ALL. No "unborn" babies get "killed" in order to do embryonic stem cell research. In fact, the embryonic stem cell lines that were in use previously (Bush put a ban on deriving additional lines, but not against using the ones already in existence), these were all derived from "leftover" embryos from IVF (In Vitro Fertilization procedure for infertile couples) that were going to be discarded - ie thrown in the trash or frozen indefinitely until they lose potency. The IVF procedure creates many embryos but only one of which is implanted into the female. The rest are thrown in the trash. Rather than throw out the pre-implantation embryos (day 8 or so of post-"conception" development - and in Jewish law, this is NOT yet considered a life - only a potential life), the researchers instead harvest the cells and grow them in petri dishes in order to derive potential treatments and cures that will save lives and relieve suffering, and also lead to a much greater understanding of some of the worst diseases that currently afflict mankind.
There are serious moral and ethical issues which are being completely ignored
That's not true. And morally, stem cell research done responsibly is NOT against halacha. Other religions can say whatever they want, but our moral system - the Torah - does not oppose this research.
It is actually Bush's ban that really had no basis and strongly hampered research efforts for no particularly enunciated reason. There was NOT a ban on IVF procedures, while there are certainly plenty of kids that can be adopted by infertile couples. And yet there was a ban on using the leftover embryos instead of throwing them in the trash. That was completely illogical, and ignored true moral principles to appeal to ignorant masses.
It is especially important for Jews who read this to realize that the aspect of Haman which causes him to hate the Jew is the fact that Amalek denies Hashem and tries to prove that everything that happens in this world is a result of nature. A true servant of Hashem can see through the veil that everything that happens is because of Hashem.
None of this contradicts a person who wholeheartedly wants to help people (ya know, chesed), and a Jew who works within what is permitted by halacha in order to help people by working in scientific research or the medical field.
This Embroynic Stem cell research is a way to test us, do we see the beauty of life and value it,
One can see the beauty of the nature G-d created and seek to explore it, understand it, and use the tools G-d has provided us with in order to improve lives and build a better world. This is a way to enlighten one's soul and beautify one's life experience as well as the world. As long as this is within halachic standards, what is the problem?
or do we just see life as genetic material which can be used as if we were animals.
Not sure where you were going with this, but this is not at all connected to the topic at hand.
-
To be even more accurate... there was a ban on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research other than the 20 or so lines that already had existed when the ban was enacted.
Regardless this is all a moot point... as Embryonic stem cell research is a farce... since there is FAR more promise and potential in tweaking adult stem cells into a omnipotent state.
This reflects the misinformation coming out of the "stem cells = abortion" camp, but being that I know a fair amount about this subject, I'll let you know that this is simply not true, and the ability of ES cells is incomparable. To reverse adult stem cells back to an ES-like state is a difficult task indeed, and if you notice, the adult stem cell only becomes AS USEFUL as an ES cell when it is transformed to an ES-like state. That just goes to show how limited it is as an adult cell (for certain research). And I know for a fact there are limitations to the adult cells, which is why they even want to induce to a totipotent state in the first place.
But when you say Embryonic stem cell research is a farce
This is weak and unfounded propaganda. Rather sad.
-
These liberal Obama has no regard for human life.
-
The issue in Jewish thought seems to me to be very explicit.
Seems? Looks can be deceiving. Bring a source.
But in the case of Embryonic Stem Cell research it is not proven that anything special will result.
Yes, and until they discovered/tested it, penicillin wasn't proven to result in anything special either.
The reason that this material will be discarded is not very relevant in my opinion.
The choice is garbage can, vs. life-saving medical research. Let's send it to the labs instead of the garbage can.
I believe every cell in my body is a part of me and should be removed from the world when I pass.
Interesting. Did you know that millions of cells in your body die each second? And that your bone marrow produces about 200 billion new red blood cells each day?
It is scary when people like Hissler Yemach Shemo used such technologies to experiment on Jews and racial theories such as Eugenics.
He wasn't doing embryonic stem cell research. The things he did were evil. Why would you make such a comparison? Is all science evil because the Nazis used "science" to do evil things? Please keep in mind that there are standards in place for modern science and that westernized nations follow the type of protocols that INCLUDE ethics and exclude certain practices which are deemed crude, inhumane, cruel, etc. Even for animal research, there are protocols in the US for how to treat rats and mice. A person cannot just abuse them. Or act on one's whim. So don't make a sweeping condemnation of science. (BTW, the Rambam, Ramban, and other great chachamim were famous physicians who employed all the greatest science of their day to treat people and earn a parnassa with which to learn the Torah). Rather than sweeping generalizations and comparisons to Nazis, instead lets focus on this one issue and tell me why it is right or wrong. Frankly, I don't see a moral problem with it at all.
-
What is so very sad about this is that ESC research is no longer viewed amongst many scientists as being a needed area of study, and in fact, is irrelevant.
