Good news for a change

[MrJim]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/07/19/stemcells.veto/index.html

Dubya vetoes stem cell bill.

:thumbsup:

Dubya: "These boys and girls are not spare parts," he said of the children in the audience. "They remind us of what is lost when embryos are destroyed in the name of research. They remind us that we all begin our lives as a small collection of cells."

When I think of embryonic stem cell research I think of the scene from The Matrix where the robots are harvesting their "batteries".

[ZiSunka]

Praise God!

[TwinCrier]

They remind us that we all begin our lives as a small collection of cells.
So true. Preborn humans are the last group that can legally be discriminated against. I pray more of these "extra embyos" will get a chance to live and contribute to society.

[Tenken07]

what are embryonic stem cells?

[MrJim]

what are embryonic stem cells?

Dude, shut off the playstation for a while and check out the news;)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_Cell_Research

Issue is that the scientists would like to "harvest" the cells, thereby using the unborn as a source. Who knows, maybe someday a baby could be concieved with the motive to sell it for parts?

There are other sources of stem cells but apparently the unborn babies are the best.:doh::cry:

[HardRockShoe]

On Evening Magazine (a local TV Show) there was a couple that adopted a frozen embryo from a fertility clinic. Apparently there are thousands of embryos that don't get used and people are now deciding to use them instead of having their own kid.

Of course, this is only if the couple that created the embroys in the first place will put them up for adoption.

[Tenken07]

Dude, shut off the playstation for a while and check out the news;)


hehe. xD

im pretty ignorant of what goes on in the news.

[ZiSunka]

what are embryonic stem cells?

When a human embryo has eight cells, all those cells are undifferentiated, meaning that they can grow into any organ, any kind of cell in a human body. All human beings were once made up entirely of 8 stem cells, even you. If left to mature in the womb, a human being will be born, but if you pull the cells apart, it ends the potential for those cells to become a person.

When the cells are pulled apart, they can be implanted in another human being where they will live to become some kind of tissue or organ in that person. It is like having a parasite in your body, and your body constantly wants to kill those cells to get rid of them.

Some people believe that by implanting embryonic stem cells in someone's body, it will cure every kind of disease, but so far, all attempts to make this happen have turned into disasters, usually creating uncontrollable tumors or uncontrollable masses of overactive tissue.

In one test, people with underactive pituitary glands were implanted with embryonic stem cells and at first it cured their disease, but after a few months, the cells had created a huge mass of tissue spewing hormones that caused untreatable seizures. All the people in the study died within one year because of the seizures.

In another study, children with type I diabetes were given embryonic stems cells in their pancreases, and at first it cure their diabetes, but eventually all of them died from pancreatic cancer, within months of the stem cell "treatment."

Adult stem cells currently are used to treat more than 80 diseases. There has never been a successful treatment derived from embryonic stem cells.

So, they have zero efficacy and a human being has to die to make the treatments possible. Not such a good thing, eh?

[Tenken07]

errr no thats not a good thing.....><

[seebs]

That's a bit of an oversimplification. Adults have stem cells too, and in some cases, stem cells have been the basis of treatments; more often, they've been the basis of research into treatments.

I do not know the technical differences between embryonic and non-embryonic stem cells, but I believe it's that embryonic stem cells are still undifferentiated. In adults, you end up with specialized stem cells that perform only given functions.

There are some therapies that have come out of stem cell research. I don't have enough information to say anything about the embyronic cells.

That said, I am not entirely sure about the moral issues here; in many cases, the question is not whether or not a baby will live, but whether the cells will be destroyed or studied. Our society produces a lot of zygotes that never get used, to say nothing of the number of zygotes that just don't implant to begin with.

It's a complicated issue, and I've had a hard time getting information on it that wasn't from people who already had a position all decided on.

[Flynmonkie]

sorry posting issues here...........

I will certainly have more information when I start class next semester. But I have to say, here in Missouri they ran an ad that answered many questions about stem cell research. Actually, it was impressive, clear and easy to understand. But of course would be somewhat biased. From what I can see so far, cells can be regenerated and grown (not human beings) and it will be very beneficial to many different needs, cancer, diabetes etc.. Both Juvenile and Adult issues. MANY different well-known (ethical) organizations are supporting it. Here is a site with some answers:
http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/faqs.asp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell_controversy

What I have learned so far is get the facts, get the opposing viewpoints and prove everything you can. Lots of rumors with this one.

I believe I plan to support it, but I need to dig deeper into what is proposed.

