This should muddy the waters a bit if true. If we can do this sort of thing with umbilical stem cells, then why is there such a rush for the untested embryonic cells?
This breakthrough is awesome, but I hope it doesn't lead to the opening of a flood gate, which would be very irresponsible. I like the pace of the debate and research as it is now... speeding it up could lead to some very bad things.
If this is true, one can not disscount the magnitude of this breakthrough. ALL people from ANY side of the spectrum can understand and jump on board with this. Being most often alligned as one of the "religous right", I know that myself and others with that allignment will be very happy to know that human babies (or fetus' if you perfer) won't be harmed/killed during this kind of stem-cell research. And so long as it continues to not involve babies/fetus'/embryos, myself (and others of my ilk) will continue to support it I'm sure.
This is HUGE. God bless those responsible (once again, if this is true).
Originally posted by Pool-BoyThis should muddy the waters a bit if true. If we can do this sort of thing with umbilical stem cells, then why is there such a rush for the untested embryonic cells?
Originally posted by Yahoo!So-called "multipotent" stem cells -- those found in cord blood -- are capable of forming a limited number of specialised cell types, unlike the more versatile "undifferentiated" cells that are derived from embroyos.
I suppose the rush for the embryonic cells is to test them to see if they are, in fact, more versatile.
I'd also like to point out to El Nastio that researchers probably aren't chomping at the bit to perform forced abortions in order to save lives and improve our quality of life, but who knows what evil lurks in the minds of men.
I'd also like to point out to El Nastio that researchers probably aren't chomping at the bit to perform forced abortions in order to save lives and improve our quality of life, but who knows what evil lurks in the minds of men.
El Nastio is Catholic. And, by all appearances, he is a very devout Catholic. Embryonic stem cell research destroys embryos. Since the Catholic Church holds that life begins at conception, this is the taking of life (or murder, if you prefer the harsher word). Because of this, the Church opposes embryonic stem cell research. Moreover, this type of research promises only potential breakthroughs; nothing is definite. So, someone who believes that life begins at conception would argue that it is worse to perform a known evil since the good is only potential good. If you believe that an embryo is just a mass of cells, then there is no moral dilemma because you are simply using a bunch of cells to pursue scientific or medical breakthroughs.
Lastly (and this came up in another thread), the embryos do not come as a result of abortions. Look up what happens in an abortion; the remnants of the fetal matter/baby cannot be used for anything. The embryos come from fertilized eggs (mostly to be used for in vitro procedures--also opposed by the Church, FYI) which have not been implanted into a potential mother.
I apologize for misunderstanding scientific things and then assuming a couple of other things, not least of which was that El Nastio referring to the embryo as a 'fetus' implying that the research involves aborted/miscarried fetuses, not lab embryos.
A misunderstanding on my part too. Should've clarified things a bit better on my end as well. Thanks Corajudo, for summarizing for me. Very well said =)
Either way, it is definitly certian that this is good news, regardless of one's personal beliefs.
WAIT UNTIL THE MAN IS DEAD. This is just rude. I didn't agree with Reagan on hardly anything, but his best idea was that you can't name stuff after public officials until they've been dead 50 years (which most Reaganites seem to have amnesia about).
#
#