Thread: Stem cell research...

...has always bugged the hell out of me as the promoters seem to only promote the gathering of stem cells from aborted fetuses! It seems to me that to support that side of it you have to put your integrity and morals aside, which always put me off! I have found a company that deals in regenerative veterinary medicine! Apparently they harvest a little fat from an animal that is injured in some manner and then collect from the fat, stem cells which the inject into the sight of the injury which promotes healing!
A neat concept that shows great potential for humans and does not require us to put our morals on the back burner! There are 3 companies doing research into this for humans!

here is a link:Stem Cell Technology | Veterinarian Adipose Stem Cell | Horse | Dog | Cat

Comments will be appreciated!

iirc there have been several potentially useful things from stem cell research but so far the only viable advances are coming form "adult stem cell research" not fetuses.

But Mark you did not mention that you got asbestos undergarments for Christmas!

Originally Posted by syslight

iirc there have been several potentially useful things from stem cell research but so far the only viable advances are coming form "adult stem cell research" not fetuses.

But Mark you did not mention that you got asbestos undergarments for Christmas!

Hush hush hush!!

Oh boy! You really stuck your foot in this one! Guess what I do for a living?

I should point out that, due to the HAPPY NEW YEAR, I am quite inebriated at the moment but I'll respond anyway. (Maybe I'll regret it in the morning.)

First, very few stem cells are collected from aborted fetuses but philosophically, let's consider it anyway...

I have no freakin' clue how many abortions occur every year but I can guarantee that the number is not affected by any form of stem cell research. Given that the number of abortions that occur because a woman doesn't want to go through with a pregnancy is quite high, there is absolutely no need for a researcher to entice a pregnant woman to have an abortion simply to provide material for stem cell research. If a woman has an abortion because she doesn't want to be pregnant and the aborted fetus is to be discarded, then what is the harm in collecting stem cells from that fetus? My point is that no form of stem cell research is responsible for even one more fetus being aborted. The fetus is going to be discarded anyway, what is the harm in making use of some of the cells in it? The research is taking advantage of the available cells but it is not the cause of the abortions.

Second, there is a great distinction between embryonic stem cell research and adult stem cell research. Relatively little research is done on fetal stem cells but they would fall into the category of adult stem cells. Most research is done on embryonic stem (ES) cells because they are pluripotent, unlike adult stem cells which are simply multipotent. Now, despite Bush's objections to ES cell research, no embryos are destroyed because of ES cell research either. Just like the vast number of aborted fetuses that are readily available, there is an incredible number of surplus embryos produced from IVF procedures. Some of those embryos destined for destruction might as well have some good come from them in the form of ES cell research.

When a couple has surplus embryos from an IVF procedure, they have four options. One, they can keep the embryos frozen in perpetuity just in case they later decide to have another baby. Two, they can allow the embryos to be adopted, like Bush's photo op "Snowflake Babies." Three, they can simply have the surplus embryo discarded, dumping them literally down the drain. Four, they can be donated for research. These are the only necessary resource for ES cell research. No embryos are destroyed for ES cell research that are not already DOOMED anyway. That is the critical point. Tens of thousands of surplus embryos are dumped down the drain every year. What exactly is the harm in deriving ES cells, that might benefit scientific endeavors, from embryos that are destined to be destroyed anyway?

I never said that stem cell research was responsible for any abortion! In using aborted fetuses though will eventually pave the way for less scrupulous scientists to pay women to harvest their fetuses! But that was never the point of this thread! it was only to point to another source of stem cells that would be easier to stomach for a large block of people!

Would you be willing to explain the difference between pluripotent and multipotent?

I have never heard of any use for aborted fetusi at all (although it seems like it would be a good thing if there was). I am an "organ donor" and I was given a considerable amount of cadaver muscle tissue in my abdomen to repair a major incisional hernia. I hope that when I get dead someone can use that same muscle tissue and it gets passed on again, kinda like a party game. You know, like the egg and spoon relay race. As an aborted fetus is pretty small and typically fairly scarmbled, I'd imagine there isn't much use for skin or muscle tissues and the eyes aren't developed enough to have any value. I doubt anyone can use any of the itty bitty organs either. However, if there are some stem cells left viable hey, why not harvest them?

Originally Posted by JMS

I never said that stem cell research was responsible for any abortion! In using aborted fetuses though will eventually pave the way for less scrupulous scientists to pay women to harvest their fetuses!

But in this case, nothing nefarious is going on to allow stem cell research. Currently, stem cell research in the US is being held back on false premises, or -in your case- by concerns about what one day might happen if noone does something against it then. But imo that is a bit like banning alcohol to prevent drunkenness (like th eprohibition experiment)

This goes back to the fundamental debate over when humanity begins. I know the whole thing may seem inane to our European brethren, but there is a bitter and sometimes violent debate on the issue in the U.S. There is a vocal minority in the U.S. (albeit a fairly large one) that believes that the moment sperm contacts egg, the result is fully human and possessed of full rights. That's why Mark would say a thing like "put your integrity and morals aside." Equally inflammatory things are said by the other side of the argument.

Most Americans -- around 2/3 -- believe that humanity is invested gradually over the period of pregnancy. That's why there is broad support for abortion in the first trimester, but less and less as the pregnancy progresses beyond the first three months. The dilation and extraction procedure was banned for that reason -- it had very little political support, as it occurs in the third trimester. Roe v. Wade, for example, specifically provides no support for abortion in the third trimester. Constitutionally, abortion can be banned in the third trimester. Politically, most Americans want some sort of exception to protect the lives of pregnant women.

The political wing of the anti-abortion faction has never dealt with the tens of thousands of fetuses that are discarded -- shall we say "killed" -- as a natural part of IVF. They don't seem to want to talk about it.

This is all by way of saying that there is broad support here for fetal stem cell research. This is why the new administration and Congress will almost certainly lift the ban.

j

Firstly, thanks for the information utopia, and thank you Jim for suggesting the asbestos undies! The word abortion was used mistakenly as I believe a fetus is living, viable human life! Therefore, to use human embryos as a source for stem cells, if that embryo is forfeited through that process, to me, no matter the benefits, it is something more foul than murder! If this is true, then maybe the link I originally supplied would be more palatable to those who believe as I! My point was not to argue the matter so much as it was to introduce this link and the idea of adult stem cells instead of embryonic stem cells! I am up for the debate if we can keep this thread from spiraling down hill, but quite honestly that was not my intent!

Utopia, can you explain more, as I am quite interested

As far as IVF goes I think that that is a problem also To waste the embryonic potential for a full and healthy life so that one can become pregnant on command equates in my view to murder for your own selfish ends!

For those who use the waste and justify it is similar to the guy who sees an old broken down car on the side of the road and removes the bumpers saying to himself "well, it was broken anyways so no one will mind" all the while forgetting that it wasn't his in the first place!