You couldn't be more wrong. The only "scientists" saying this are the ones who are opposed to using ES cells due to their religious convictions. Convictions which I as a Jew do not agree with. It may be wishful thinking, but objectively speaking, it is simply not true at all that ES cells are not a promising field of study that could lead to many many cutting edge discoveries to advance medicine. They still are, and those who pushed for the funding for this research were not doing so just to "be evil." They believe in the research, that it can work, and that it is the best option.
So, we are killing babies for no reason at all, only to preserve the funding and Jobs of those who would murder a whole generation of children so they can get their fat grants.
Nobody is killing babies. Except those who have abortions. What you said is grossly ignorant and represents a fundamental misunderstanding of what science is and how it works. No one is getting grants in order to kill babies or kill anything.
-
G-d may be watching and thinking; " Yeah, keep it up..I gave you brains to create cures, ..............but those were not enough, you want more and more! "
Yes, brains with which to study the promising attributes and abilities of embryonic stem cells which G-d has imbued them with in order for us to create cures. We weren't supposed to close our eyes to penicillin, so why should we close our eyes to this?
-
It's unnecessary cuz there's no change in this issue. Conservatives don't like embryos created for parts, for destruction, and libs love it because it justifies abortion and discarded fetal
Yeah, someone who says "cuz" is real credible. What a professional!
Interesting how she says FETAL. Embryonic is by definition NOT FETAL, but EMBRYONIC. An embryo is not a fetus. A week-old embryo is certainly not even close to being a fetus.
Hold on while I quote Muamar Qaddafi, he's a real expert and can add some credibility to this issue for sure! {/sarcasm}
-
Kahane Was Right, I can't believe you. This is murder and it is absolutely indefensible under any religion. These unborn human beings are spare-parts reservoirs? This is exactly the attitude that led to six million Jews being fogged to death in insecticide chambers and burned alive. I am 100% with Muman on this issue.
-
Kahane Was Right, I can't believe you. This is murder and it is absolutely indefensible under any religion. These unborn human beings are spare-parts reservoirs? This is exactly the attitude that led to six million Jews being fogged to death in insecticide chambers and burned alive. I am 100% with Muman on this issue.
Would you drop the Nazi comparisons already. Abortion is wrong. That is against halacha. Stem cell research is not.
You obviously have not read a single thing I wrote in this thread. Because otherwise there is no way to conclude what you wrote!
Throwing in the garbage can vs. using for medical research - that is the choice. The attitude to throw in the garbage can is simply blind and illogical. The attitude to put an embryo to use instead of throwing it in the garbage can is an attitude that led to Jews being murdered? Don't lecture to me about the Shoah (it doesn't intimidate me, and it in fact makes your position look even more untenable resorting to such cheap, wormlike tactics), and don't tell me about the Jewish religion - "under any religion" - you are in no place to start lecturing on any religion other than your own. You are clearly clueless! Stem cell research is not murder. And it's not abortion either.
-
Save it for someone who cares. Your views here are nothing short of hideous.
-
To be even more accurate... there was a ban on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research other than the 20 or so lines that already had existed when the ban was enacted.
Regardless this is all a moot point... as Embryonic stem cell research is a farce... since there is FAR more promise and potential in tweaking adult stem cells into a omnipotent state.
This reflects the misinformation coming out of the "stem cells = abortion" camp, but being that I know a fair amount about this subject, I'll let you know that this is simply not true, and the ability of ES cells is incomparable. To reverse adult stem cells back to an ES-like state is a difficult task indeed, and if you notice, the adult stem cell only becomes AS USEFUL as an ES cell when it is transformed to an ES-like state. That just goes to show how limited it is as an adult cell (for certain research). And I know for a fact there are limitations to the adult cells, which is why they even want to induce to a totipotent state in the first place.
But when you say Embryonic stem cell research is a farce
This is weak and unfounded propaganda. Rather sad.
I too know quite a bit about this subject, and you woulda have been right 5 years ago. but now even the most so-called progressive people in the stem-cell world have conceded that this IS NO LONGER THE CASE. There are SO MANY methods in the pipeline to reprogram adult cells to either pluripotent or potentially-omnipotent forms, that by the time embryonic stem cells become of real use... there is a VERY high probability that they will be prohibitively useless since the same will be able to be done with these new techniques for FAR cheaper and practical and without ever needing such questionable and costly methods such as therapeutic cloning.
And its not just 1 method in the pipeline.. .its a half dozen.
Heres an example (One of many) of its practical use. Again there are MORE than JUST this technique.. but this one is the furthest along.. since its showing huge promise in Humans.
http://www.examiner.com/x-4603-Boston-Health-News-Examiner~y2009m3d5-Stem-cell-breakthrough-spells-hope-for-patients-with-Parkinsons-disease
By the way.... dont assume that we all think exactly the same in this forum. I too used to be very much in favor of embryonic stem cell research.. as I am FAR more secular than many here. I also am a member of the imminst.org and they have been pushing embryonic stem cell research forever... HOWEVER... many of the members are conceding that it may NEVER be practical... and may even be a waste of time... BECAUSE there seems to be SO MUCH MORE potential with these new breakthroughs of reprogramming.
