Stem Cell Breakthrough!

[Neubob]

Looks hopeful

So they may be able to generate cells with stem-like characteristics without having to use embryonic tissue--sounds good, right? I just wonder what the religious wackos are gonna say now to challenge this technology.

Maybe as a little game, we can try to predict their new arguments....

[Blank]

I'm looking forward to new cartilage for my knees in the future :-D

[B@tfinkV]

my list -


new spine (cracked, compressed and twisted, self inflicted mostly)

new left shoulder (dislocated once, shoulderblade torn ligaments)

new liver, lungs. (duh)

new knees (snowboarding, skateboarding, ouch)

new teeth (i am a brit)



that is all, thanks.

[Neubob]

See guys, you're thinking way too short-term.

I would eventually like to be completely replaced, from head to toe, with non-aging biological components that perfectly mimic my natural body. However, before that happens, I would definitely like to go through a phase where I've got a Darth Vader-like cybernetic anatomy--complete with sounds and appearance.

[Sabre]

Originally posted by Neubob
Looks hopeful

So they may be able to generate cells with stem-like characteristics without having to use embryonic tissue--sounds good, right? I just wonder what the religious wackos are gonna say now to challenge this technology.

Maybe as a little game, we can try to predict their new arguments....

I don't know about "religious wackos", but the majority of Christians such as myself and others, who are against destruction of embryos for use in research and "theraputic cloning", will likely welcome this breakthrough, if it pans out.  You see, I am not against stem cell research; I'm very much supportive of it.  Indeed, adult and cord-blood stem cell research has actually produced scores of treatments that are in use or in the human clinical trial stages (unlike embryonic stem cell research which has produced none that I know of).

Try not to use such a broad brush next time, Neubob...it gets paint everywhere.  The opposition all along is to the use of ESC's, not the research itself.  The current administration is the first to actually authorize Federal funds for ESC research, so long as it doesn't destroy embryos to get there.  The above research easily qualifies under that restriction, and I would support use of Fed $s for it.

[Neubob]

Originally posted by Sabre
Try not to use such a broad brush next time, Neubob...it gets paint everywhere.  The opposition all along is to the use of ESC's, not the research itself.  The current administration is the first to actually authorize Federal funds for ESC research, so long as it doesn't destroy embryos to get there.  The above research easily qualifies under that restriction, and I would support use of Fed $s for it.

The religious wackos in this case would scurry to find fault with this take on the technology and try to sell the idea to the masses. The rest of the whackos would agree with that idea and carry it forward.

If your eyes are open and you welcome progress then you're not a wacko, and shouldn't assume that I meant the term to apply to you or anybody who thinks like you.

[Donzo]

Originally posted by Neubob
Looks hopeful

So they may be able to generate cells with stem-like characteristics without having to use embryonic tissue--sounds good, right? I just wonder what the religious wackos are gonna say now to challenge this technology.

Maybe as a little game, we can try to predict their new arguments....

Why do you think the "religious wacko's" would challenge this technology?

Do you even understand their opposition to embryonic stem cell research?

If these "religious wacko's" object to embryonic stem cell research and this article points to an alternative to that, why would they object?

The only objection I can foresee based on the article would be the need for more embryonic stem cell research as a result of this discovery (questioning the logic here).

[Sabre]

Forgive me then if I read too much into your post, Neub.  It is often the case that terms like "religious wackos" are used to describe anyone of serious religious conviction.  I am curious then to know what persons or groups you refer to then.  Thanks.

[Donzo]

Originally posted by Neubob
The religious wackos in this case would scurry to find fault with this take on the technology and try to sell the idea to the masses. The rest of the whackos would agree with that idea and carry it forward.

That's funny.  You could use that same explanation to describe those that would insist on embryonic stem cell research over adult stem cell research even though the former has not produced the results that the latter has.

[LePaul]

Why are those who feel life is precious and deserved to be spoken for called "wackos"?

[AKIron]

Originally posted by Neubob
The religious wackos in this case would scurry to find fault with this take on the technology and try to sell the idea to the masses. The rest of the whackos would agree with that idea and carry it forward.

If your eyes are open and you welcome progress then you're not a wacko, and shouldn't assume that I meant the term to apply to you or anybody who thinks like you.

