Stem Cell research

So, how do you feel about it?

Stem cells are already being used in the medical field with very promising results. For example, in the spine surgery arena, some surgeons are harvesting stem cells from bone marrow aspirate, concentrating them, and re-introducing them to the spine to promote a better fusion rate. It's working pretty well too. I've been told that adipose stem cells may even be better for that purpose.

Additionally, I've heard of some surgeons who believe that they can use a similar procedure to introduce concentrated stem cells into joints effectively allowing patients to put off joint replacement surgery. I'm not sure about this, but it kind of makes sense because there in an intense anti-inflammatory response caused by the concentrated stem cells. Inflammation is what is causing the pain that makes joint replacements necessary; so, it seems plausible. I don't know enough about the research to know if I "buy" it.

Of course these are all from adult stem cells... I'm not familiar with any real applications for embryonic stem cells presently.

I would've voted it a fantastic .... as in a great .... idea if not for the "I want to live forever" behind it. If it can help people with Parkinson's MS and other debilitating diseases I am all for it.

At somepoint I heard about different stem cell uses. Basically the embryonic ones are unspecialized, thus having way more potential and uses.

Stem cells are a touchy subject, but they could have a huge impact on medicine. I dont know where you would draw the line and let someone stop having new organs though.

Jared

Doesn't sit right with me.

I will concede that this probably needs to happen, in the sense that we need to keep along the path we are on until things sort them selves out again.

That is, in the grand scheme of things, it will all balance out.

I dislike the idea that man thinks they know better than nature, we are not meant to live for ever or always be fixed. Sometimes we're just meant to die, and sometimes that is a slow and painful death. This is from someone who has had some one in the family die a slow painful death to a debilitating disease that left his mind intact but his body a mess. A prison in his own body.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gregs656

Doesn't sit right with me.

I will concede that this probably needs to happen, in the sense that we need to keep along the path we are on until things sort them selves out again.

That is, in the grand scheme of things, it will all balance out.

I dislike the idea that man thinks they know better than nature, we are not meant to live for ever or always be fixed. Sometimes we're just meant to die, and sometimes that is a slow and painful death.

---

A couple of months ago, my 2 year old son got Scarlet Fever (actually twice within a few weeks)... With this mindset, he'd be dead right now. I'll take advancement rather than the status quo any day :)

Trouble is, I'm not sure it is advancement.

On that note, I will remove my self from open debate, for the first time on this forum. If any one would like to continue this discussion with me, by all means PM me. It's a discussion I enjoy.

Anesthesia, pain medication, sulfur drugs, penicillin and other anti biotic medications, the polio vaccine are all scientific breakthroughs that led to saving lives and/or making life better for millions of people. Stem cells have the same potential. IMHO.

stem cell research "may" hold some great benefits.
if you are are talking about research here in America, i think it should be left up to private research rather than government backed. the government will just screw it up like most other programs. private companies will do better and may be less costly

I agree that advancement saved your son. However, stem cells, like immunotherapy are not going to make people live forever. I think private researchers or private funding should be used for virtually all research because our government can't separate useful research from wasteful spending. This would increase efficiency for their use and the speed at which their purposeful use could dome to fruition. There is great potential for the research, but people who make these huge claims of unlimited potential are not well informed.
BTW I believe if a woman want to donate her cord cells after giving birth its her business and I believe a doctor should be able to ask her to donate it.

Ok... I'm not sure what all this government will screw it up talk is about. The OP is asking about general thoughts about the idea of stem cells. I prefer not to get into the who is better suited to do this debate, and I'll stay on topic here (at least I hope to :))

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by richmondesi

Ok... I'm not sure what all this government will screw it up talk is about. The OP is asking about general thoughts about the idea of stem cells. I prefer not to get into the who is better suited to do this debate, and I'll stay on topic here (at least I hope to :))

---

whether the research is done properly with the best outcome is very much on topic. i would think all would want only the best outcome for this or any other kind of medical research.:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 59caddy

whether the research is done properly with the best outcome is very much on topic. i would think all would want only the best outcome for this or any other kind of medical research.:)

---

We both know that it's going to be twisted into government versus private sector, which will morph into right versus left, and this thing will get every bit as twisted and predictable as several other threads that go that route do. It's NOT on topic, the idea of the research or the concept of that research is the topic... I didn't see anything in the poll or the OP asking for political discussions on it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by richmondesi

We both know that it's going to be twisted into government versus private sector, which will morph into right versus left, and this thing will get every bit as twisted and predictable as several other threads that go that route do. It's NOT on topic, the idea of the research or the concept of that research is the topic... I didn't see anything in the poll or the OP asking for political discussions on it.