Even the left-wing media has stopped pushing this as a major issue. They have been embarrassed by the extraordinary progress of adult cell re-programing... and find it harder and harder to justify their position.
-
People! Let's stop the fighting.
If embryonic stem cells were so useful, how is it that there hasn't been news of private drug companies successfully making use of them? If they have, and I missed it, please provide a link, or links. I personally think this whole argument about government funding for ESC research is nothing but a back handed way to keep abortion on demand lega.
On another note, there are also umbilical chord stem cells, which may also be promising. What do you guys think of that?
-
Of course I am not against umbilical stem cells or adult stem cells.
-
People! Let's stop the fighting.
If embryonic stem cells were so useful, how is it that there hasn't been news of private drug companies successfully making use of them?
Because that is not easy! Without the govt funding, that was near impossible. And that's the whole reason behind the push to remove the ban. The universities and big institutions are where the big research is at. You can't just believe everything you hear. It is completely irrational to say (as one person in this thread claimed) that on the one hand, the govt ban didn't at all hamper the research, since it could have been done by private companies, and on the other hand, where are all the private company success stories? Obviously, it was hampered. And in truth, when someone makes that argument, they really highlight the pointlessness of the ban. They are saying 'hey for all you people who are against the ban, look private companies could have done x y and z and still done the es cell research' - well, in that case, stop limiting these people and let them do the research full force.
ESC research has nothing to do with abortion. If you can't see them as separate issues, you simply don't understand the ES cell issue and have been misinformed by the propaganda that comes out of the anti-stem-cell-research camp (often religious propaganda or "republican" talking points).
-
The reason why stem-cell corporations had to go to Uncle Sam with their pockets pulled, asking for a handout is because their so-called research had led to nothing and not enough investors were financing them as a result. They feared that they would go under if it wasn't for Uncle Sam bailing them out. Stem-cell programs have been being funded privately though for more than a decade (despite the propaganda saying otherwise), and has led to absolute jack squat in the way of medical cures.
Spending money on "stem-cell research" is just like the AIDS rathole.
-
that by the time embryonic stem cells become of real use... there is a VERY high probability that ...
What do you mean by the time they become of real use? They already were (at the time Bush banned new lines) and are of real use. Overnight cures are not to be expected. And that certainly is not the case with adult cells either.
BECAUSE there seems to be SO MUCH MORE potential with these new breakthroughs of reprogramming.
If there is potential with adult cells, great. And if umbillical cord cells, also great. Neither of these take away from the potential that also exists with ES cells. All should be worked on. In the case of ES cells, if it is not immoral, there is no reason to stop working on it, just because other areas of research are also promising. That's like saying, stop studying chemistry because genetics is all the rage right now and biochemical genetics will be the foundation of modern science in the next generation. Great, but we still should not stop studying chemistry. So it comes down to, is chemistry (or in our case, ES cells) wrong to study or is it not? From my standpoint, it is not wrong. So therefore there is no reason to prevent it. And there will be advance in the field of chemistry as well. But again, I do not agree with you that adult stem cell field has surpassed the potential of ES cell research.
Even the left-wing media has stopped pushing this as a major issue.
They were never greatly behind this issue other than the token Bush-bashing, which they will do for any of his decisions. It quickly passed away and was never a major sticking point. They were much too obsessed with Iraq wars, tax cuts, halliburton, 9/11 and a whole array of other issues to stick him on.
They have been embarrassed by the extraordinary progress of adult cell re-programing...
There is nothing embarrassing about this. This progress is also positive. Very positive indeed.
and find it harder and harder to justify their position.
I'm not much concerned with the "left wing media's" position on this issue or what they feel they can justify or not justify. A bunch of ignorant self-obsessed money-crazed America-hating fiends are irrelevant to this issue. It's the scientists who can justify and have been justifying their position for a whole array of reasons since the beginning. And none of this has changed just because the media shut up about it, ceased giving it attention, found other issues to hammer away at their whipping boy (bush) with instead, or because there was success in another direction. The crux of the issue is, is it right or wrong. If you don't find it wrong or immoral, there is no sane rational or logical reason to prevent this type of research. And it's not as if the govt is going to now start giving grants to things they don't think will work. In individual cases, if a submitted grant proposal has demonstrable potential, just like any other project for any other type of grant, including an adult stem cell project, it will get funding. If not, not.
-
The reason why stem-cell corporations had to go to Uncle Sam with their pockets pulled, asking for a handout is because their so-called research had led to nothing and not enough investors were financing them as a result. They feared that they would go under if it wasn't for Uncle Sam bailing them out. Stem-cell programs have been being funded privately though for more than a decade (despite the propaganda saying otherwise), and has led to absolute jack squat in the way of medical cures.
Spending money on "stem-cell research" is just like the AIDS rathole.
As usual, all rhetoric and no substance. This is a display of a fundamental misunderstanding of what science is and how it works. Ignorance is not bliss, but I guess from someone who is uninformed (except by propaganda) and has no experience in the field, I can't expect too much more (especially not with today's education system)....