[ZiSunka]

I just don't think it's ethical or moral to take the life of one person to make the life of another person better.

That's the same reason I oppose abortion.

All taking of human life for the sake of convenience or preference or improving the life of another person sends the message that humans are a commodity to be used and discarded when no longer valued. I think it is a dangerous message, because at some point in our lives, everyone of us could be disposable.

[Matthan]

The Prez did a good thing this day...

Matthan

[seebs]

I am not convinced that embryonic stem cell research necessarily requires "taking the life of a person". I think in some cases it is much closer in moral analysis to posthumous organ donation.

[ZiSunka]

I am not convinced that embryonic stem cell research necessarily requires "taking the life of a person". I think in some cases it is much closer in moral analysis to posthumous organ donation.

Except that the posthumous organ donation is done AFTER the person has already lived and died, and typically with the consent of the person before they died.

I am registered to be an organ donor when I die. But it would be wrong to kill me now to take my organs to save someone else's life. The value of my life is equal to the life of the other person.

Likewise the embryonic life. It's value is equal to anyone else's life, by virtue of it being human, made in the image of God, just like yours and mine.

[JPPT1974]

The Prez did a good thing this day...

Matthan

I think that he did a good thing too
As he really laid down the law
BTW, that is the first time that
He used his veto of power ever!

[Project 86]

sorry posting issues here...........

I will certainly have more information when I start class next semester. But I have to say, here in Missouri they ran an ad that answered many questions about stem cell research. Actually, it was impressive, clear and easy to understand. But of course would be somewhat biased. From what I can see so far, cells can be regenerated and grown (not human beings) and it will be very beneficial to many different needs, cancer, diabetes etc.. Both Juvenile and Adult issues. MANY different well-known (ethical) organizations are supporting it.

There is adult stem cell research and embryonic stem cell research. Almost no one has problems with adult stem cell research. It doesn't like an innocent human life like embryonic stem cell research does. Also adult stem cell research has had more success then had embryonic. Embryonic research is not illegal even though I think it should be. The fuss is they want more tax payer money to fund the research using innocent lives. I believe it is bad enough tax payers already have to help fund abortions. I don't want to have to pay more money to help the research and killing of babies.

How we have decieved ourselves. We think Nazi Germany was bad? In God's eyes I don't think we are much better and possibly we are even worse.
:sigh:

[ZiSunka]

How we have decieved ourselves. We think Nazi Germany was bad? In God's eyes I don't think we are much better and possibly we are even worse.
:sigh:

So sadly true.

I think of the relatively short duration of the war, and that only 12 million innocents lost their lives because of the politics of power, and then I think of the more than 30 years of abortion with 1.5 million innocents losing their lives every year because of the politics of power...it's horrifying.

How heaven must weep when another tiny life is shredded apart.

[Flynmonkie]

There is adult stem cell research and embryonic stem cell research. Almost no one has problems with adult stem cell research. It doesn't like an innocent human life like embryonic stem cell research does. Also adult stem cell research has had more success then had embryonic. Embryonic research is not illegal even though I think it should be. The fuss is they want more tax payer money to fund the research using innocent lives. I believe it is bad enough tax payers already have to help fund abortions. I don't want to have to pay more money to help the research and killing of babies.

How we have decieved ourselves. We think Nazi Germany was bad? In God's eyes I don't think we are much better and possibly we are even worse.
:sigh: From what I gather...
In Missouri, they do have a problem with Adult cell research. It is up for vote in August. Here is a site from Washington University that explains it a bit.
http://magazine.wustl.edu/Spring05/StevenTeitelbaum.htm

Right now Missouri has issues with this. Somatic cell reproduction is still something questionable to me. The embryo has no nucleus (need that to truly generate a life no?) And my other concern is activation.
"ES cell research does not use or harm an embryo or fetus in a woman's uterus – and it does not
involve abortion."http://www.missouricures.com/settingtherecord.php
In addition, I see nothing wrong with using umbilical cord, I cannot get to IF it is allowed, what is allowed or not UGH! I have to struggle to find consistency of information in sites. Some say Missouri does not allow it at all, others claim it does but does not support embryonic blah blah blah... what a mess.

[ZiSunka]

The embryo has no nucleus (need that to truly generate a life no?) And my other concern is activation.

The embryo as a whole has no nucleus, but each cell in the embryo has a nucleus. Just as your body has no nucleus, yet pretty much every somatic cell in your body does. Your blood cells don't, at least the red ones, but as the Bible says, the life is in the blood, so I'm not sure that not having a nucleus means a cell is not alive.