---

NO, i do not see it getting twisted. i was very sincere. i do not care about who is in power. it is an honest appraisal of what usually happens. i only want the best outcome on this matter. i want as much good to come out of this type of research as possible. this is one time i was not taking any side!!
no where did i say anything about politics, just my hopes for something good from the medical research

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 59caddy

NO, i do not see it getting twisted. i was very sincere. i do not care about who is in power. it is an honest appraisal of what usually happens. i only want the best outcome on this matter. i want as much good to come out of this type of research as possible. this is one time i was not taking any side!!
no where did i say anything about politics, just my hopes for something good from the medical research

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 59caddy

stem cell research "may" hold some great benefits.
if you are are talking about research here in America, i think it should be left up to private research rather than government backed. the government will just screw it up like most other programs. private companies will do better and may be less costly

---

That was the first mention of government in the thread, and it leads to a predictable discussion. All I'm saying is: let's keep this out of the Government=Incompetent realm, and keep it on the general

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seraphim

So, how do you feel about it?

---

Thanks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by richmondesi

That was the first mention of government in the thread, and it leads to a predictable discussion. All I'm saying is: let's keep this out of the Government=Incompetent realm, and keep it on the general

Thanks

---

whatever! i gave an honest answer...you are the only one who is complaining. i have a right to want a great outcome on the research and i stated how i thought this should be accomplished. if you want to discuss this further please pm me and lets not tie up this thread.

Fantastic idea. No, I don't want to live forever, but yes, I do have type 1 Diabetes and stem cells are really the only hope for a cure.

Fantastic Idea... and I DO want to live forever!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gregs656

I dislike the idea that man thinks they know better than nature, we are not meant to live for ever or always be fixed. Sometimes we're just meant to die, and sometimes that is a slow and painful death. This is from someone who has had some one in the family die a slow painful death to a debilitating disease that left his mind intact but his body a mess. A prison in his own body.

---

I get your point. But we were not meant to have transplants, MRI, computers, the internet, or even just plain old modern medicine.

We were meant to die of msot diseases you can get, including silly things like pneumonia or skin conditions like impetigo. If your lives these days are easier, it is because we made it so.

Dinosaurs lived like nature intended them to live and some species lived 60 000 000 years without notable change, eat and be eaten, until they finally and rightfully were wiped out by an asteroid and gave us the opportunity to do something.

Eternal life comes with its own set of problems and ultimately it would be a bad idea imo. Still, we left 'what nature intended' behind the day weinvented the first tool and tried to make our lives better.

Love the Jonathan Swift reference, was sorely tempted to choose it. But I feel that stem cell research is a fantastic idea.

They can make as many fetus milkshakes as they want, for all I care. Advancements are being made daily, and they're saving and improving many lives.

I agree with Jimmy. I would have voted it as fantastic were it not for the living forever chaser..!

I think if something like this has the potential to reverse paralysis, restore sight and hearing and maybe even allow for growing organs for transplant then I think its a great idea.

If a child gets kidney failure, and the stem cell research allows for him to have another kidney grown, with no risk of rejection and allows them to have a full life, how could you possibly argue that this is a bad idea?

Thats why I'm on the organ donor register. If I get written off in some horrible accident (God forbid) then I'd want to be able to help someone else get better.

I've read some articles where doctors were talking about harvesting an individuals stem cells from the placenta and umbilical cord after birth and storing them on ice in case they are ever needed, which removes the moral objections some people have to stem cell research.

I guess I could have broken it down further: adult stem cell research, and embryonic.

The Jonathan Swift reference was indeed in regards to the embryonic research.:)

Stem cell research and the results we got from it aren't meant to make us live forever.
They can help people with serious diseases to have better life, as long as it lasts.