-
To be even more accurate... there was a ban on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research other than the 20 or so lines that already had existed when the ban was enacted.
Regardless this is all a moot point... as Embryonic stem cell research is a farce... since there is FAR more promise and potential in tweaking adult stem cells into a omnipotent state.
This reflects the misinformation coming out of the "stem cells = abortion" camp, but being that I know a fair amount about this subject, I'll let you know that this is simply not true, and the ability of ES cells is incomparable. To reverse adult stem cells back to an ES-like state is a difficult task indeed, and if you notice, the adult stem cell only becomes AS USEFUL as an ES cell when it is transformed to an ES-like state. That just goes to show how limited it is as an adult cell (for certain research). And I know for a fact there are limitations to the adult cells, which is why they even want to induce to a totipotent state in the first place.
But when you say Embryonic stem cell research is a farce
This is weak and unfounded propaganda. Rather sad.
As I said in my last post, Stem cells of any type will very soon not be needed to treat any type of disease, it will be much more simple to simply re program existing cells of any type to the required cell type.
-
I have ambivalent feelings about this issue. I often wonder, if I were the victim of some dreaded disease/illness, would I support it? I can imagine people who are so desperate for answers.
Kahane-Was-Right BT, why isn't money from the private sector and charitable donations enough?
Due to the controversy and debate surrounding embryonic stem cell research, shouldn't the government stay out of it?
Let some of the HollyWeirdos put their money where there mouth is or use their fame to raise the funds.
-
that by the time embryonic stem cells become of real use... there is a VERY high probability that ...
What do you mean by the time they become of real use? They already were (at the time Bush banned new lines) and are of real use. Overnight cures are not to be expected. And that certainly is not the case with adult cells either.
BECAUSE there seems to be SO MUCH MORE potential with these new breakthroughs of reprogramming.
If there is potential with adult cells, great. And if umbillical cord cells, also great. Neither of these take away from the potential that also exists with ES cells. All should be worked on. In the case of ES cells, if it is not immoral, there is no reason to stop working on it, just because other areas of research are also promising. That's like saying, stop studying chemistry because genetics is all the rage right now and biochemical genetics will be the foundation of modern science in the next generation. Great, but we still should not stop studying chemistry. So it comes down to, is chemistry (or in our case, ES cells) wrong to study or is it not? From my standpoint, it is not wrong. So therefore there is no reason to prevent it. And there will be advance in the field of chemistry as well. But again, I do not agree with you that adult stem cell field has surpassed the potential of ES cell research.
Even the left-wing media has stopped pushing this as a major issue.
They were never greatly behind this issue other than the token Bush-bashing, which they will do for any of his decisions. It quickly passed away and was never a major sticking point. They were much too obsessed with Iraq wars, tax cuts, halliburton, 9/11 and a whole array of other issues to stick him on.
They have been embarrassed by the extraordinary progress of adult cell re-programing...
There is nothing embarrassing about this. This progress is also positive. Very positive indeed.
and find it harder and harder to justify their position.
I'm not much concerned with the "left wing media's" position on this issue or what they feel they can justify or not justify. A bunch of ignorant self-obsessed money-crazed America-hating fiends are irrelevant to this issue. It's the scientists who can justify and have been justifying their position for a whole array of reasons since the beginning. And none of this has changed just because the media shut up about it, ceased giving it attention, found other issues to hammer away at their whipping boy (bush) with instead, or because there was success in another direction. The crux of the issue is, is it right or wrong. If you don't find it wrong or immoral, there is no sane rational or logical reason to prevent this type of research. And it's not as if the govt is going to now start giving grants to things they don't think will work. In individual cases, if a submitted grant proposal has demonstrable potential, just like any other project for any other type of grant, including an adult stem cell project, it will get funding. If not, not.
I think that the potential of ESC has been vastly over rated. To date there have not been any real widespread clnical use of ESCs. Why not just concentrate on a more effective methiod from the start?
-
"Propaganda"? ROTFLMAO. :::D You have clearly been falling hook, line, and sinker for eight years of mass-media Bush-bashing propaganda on the stem-cell issue. (Not that Bush was perfect--he should have banned stem-cell research entirely, but I digress). The fact is that not even any animal therapies (which require a much lesser required threshhold for proof of effectiveness and safety than human therapies) have come out of ESCR so far. Why have no dogs or cats been cured of paralysis? Why hasn't rhesus or chimpanzee diabetes been reversed?
-
"Propaganda"? ROTFLMAO. :::D You have clearly been falling hook, line, and sinker for eight years of mass-media Bush-bashing propaganda on the stem-cell issue. (Not that Bush was perfect--he should have banned stem-cell research entirely, but I digress). The fact is that not even any animal therapies (which require a much lesser required threshhold for proof of effectiveness and safety than human therapies) have come out of ESCR so far. Why have no dogs or cats been cured of paralysis? Why hasn't rhesus or chimpanzee diabetes been reversed?
I am laughing right along with you, C.F.