I'll be interested to see what "religious wackos" opposition you find on this. As Sabre alluded to, your generalization reveals your misunderstanding of the issue.

[Neubob]

Lol, why are you guys already getting bent of shape?

Maybe when I said religious wackos, I wasn't including everyone and their mother in that characterization? Maybe some of you are way too hell bent on getting offended at every hint of a poke at the religious segment of the population.

My understanding of the issue is just fine, Iron. The 'religious wackos' who opposed this technology did so because a primary source of stem cell material was human embryos, and thus were construed to end a life--even though this stem cell material can be gathered from an embryo that has undergone just several cell divisions and can hardly be defined as clinically alive.

So those who find life 'precious', are against the destruction of en embryo, if even that destruction can lead to the saving of countless lives of fully developed human. That argument is nonsensical to me, and certainly a product of indoctrinated reasoning. A shortcut to actual thought. Those who find life precious should be more concerned with those who are definitely alive, not just those tiny biological bits that may one day be born.

This latest issue steps away from embryos and uses renewable human tissue. However, since certain 'religious wackos' tend to find a way to find fault in anything (these are the true wackos here, guys, not everyone who happens to attend church on sunday), I would assume that they'd also find fault in creating spare parts for people as a concept in general. Just imagine how many ways one can describe this process in a negative light?

It's giving life that was never intended.

It's building human parts

It's undermining god's monopoly on the creation of living tissues

I can see all of these statements from the mouths of certain backward-thinking rhetoricians. If you're among them, don't take these posts as a reference to you.

[lasersailor184]

Originally posted by Neubob
Lol, why are you guys already getting bent of shape?

Maybe when I said religious wackos, I wasn't including everyone and their mother in that characterization? Maybe some of you are way too hell bent on getting offended at every hint of a poke at the religious segment of the population.

My understanding of the issue is just fine, Iron. The 'religious wackos' who opposed this technology did so because a primary source of stem cell material was human embryos, and thus were construed to end a life--even though this stem cell material can be gathered from an embryo that has undergone just several cell divisions and can hardly be defined as clinically alive.

So those who find life 'precious', are against the destruction of en embryo, if even that destruction can lead to the saving of countless lives of fully developed human. That argument is nonsensical to me, and certainly a product of indoctrinated reasoning. A shortcut to actual thought. Those who find life precious should be more concerned with those who are definitely alive, not just those tiny biological bits that may one day be born.

This latest issue steps away from embryos and uses renewable human tissue. However, since certain 'religious wackos' tend to find a way to find fault in anything (these are the true wackos here, guys, not everyone who happens to attend church on sunday), I would assume that they'd also find fault in creating spare parts for people as a concept in general. Just imagine how many ways one can describe this process in a negative light?

It's giving life that was never intended.

It's building human parts

It's undermining god's monopoly on the creation of living tissues

I can see all of these statements from the mouths of certain backward-thinking rhetoricians. If you're among them, don't take these posts as a reference to you.

Actually, the primary source of Stem Cells is NOT embryonic stem cells.  It's adult stem cells.  In this, many breakthroughs have been made with adult stem cells.  Absolutely no breakthroughs have ever been made with embryonic stem cells.

Except for those that shun even the smallest of medical help, the "Religious Right Wackos" welcome the advances of Stem Cell Research.  However, they will not allow embryos and human lives to be trivialized.

[moot]

Originally posted by Neubob
See guys, you're thinking way too short-term.

I would eventually like to be completely replaced, from head to toe, with non-aging biological components that perfectly mimic my natural body. However, before that happens, I would definitely like to go through a phase where I've got a Darth Vader-like cybernetic anatomy--complete with sounds and appearance.

http://www.sens.org/
I'm going straight for the Darth Vader part... after a short while enjoying reforestation of my cranium.

[GovtFlu]

I have damaged nerves in my arm, stem cell research could lead to help for people like me much sooner, if not for the wackos getting in the way of science.  

Lets say you're in a burning building, in one corner is a cute little 5 year old girl.. her hair in on fire, face melting, shes screaming and all that. In the other corner is a Petrie dish with 5 viable embryos, or "babies" / "children" or whatever.

You can only save one...

I save the living breathing one, just like I'd like to see living breathing people who suffer from debilitating, often painful, injuries / conditions benefit from science.