I voted fantastic, though I also have no desire to live forever.

I am all for doing the research to find a cure. I do not see the moral implications. The problem with the naysayer argument (unfortunately a religion-backed one which means there will inevitably be blind followers) is just a result of people being afraid of the unknown. Could this one day lead to such advanced developments such as cloning? Maybe. But I'd draw the line well before that, and not for moral reasons. For economic, sustainment, global population reasons. Oh and because anybody with lots of money could clone him/herself a million times and take over the world :)


Sorry for taking that jab at "religion" again, but we know there is skepticism in the "Church" and so I feel it's very pertinent to the way some people may answer the poll question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oglethorpe

I am all for doing the research to find a cure. I do not see the moral implications. The problem with the naysayer argument (unfortunately a religion-backed one which means there will inevitably be blind followers) is just a result of people being afraid of the unknown. Could this one day lead to such advanced developments such as cloning? Maybe. But I'd draw the line well before that, and not for moral reasons. For economic, sustainment, global population reasons. Oh and because anybody with lots of money could clone him/herself a million times and take over the world :)


Sorry for taking that jab at "religion" again, but we know there is skepticism in the "Church" and so I feel it's very pertinent to the way some people may answer the poll question.

---

Do you think there are no moral implications to embryonic stem cell research?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seraphim

Do you think there are no moral implications to embryonic stem cell research?

---

I knew this was coming. I agree that it is a VERY touchy subject, but only because of the "popular" way of thinking in the world.

I tend to look at these things from a purely scientific standpoint. We are talking about embryos that are not used in in vitro fertilization, but similarly cultivated for the stem cells.

The same "con" argument is used in abortion debates: when is the embryo considered a human being, and when that life is terminated, is it immoral?

I certainly value human life. The way I've lived my life to this point (without going into details) would certainly support this. However, the embryo is cultivated in as inhumanly (read: not inhumanely) a manner as possible.

Scientifically speaking, we take a sperm cell and an egg cell, and allow them to become fertilized in a dish filled with nutrients that mimics a womb/fallopian tube/whatever. If that activity to you is the beginning of a human life, then we will never agree on the subject. That act, coupled with the culturing of the stem cells that can adapt to a number of various applications, is a biological remedy which the field of medicine has discovered.

It can be very useful. It can help save lives. It can help improve the quality of life of disabled or terminally ill human beings. There is no consciousness, no pain, and in my mind, nothing immoral about it. There is no "soul" which can be measured (21 gram urban myths aside), so we can leave that argument at the door.

Not that it drives my point home any, but I read somewhere (sorry I don't have a citation) that there are something like half-a-million embryos in the United States which are dedicated to stem cell research. They are either used immediately and discarded, or frozen cryogenically for future use. I think the future is here, ladies and gentlemen, and I'm glad for it.

Hope that answers your question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oglethorpe

Scientifically speaking, we take a sperm cell and an egg cell, and allow them to become fertilized in a dish filled with nutrients that mimics a womb/fallopian tube/whatever. If that activity to you is the beginning of a human life, then we will never agree on the subject. That act, coupled with the culturing of the stem cells that can adapt to a number of various applications, is a biological remedy which the field of medicine has discovered.

It can be very useful. It can help save lives. It can help improve the quality of life of disabled or terminally ill human beings. There is no consciousness, no pain, and in my mind, nothing immoral about it. There is no "soul" which can be measured (21 gram urban myths aside), so we can leave that argument at the door.

.

---

How can that not be seen as the begining of a human life?

Isn't that exactly what makes embryonic stem cells so valuable--that they are human cells? You can't use monkey cells, or mice cells, you have to use human cells.

So, where else can you get human cells, if not from a human organism?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seraphim

Do you think there are no moral implications to embryonic stem cell research?

---

I do, I think that preventing the use of embryonic stem cells that would be tossed in the dumpster because of cultural and religious beliefs is definitely immoral.

How about this:

You want to get stem cell therapy.


You do the oofa-ooffa dance with your wife, if you catch my drift, and 4 weeks later remove the "cell tissue" that will be used to treat you. It will be as close a genetic match as you can get, customized especially for you.