KWR-BT needs to do a little homework.
-
KWRBT,
I admit I am not fully versed in the relevant Halacha but I will study it more. In my understanding the issue is the value of human life. Through this ESCR it seems that the value of life goes down, not increased, as it appears you suggest. I am fully supportive of technology which is used ethically but I often believe that scientists operate in a moral vaccuum because their 'morals' must be scientifically proven. Judaism is not based on scientific conclusions or hypotheses but instead are grounded in Torah. What is essential to understand is "In the image of Hashem" and as a result we learn that all life is precious.
I will learn more about halacha before I comment on it. I still hold to my original statement that there is something wrong with ESCR morally.
-
I found this @ torah.org:
http://www.torah.org/features/secondlook/stemcell.html
"
...
JEWISH LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS
We begin the outline of the Jewish legal approach to stem cell research by stressing some general overarching principles. In contrast with other religions, Judaism has no problem with "playing G-d," provided we do so according to His rules as expressed by authentic Jewish legal mandate. Far from being shunned, "playing G-d" in the Jewish tradition is, in fact, a religious imperative: the concept of emulating G-d is implicit in the mandate to heal and provide effective medical relief wherever possible. Of note, the only two "professions" ascribed to G-d Himself are those of teaching and healing. By teaching and/or healing, we fulfill the obligation to "play G-d." There's no reason that microscopic manipulation of a faulty genetic blueprint should be any different than surgical manipulation of a defective macroscope -- that is, visible to the unaided eye -- tissue or organ. Normative Jewish law sanctions -- nay, encourages -- medical intervention to correct both congenital and acquired defects, and makes no distinction between stem and somatic (body) cell tissues.
The crucial distinction here is between the permissible act of correcting a defect and the forbidden act of attempting to improve on G-d's creations (generally proscribed by the laws of cross-breeding). For example, it would be permitted, were it possible, to correct the genetic defect which leads to Down's syndrome, but manipulating genes to produce a "perfect-bodied" six-footer with blue eyes would be prohibited.
There would, therefore, be no Jewish legal problem with using stem cells derived from adult tissue. Similarly, it would appear that using cells from umbilical cord tissue would be permissible. A rather minor concern here might be the following: May one have umbilical tissue collected and frozen so that the cells will be available in case one requires stem cell therapy sometime in the future? Is this degree of effort, in trying to ensure one's health, appropriate or excessive?
While there are few Jewish legal objections to deriving the stem cells from adult or umbilical cord tissue, the problems arise, however, with deriving stem cells from the embryonic tissue.
Post-implantation embryonic tissue (that is an embryo already implanted into the uterine wall) is after all, an early fetus; clearly no sanction would be given to aborting a fetus in order to obtain stem cell tissue. Even were fetal tissue necessary to provide life-sustaining therapy for a patient, no sanction would be given to sacrifice an innocent fetus even in the interest of saving another life. The only exception to this rule is the obligation to forfeit the life of the "non-innocent" fetus when its continued existence constitutes a danger to its mother by virtue of the fetus's pursuer ("rodef") status.
Even fetal life before the 40th day of gestation -- which is considered "mere water" -- could not be aborted in order to obtain stem cell tissue. Prior to 40 days, a miscarried fetus does not trigger birth-related purity issues, and therefore is of lesser status than a more mature fetus. (There is a large body of rabbinical writings regarding the 40-day status of a fetus.)...
TOWARD THE FUTURE
The prime source of embryonic stem cell tissue is embryos that have not been implanted into the uterine wall. As discussed above, they are usually the "by-products," spare embryos left aside during in vitro fertilization in order not to dangerously overload the mother's uterus. The Jewish legal status of these spare, non-implanted embryos is somewhat unclear. Some rabbinical opinions suggest that in addition to the 40-day milestone, an embryo doesn't reach fetal status until it is implanted into the uterus. Prior to that, while still in a petri dish, or other artificial medium, it cannot develop into a viable fetus. Therefore such early embryos have no real life potential at all and they're not considered alive. Consequently, there would be no Jewish legal opposition to disposing of them, researching on them, or deriving stem cell tissue from them.
The status of pre-implantation embryos has another potentially important Jewish legal consequence. Pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) offers a promising approach to prevent the birth of genetically defective children. By studying embryos before implantation into the uterus, it is possible to identify those defective genes. By selecting only genetically intact embryos for implantation, the development of genetically defective fetuses would be avoided. Assuming the pre-implanted embryo has not reached the level of a fetus, Jewish legal sanction may be possible.
The ethical issues raised by stem cell research and therapy are, of course, not only of interest to Jews. In an unprecedented national broadcast, President Bush defined some fairly restrictive regulations. Just recently the administration argued strongly in favor of banning all research into human cloning. Evidently the crossroads of medical science and the generation of life itself raises fears and genuine concern in the minds of many thinking people.