[ZiSunka]

In addition, I see nothing wrong with using umbilical cord, I cannot get to IF it is allowed, what is allowed or not UGH! I have to struggle to find consistency of information in sites. Some say Missouri does not allow it at all, others claim it does but does not support embryonic blah blah blah... what a mess.

Most hospitals will collect the cord blood for a newborn and there are private services that will preserve the cord blood for decades in case it is needed later.

Cord blood can also be used for stem cell treatments for other people, like a bone marrow transplant. Collecting and keeping cord blood or using cord blood for stem cell transplants is legal in all states and most nations of the world, if not all.

[Project 86]

From what I gather...
In Missouri, they do have a problem with Adult cell research. It is up for vote in August. Here is a site from Washington University that explains it a bit.
http://magazine.wustl.edu/Spring05/StevenTeitelbaum.htm

Right now Missouri has issues with this. Somatic cell reproduction is still something questionable to me. The embryo has no nucleus (need that to truly generate a life no?) And my other concern is activation.

In addition, I see nothing wrong with using umbilical cord, I cannot get to IF it is allowed, what is allowed or not UGH! I have to struggle to find consistency of information in sites. Some say Missouri does not allow it at all, others claim it does but does not support embryonic blah blah blah... what a mess.

I find it interesting they have a problem with it. We have a cousin that just defeated cancer (we hope for good) with some help with adult stem cells, from herself! I want to see more research in stem cells, just as much as any good scientists or doctor would. We just need to make sure we don't sacrafice anyone else in the name of science.

I have not looked much into using the umbilical cord for stem cell research but if it is a good alternative solution to taking human life I'm all for it. Thanks for the post and when I get time I'll have to read the article closer then I did.

[JPPT1974]

The embryo as a whole has no nucleus, but each cell in the embryo has a nucleus. Just as your body has no nucleus, yet pretty much every somatic cell in your body does. Your blood cells don't, at least the red ones, but as the Bible says, the life is in the blood, so I'm not sure that not having a nucleus means a cell is not alive.

Life is indeed in the blood
I don't believe in stem cell research
That goes against the Lord's will
And what He wants for us in life!
As well as preserving life to the fullest extent!

[Stinker]

What makes a group of multiplying cells so special? Just because they are human cells that are multiplying until the whole of them (at such a stage) are subjectively classified as a person?

Even if we believe that when at the point of egg fertalization, we should happen to believe that then is when the spirit is received, who of us would give as high of regard to it as we would a new born?

I really have difficulty with the belief that it is not a person's spirit within them that makes them so special to God....as the belief that our physical makeup alone makes us so special to God.

So my take on the stem cell issue is that if there is no spirit in the process at that point, then I don't see how there can be any sin.

[ZiSunka]

What makes a group of multiplying cells so special? Just because they are human cells that are multiplying until the whole of them (at such a stage) are subjectively classified as a person?

Even if we believe that when at the point of egg fertalization, we should happen to believe that then is when the spirit is received, who of us would give as high of regard to it as we would a new born?

I really have difficulty with the belief that it is not a person's spirit within them that makes them so special to God....as the belief that our physical makeup alone makes us so special to God.

So my take on the stem cell issue is that if there is no spirit in the process at that point, then I don't see how there can be any sin.

What evidence do you have that the spirit is not in a person when they are conceived?

[BrandonGray]

so why don't they use the stem cells from adults? Or would it be lethal?

[ZiSunka]

so why don't they use the stem cells from adults? Or would it be lethal?

They do use stem cells from adults. Adult stem cells are used to treat many illnesses, and they are researching the potential to use them for things like healing broken spinal cords (having good success with that--most of the subjects show at least 30% improvement in movement and sensation) and other illnesses that are currently difficult to treat.

Your body fat is rich with stems cells waiting to be harvested.

[Flynmonkie]

I am not convinced that embryonic stem cell research necessarily requires "taking the life of a person". I think in some cases it is much closer in moral analysis to posthumous organ donation.
These are my thoughts, but starting in August through May I will be in a bioethics class “Controversial Topics in Bioethics” that I fully expect to address these issues. (That is if I stay on the Presidents list!)

I can see the potential for the increase in abortions being a problem. But I am still gaining conflicting information at this point. Here in Missouri we have the Stowers Institute, and more than likely we will be visiting them and hearing that perspective. The Biologist and Philosophy Professors guiding this aim to look at this along with other controversial issues from every ideology.. So it should prove to be interesting. If I gain any pertinent information I plan to share it here. I am all about informed decisions :)