Any moral implications to that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seraphim

How can that not be seen as the begining of a human life?

---

Well it's not the beginning of consciousness. That seems more important.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seraphim

How can that not be seen as the begining of a human life?

Isn't that exactly what makes embryonic stem cells so valuable--that they are human cells? You can't use monkey cells, or mice cells, you have to use human cells.

So, where else can you get human cells, if not from a human organism?

---

Where would you put it if there were no willing recipients? You certainly can't "grow" a human in a petri dish.

But that's neither here nor there. My point was that the embryos are cultured for a purpose other than to become humans. They are "grown" to become hosts for stem cells.

Judging from your response (and correct me if I'm wrong, please) you are both:

a) In the opposition of the embryonic stem cell research camp.
b) In agreement that human life begins at the joining of the sperm and the egg.

I did preface the whole thing by saying that it's a very sticky situation. I'm just... "imploring" I guess would be the right word... people to look at things from a different point of view.

From a purely biological/scientific standpoint, its on the same level as (and I'm prepared to be crucified for this one) cultivating monkeys or mice or tadpoles or bacteria or whatever. We tend to put human existence, even at the earliest phases, above the rest of the animal/botanical kingdom simply because we are capable of rational thought. I tend to disagree with that stance.

We've learned how to do these things. I don't look at it as "playing god" or whatever some might call it because I don't believe there is a god. I believe in humanity and doing what it takes to make people's lives better. That embryo's purpose is not to become a human life because we have the ability to intervene and use what's needed for another purpose.

Is this leaving a lot of potential for opening another can of worms (cloning, etc)? Absolutely. But that's why I also said we need to keep a close eye on things. I didn't even vote for option A. I voted for option B because I believe we need to tread lightly and be careful to not let this turn from a helping others thing to a self-serving thing.

I had a couple ****tails so forgive my rambling. It's Friday. Now, back to more ****tails. Have a great weekend guys.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

I do, I think that preventing the use of embryonic stem cells that would be tossed in the dumpster because of cultural and religious beliefs is definitely immoral.

---

It was not the religious belief system that created that backlog of embryonic stem cells in the first place, though was it?

That would be the reponsibility of the $cientific community.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oglethorpe

I had a couple ****tails so forgive my rambling. It's Friday. Now, back to more ****tails. Have a great weekend guys.

---

Bottoms up, you Tabac swashbuckler!:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seraphim

How about this:

You want to get stem cell therapy.


You do the oofa-ooffa dance with your wife, if you catch my drift, and 4 weeks later remove the "cell tissue" that will be used to treat you. It will be as close a genetic match as you can get, customized especially for you.

Any moral implications to that?

---

OK, I'll bite, but only because you cast the line. Sure it's moral as long as it's between consenting parties from both sides.

(EDIT: Also keeping in mind that this should be used for medical benefit for those who need it. Not so that I can use my unborn child to be a clone of myself or whatever other twisted hidden agendas certain sick individuals may have. Again, purely for the betterment of an existing human life.)

But that point is moot, at least now. This is not how it works. The way I described above is how the embryos are cultured, not via the oofa-oofa dance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seraphim

Bottoms up, you Tabac swashbuckler!:)

---

Thanks, friend. I'll tip one to you when I hit the bar later. Hopefully the bar doesn't hit me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oglethorpe

OK, I'll bite, but only because you cast the line. Sure it's moral as long as it's between consenting parties from both sides.

(EDIT: Also keeping in mind that this should be used for medical benefit for those who need it. Not so that I can use my unborn child to be a clone of myself or whatever other twisted hidden agendas certain sick individuals may have. Again, purely for the betterment of an existing human life.)

But that point is moot, at least now. This is not how it works. The way I described above is how the embryos are cultured, not via the oofa-oofa dance.

---

That certainly sounds like an agenda to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oglethorpe

Thanks, friend. I'll tip one to you when I hit the bar later. Hopefully the bar doesn't hit me.

---

Please do.

Something along he lines of:

"And dishhh ones, fer ol' Seraphim.....*hic*, that rapscallion!":beer2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seraphim

That certainly sounds like an agenda to me.

---

Right, but not a twisted hidden agenda.