It appears that Jewish legal concerns may be more permissive than is generally understood. Clearly, it behooves us, as Jews, to avail ourselves of whatever Torah and scientific knowledge we can -- not only as we try to find the Jewish legal guidance for ourselves, but perhaps equally importantly -- as we strive to fulfill our national mandate to be a Light Unto the Nations -- to help shed light on these vexing issues for society at large.
"
-
Don't 'omnipotent' cells also have the potential to become a person ?
I think you mean pluripotent, and yes even if you create stem cells from adults or other ethical sources, they could potentially be grown into embryos depending on how they are tweaked. It's quite strange.
I have been excited about stem cells from ethical sources and I support that research as long as they're careful with it.
Even though I've heard some good arguments about embryonic stem cells it just feels incredibly wrong to me, to create an embryo and then not to implant it in a womb. Even when I try to think about how the embryos will be discarded anyway I still have this strong sense that this is absolutely against G-d to do that. It would be good if they could cure diabetes and other illnesses by using ethical sources of stem cells rather than killing embryos already created.
All the frozen embryos should be given up for adoption, not discarded.
I'm also against Pre-implanation diagnosis because it allows embryos to be created and then killed if they don't have the desirable traits.
-
It seems to me that the smart thing is to invest mostly in adult stem cell research, however I can imagine that embryonic stem cells are still required for such research (for example to compare the manipulated adult stem cells to the embryonic ones).
-
http://www.wesleyjsmith.com/blog/2009/03/untold-story-radical-obama-also.html
(http://www.wesleyjsmith.com/blog/2009/03/untold-story-radical-obama-also.html)
Monday, March 09, 2009
The Untold Story: Radical Obama Also Rescinds Executive Order for Alternatives to ESCR
Wesley Smith
We all know that President Obama rescinded the Bush funding restrictions for ESCR. But that isn't all he did. He also rescinded Executive Order 13435 of June 20, 2007. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Removing-Barriers-to-Responsible-Scientific-Research-Involving-Human-Stem-Cells/ (http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Removing-Barriers-to-Responsible-Scientific-Research-Involving-Human-Stem-Cells/)
What is that? Of course, the Administration didn't have the candor or courage to publicize this part of his nasty work, but the now dead order explicitly required funding for "alternative methods," such as the new IPSCs, which offer so much promise without the ethical contentiousness. For more on that late executive order, see SHS, "Bush to Fund Stem Cell 'Alternatives' Research http://www.wesleyjsmith.com/blog/2007/06/bush-to-fund-stem-cell-alternatives.html (http://www.wesleyjsmith.com/blog/2007/06/bush-to-fund-stem-cell-alternatives.html).) Alternative methods are one of the few areas in which we can all row in the same direction, which I thought this president wanted to do.
I can think of only two reasons for this action, for which I saw no advocacy either in the election or during the first weeks of the Administration: First, vindictiveness against all things "Bush" or policies considered by the Left to be "pro life;" and second, a desire to get the public to see unborn human life as a mere corn crop ripe for the harvest.
So much for taking the politics out of science!
-
clause from the Bush Executive Order:
(d) human embryos and fetuses, as living members of the human species, are not raw materials to be exploited or commodities to be bought and sold.
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/pdf/07-3112.pdf (http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/pdf/07-3112.pdf)
-
Don't 'omnipotent' cells also have the potential to become a person ?
These terms can means something completely different in different contexts... but I am just using them for how they are generally used in stem cells.
(Pluri means more than one)
Pluripotent ... means the stem cells can be changed into many but not all types of stem cells. IE..... A pluripotent stem cells can change into a nerve cell OR muscle cells Or Bone Cells... etc.
(omni means ALL)
OMNI-potent (aka Toti-potent) means they can change into ALL types of stem cells including extraembryonic (Placentia, etc)
Here is a list from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell
* Totipotent (a.k.a omnipotent) stem cells can differentiate into embryonic and extraembryonic cell types. Such cells can construct a complete, viable, organism.[4] These cells are produced from the fusion of an egg and sperm cell. Cells produced by the first few divisions of the fertilized egg are also totipotent.[citation needed]
* Pluripotent stem cells are the descendants of totipotent cells and can differentiate into nearly all cells,[4] i.e. cells derived from any of the three germ layers.[5]
* Multipotent stem cells can differentiate into a number of cells, but only those of a closely related family of cells.[4]
* Oligopotent stem cells can differentiate into only a few cells, such as lymphoid or myeloid stem cells.[4]
* Unipotent cells can produce only one cell type, their own,[4] but have the property of self-renewal which distinguishes them from non-stem cells (e.g. muscle stem cells).
-
The crux of the issue is, is it right or wrong. If you don't find it wrong or immoral, there is no sane rational or logical reason to prevent this type of research. And it's not as if the govt is going to now start giving grants to things they don't think will work. In individual cases, if a submitted grant proposal has demonstrable potential, just like any other project for any other type of grant, including an adult stem cell project, it will get funding. If not, not.
Your barking up the wrong tree here. I am in the minority here... and I DONT beleive it is unethical.
HOWEVER.... I think 99% of the public and the media DONT understand whats going on... If you ask the average person.. .they would say... umm.. yeahhh... Bush banned stem cells research. The more accurate way of looking at it is.... Bush limited federal funds to emryonic stem cell research using only the 20 stem cell lines available. And this research has been abandoned by almost everyone in the stem cell community regardless of what country they are doing the research in.
Case in point:
George Daley, made headlines by testifying in front of a U.S. Senate committee only three years ago that Adult stem cell reprogramming was “extremely high-risk” and would more than likely never achieve the pluripotency that embryonic stem cells.
Daley has now completely changed his position... and beleives that Induced pluripotency is showing far more promise.. and that embryonic stem cell cloning is going nowhere.
As a result, Daley and other scientists have progressed further using reprogrammed cells “in six months than he had in years toiling over embryonic stem cells,” according to BioEdge.
Obama and the Dems are pushing this for political reasons ONLY!!!!! The public is being fooled. THAT is why this is a farce. (Sorry for the strong wording... but its true)
-
"Propaganda"? ROTFLMAO. :::D You have clearly been falling hook, line, and sinker for eight years of mass-media Bush-bashing propaganda on the stem-cell issue. (Not that Bush was perfect--he should have banned stem-cell research entirely, but I digress). The fact is that not even any animal therapies (which require a much lesser required threshhold for proof of effectiveness and safety than human therapies) have come out of ESCR so far.
This is not true at all. There were many animal studies going on prior to the ban, and after the ban they continued using the stem cell lines that were not banned. Problem is, after too many passages of the same cell line, it can accumulate genetic mutations and damages that make using the same cell lines for many years problematic. This is part of the problem with the ban. Of course, no one is going to rush into human studies until they perfect the techniques in animal studies. This just proves how responsible the researchers are that they are not going to jump the gun with flashy superficial treatments without first proving them solidly in animals. Whatever you are saying about ES cells the same can be said about adult stem cells (or adult stem cells which they've tried to revert to an embryonic level of plasticity). If ES cell research is a "farce," then adult stem cell research is also a farce. GET IT? They both try to achieve the same type of results. Only the adult stem cells require an additional first step - that is, induce them into a biological state that mimicks that of ES cells!
Science takes time.
-
Don't 'omnipotent' cells also have the potential to become a person ?
Even though I've heard some good arguments about embryonic stem cells it just feels incredibly wrong to me, to create an embryo and then not to implant it in a womb. Even when I try to think about how the embryos will be discarded anyway I still have this strong sense that this is absolutely against G-d to do that.
It may feel "wrong," but it is a fact that that happens. Now the question is how to deal with it. The embryo's are created for a different purpose, and then will be thrown out. So why not make use of them instead of letting them be thrown away.
It would be good if they could cure diabetes and other illnesses by using ethical sources of stem cells rather than killing embryos already created.
Yes that would be good, but also not 100% necessary, and also not possible.
All the frozen embryos should be given up for adoption, not discarded.
How does one "adopt" an embryo? You do realize that frozen embryos would have to be IMPLANTED into a female surrogate mother in order that she can than carry it to term and give birth, right? Right now, the frozen embryos are kept frozen until they perish on their own (lose potency). And usually the "extra" embryos from IVF procedures are considered less likely to be able to carry to term if I understand correctly.
I'm also against Pre-implanation diagnosis because it allows embryos to be created and then killed if they don't have the desirable traits.
This is insane. If you are not against IVF procedure, then to be against this is completely illogical and coldhearted. Once someone is doing IVF, out of the set of embryos created for that purpose, they might as well implant the one that is most likely to survive and most healthy genetically (ie, no debilitating diseases or conditions that will prevent healthy birth). We are not talking here about selecting a tall one vs. a short one. We are talking whether the baby will survive or have a debilitating genetic disease or not.
-
clause from the Bush Executive Order:
(d) human embryos and fetuses, as living members of the human species, are not raw materials to be exploited or commodities to be bought and sold.
Sorry to inform you, but under Jewish law, an embryo is not considered a living human being or member of society. Under basic rational thought, it seems it wouldn't be either.
-
The crux of the issue is, is it right or wrong. If you don't find it wrong or immoral, there is no sane rational or logical reason to prevent this type of research. And it's not as if the govt is going to now start giving grants to things they don't think will work. In individual cases, if a submitted grant proposal has demonstrable potential, just like any other project for any other type of grant, including an adult stem cell project, it will get funding. If not, not.
And this research has been abandoned by almost everyone in the stem cell community regardless of what country they are doing the research in.
No it hasn't. And those who did "abandon" it, or made no progress, were forced to do so because of the difficulties of being limited to those 20 already-existing lines!
If you admit that you don't find it unethical, then again as I said before, there is really no defense or possible explanation to limiting that field of research!
And calling a type of biology research a farce, is a farce in itself! It shows you have not worked in science and don't understand how it works. I don't know how many times I have to say this.
-
It may feel "wrong," but it is a fact that that happens. Now the question is how to deal with it. The embryo's are created for a different purpose, and then will be thrown out. So why not make use of them instead of letting them be thrown away.
I think that the parents of these embryos should have two choices available to them
1. To implant them in the mother
2. To donate them to another couple
Discarding them should never be an option and I think it's horrible that this is even allowed to happen. Just because an embryo is implanted doesn't mean it will survive, but I think that it should be given that chance at life, rather than discarded or destroyed.
Yes that would be good, but also not 100% necessary, and also not possible.
Why is it not possible? What if cells from ethical sources were grown to produce human insulin in a diabetic patient, for example? There are a lot of sources of stem cells that don't involve embryos, such as teratomas, adult stem cells, umbilical stem cells, stem cells from newborns, etc.
How does one "adopt" an embryo? You do realize that frozen embryos would have to be IMPLANTED into a female surrogate mother in order that she can than carry it to term and give birth, right? Right now, the frozen embryos are kept frozen until they perish on their own (lose potency). And usually the "extra" embryos from IVF procedures are considered less likely to be able to carry to term if I understand correctly.
There are actually embryo adoption agencies where couples can adopt the embryos and then attempt to implant them. It's better to give them that chance at life than to let them die or discard them.
This is insane. If you are not against IVF procedure, then to be against this is completely illogical and coldhearted. Once someone is doing IVF, out of the set of embryos created for that purpose, they might as well implant the one that is most likely to survive and most healthy genetically (ie, no debilitating diseases or conditions that will prevent healthy birth). We are not talking here about selecting a tall one vs. a short one. We are talking whether the baby will survive or have a debilitating genetic disease or not.
I don't think it's cold hearted to say that disabled people have the same rights as non-disabled people.
-
The crux of the issue is, is it right or wrong. If you don't find it wrong or immoral, there is no sane rational or logical reason to prevent this type of research. And it's not as if the govt is going to now start giving grants to things they don't think will work. In individual cases, if a submitted grant proposal has demonstrable potential, just like any other project for any other type of grant, including an adult stem cell project, it will get funding. If not, not.
And this research has been abandoned by almost everyone in the stem cell community regardless of what country they are doing the research in.
No it hasn't. And those who did "abandon" it, or made no progress, were forced to do so because of the difficulties of being limited to those 20 already-existing lines!
You are completely making this up. Please do some research before you say this.
9 other nations abandoned their failed attempts to produce viable tissue and organ transplants from Embryonic stem cells derived from human embryos; they are Portugal, Austria, Brazil, Italy, Germany, Norway, Israel, Thailand and Singapore. I beleive that each of those countries had NO morally based compunction regarding the destruction of life that sways some people’s opinion and causes controversy regarding embryonic stem cell research. They did not dispose of it for religious reasons, they abandoned that research was getting nowhere!!! They would LOVE to get a HUGE advantage over the U.S. in this field... because of our limitations... but they just didnt see it getting anywhere.
Company after Company that has been specializing in embryonic stem cell research has been folding or switching over to adult stem cells as investors and sceintists are seeing FAR more porgress in adult stem cells.
Remember that company ESI that was started by the guy who invented dolly the sheep and who was such a HUGE E.S.C. advocate? He was able to which raise 100 million dollars from the Singapore Government and the Australian Stem Cell Centre (a private investment group ), and other sources... and after 5 years of absolutely no success, they have abandon the Embryonic stem cell research altogether since its jUST NOT PRACTICAL and its getting nowhere!! And it makes more sense to focus on something that is showing HUGE promise.
Again.. induced pluripotent stem cells, or iPS cells have gotten to the point where they are INDISTINGUISHABLE (Their words, not mine) from Embryonic stem cells AND they are 1000x more practical and scalable AND they are never rejected by a patient's immune system.
-
It does seem like tissue from another person would run a huge risk of rejection just like with any other transplant.
-
The crux of the issue is, is it right or wrong. If you don't find it wrong or immoral, there is no sane rational or logical reason to prevent this type of research. And it's not as if the govt is going to now start giving grants to things they don't think will work. In individual cases, if a submitted grant proposal has demonstrable potential, just like any other project for any other type of grant, including an adult stem cell project, it will get funding. If not, not.
And this research has been abandoned by almost everyone in the stem cell community regardless of what country they are doing the research in.
No it hasn't. And those who did "abandon" it, or made no progress, were forced to do so because of the difficulties of being limited to those 20 already-existing lines!
If you admit that you don't find it unethical, then again as I said before, there is really no defense or possible explanation to limiting that field of research!
And calling a type of biology research a farce, is a farce in itself! It shows you have not worked in science and don't understand how it works. I don't know how many times I have to say this.
What type of science research do you do? And may I ask if you or a loved one has a disease that has been hyped as a possible candidate for ESC intervention? You seem to be very angry at something
The instant a sperm and egg unite a life is created. This is true of any species. You could argue that any person within a different age range is at an earlier or later stage of development. I do understand that up to a certain point an zygote, embryo etc May not be given the legal rights of a Human, but this does not mean that this life should be ended for the pursuit of science. This is even more true as ESC research is basically yesterdays news as I have explained in previous posts.