Stem Cell Research

Talk about anything under the sun or stars - but keep it civil. This is where we really get to know each other. Everyone is welcome, and invited!

Who here believes that we should support stem cell research.

yes
15
83%
no
3
17%
 
Total votes: 18

User avatar
shadow_8818
Soldier
Soldier
Posts: 80
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 5:31 pm
Location: Earth

Stem Cell Research

Postby shadow_8818 » Sun Nov 09, 2008 9:14 pm

Who here believes that we should support stem cell research. It could help our society so much.
Daniel- you know speaking in the third person has proven that your crazy.
Rodney- crazy like a fox

User avatar
wigginboy
Soldier
Soldier
Posts: 277
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 11:38 am
First Joined: 0- 2-2004
Location: Red Deer, Alberta, Canada

Postby wigginboy » Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:19 am

I really honestly think we should pursue stem cell research but to me there should be rules governing where the cells are harvested from. Using the placenta and umbilical cords of newborns I don't think is a problem, but using aborted fetuses is wrong. I know abortion is legal in many places but to me it is wrong. This is an issue of opinion for me and in no way do I think that anyone else has to believe the same thing. I fully agree that stem cell research can lead us farther into the future by allowing us to develop new ways to preserve our longevity. Imagine being able to grow a heart for a patient waiting for a transplant, or a kidney. Imagine skin grafts being a thing of the past. Policy makers have to wake up and realize this is beneficial and stop beating around the bush. If something can promise this much good for the future, why not?

starfox
Launchie
Launchie
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 10:43 pm

Postby starfox » Mon Nov 10, 2008 9:24 am

Using the placenta and umbilical cords of newborns I don't think is a problem, but using aborted fetuses is wrong.
If the fetus is already aborted, you don't want it to be used for research? You can either use it for stem cells, or you can let it go to waste. Neither will bring it back, but one will bring about some benefit.

User avatar
wigginboy
Soldier
Soldier
Posts: 277
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 11:38 am
First Joined: 0- 2-2004
Location: Red Deer, Alberta, Canada

Postby wigginboy » Tue Nov 11, 2008 1:44 am

That comment was a matter of opinion. I don't support abortion so naturally I don't support the use of fetuses to aid research. This comes directly from my personal beliefs and in no way do I ever intend to speak out against such use if said research is pursued. Science will do what it wants and as I am not a scientist, I will not stand in it's way. Dead is dead, and I suppose there is no logical reason why the fetuses could not be used. As is aforementioned, it is simply a matter of personal belief for me.

starfox
Launchie
Launchie
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 10:43 pm

Postby starfox » Tue Nov 11, 2008 9:28 am

That comment was a matter of opinion. I don't support abortion so naturally I don't support the use of fetuses to aid research.
Right. This is what I'm asking about. Say somebody decided to have an abortion. You now have a dead fetus, and nothing can undo what has been done. You can either use it for the advancement of science, or do nothing with it.

On one hand, only good can come from it. On the other hand, nothing. You choose nothing?

User avatar
akrolsmir
Launchie
Launchie
Posts: 48
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:20 pm

Postby akrolsmir » Tue Nov 11, 2008 11:32 pm

Right. This is what I'm asking about. Say somebody decided to have an abortion. You now have a dead fetus, and nothing can undo what has been done. You can either use it for the advancement of science, or do nothing with it.

On one hand, only good can come from it. On the other hand, nothing. You choose nothing?
True. But wouldn't that also serve as a roundabout justification of abortion?

So those thinking of aborting could morally allow it, saying that they are advancing science?

It doesn't make sense to me that one would end a human life in order to extend another human life without permission of the martyr.
Image
Image

User avatar
wigginboy
Soldier
Soldier
Posts: 277
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 11:38 am
First Joined: 0- 2-2004
Location: Red Deer, Alberta, Canada

Postby wigginboy » Wed Nov 12, 2008 2:00 am

Right. This is what I'm asking about. Say somebody decided to have an abortion. You now have a dead fetus, and nothing can undo what has been done. You can either use it for the advancement of science, or do nothing with it.

On one hand, only good can come from it. On the other hand, nothing. You choose nothing?
True. But wouldn't that also serve as a roundabout justification of abortion?

So those thinking of aborting could morally allow it, saying that they are advancing science?

It doesn't make sense to me that one would end a human life in order to extend another human life without permission of the martyr.

And that is EXACTLY what I was getting at. Thank you for putting it into words, akrol.

Alexander
Launchie
Launchie
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Nov 16, 2008 5:23 pm

Postby Alexander » Sun Nov 16, 2008 5:45 pm

I think it is ridiculous that the U.S. stopped funding for stem cells it could help so many lives. Just wait once a celebritey supports the stem cells so will the rest of the world

User avatar
shadow_8818
Soldier
Soldier
Posts: 80
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 5:31 pm
Location: Earth

Postby shadow_8818 » Sun Nov 16, 2008 6:03 pm

To save one who is alive is better then to bring someone into the world where they are not wanted
Daniel- you know speaking in the third person has proven that your crazy.
Rodney- crazy like a fox

User avatar
Eaquae Legit
Speaker for the Dead
Speaker for the Dead
Posts: 5185
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:30 pm
Title: Age quod agis
First Joined: 04 Feb 2002
Location: ^ Geez, read the sign.
Contact:

Postby Eaquae Legit » Sun Nov 16, 2008 8:17 pm

Alexander/shadow, many celebrities do already. Michael J. Fox is a huge supporter. So was Christopher Reeve.
"Only for today, I will devote 10 minutes of my time to some good reading, remembering that just as food is necessary to the life of the body, so good reading is necessary to the life of the soul." -- Pope John XXIII

User avatar
neo-dragon
Commander
Commander
Posts: 2516
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:26 pm
Title: Huey Revolutionary
Location: Canada

Postby neo-dragon » Thu Nov 20, 2008 3:41 pm

Right. This is what I'm asking about. Say somebody decided to have an abortion. You now have a dead fetus, and nothing can undo what has been done. You can either use it for the advancement of science, or do nothing with it.

On one hand, only good can come from it. On the other hand, nothing. You choose nothing?
True. But wouldn't that also serve as a roundabout justification of abortion?

So those thinking of aborting could morally allow it, saying that they are advancing science?

It doesn't make sense to me that one would end a human life in order to extend another human life without permission of the martyr.

And that is EXACTLY what I was getting at. Thank you for putting it into words, akrol.
Who's ever actually going to say, "I wasn't going to have an abortion, but since it'll help advance science, I guess I will after all." I really can't believe that that would be the one factor that convinces someone to abort, or even make them feel better about it once they've decide.

I just can't see a logical reason not to obtain some benefit after the fact. Ending a life to save another life may not make sense, but the life isn't being ended for that or any other purpose. It's just being ended regardless.
"Deep in the human unconscious is a pervasive need for a logical universe that makes sense. But the real universe is always one step beyond logic."
- Frank Herbert's 'Dune'

User avatar
Bean_wannabe
Soldier
Soldier
Posts: 485
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 11:30 am
Title: I spy with my Fishy Eye
First Joined: 08 Nov 2007
Location: England

Postby Bean_wannabe » Fri Nov 21, 2008 4:46 pm

I'm against stem cell research involving the killing of embryos or fetuses. Bone marrow stem cells, fine.
Mostly for the same reasons that I'm against abortion - one life is worth just as much as another.

User avatar
Person122
Soldier
Soldier
Posts: 63
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 7:18 pm
Location: Sorreledolce (Actually it's USA North America Earth Sol System)
Contact:

Postby Person122 » Sun Nov 30, 2008 4:02 pm

I'm against stem cell research involving the killing of embryos or fetuses. Bone marrow stem cells, fine.
Mostly for the same reasons that I'm against abortion - one life is worth just as much as another.
Didn't they say there were more ways of collecting stem cell than from embryos?
"And no one is a better observer of the folkways of the adolescent male than the adolescent female." - Shadow of the Hegemon

"... Some times lies were more dependable than the truth" - Ender's Game

"He [[Locke]] has influence but he doesn't have power"
"In my experience, influence is power"

Orson Scott Card Wiki http://ansible.wikia.com

User avatar
Bean_wannabe
Soldier
Soldier
Posts: 485
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 11:30 am
Title: I spy with my Fishy Eye
First Joined: 08 Nov 2007
Location: England

Postby Bean_wannabe » Tue Dec 02, 2008 2:12 pm

Thus the bit saying 'bone marrow stem cells, fine'

User avatar
Aesculapius
Soldier
Soldier
Posts: 496
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 2:28 pm
Location: Canada, eh?
Contact:

Postby Aesculapius » Mon Feb 23, 2009 11:23 am

I haven't read any of the previous comments to this topic and I'm stating my opinion:
I think stem cell research is kind of like a drug. You find it weird the first time, but it starts to get addicting because it helps "solve" all of your problems.
I think that if stem cell research is done purely for the prupose of healing others, and not for some other random diobolical prupose such as cloning (?), then it sounds fair enough.
If scientists happen to reach a stage where stem cell research can be used for many other kidns of things (perhaps it might randomly lead to the cure for cancer) then could it not also cause cancer if done by the wrong mind(s)?
That's only an example, I don't know enough to say it might actually be possible, but that can happen, just as it has happened in the past with many other things.
So, I think if the research is being in moderate proportion, then I suppose I can say I support it.
"He that falls in love with himself will have no rivals."
-Benjamin Franklin

Aesculapiüs

User avatar
powerfulcheese04
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1392
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 2:49 pm
Title: Momma Cat
Contact:

Postby powerfulcheese04 » Mon Mar 02, 2009 5:00 pm

Aesculpaius, I think it is really interesting that you use the name of a mythical healer, and yet seem to have so little knowledge of medicine or science.

I don't think stem cell research has the possibilty of being addictive. For one, micromanipulation and tissue culture aren't really fun. Though, I suppose you could argue that making scientific advances is fun.

Also, cloning is not "random" or "diabolical." It's a reproductive technology that has been progressively improved upon since it was first concieved. (Ah, a repro pun!) It is not currently done in humans due to ethical debates, one of which is the use of embryos. (Since cloning involves in some way de-nucleating an ovum, reprogramming a somatic nucleus and combining the two.)

As to your cancer argument, stem cells would not "randomly" lead to the cure for cancer. While many discoveries are made as unforseen corollaries to a given experiment, the methods are still methodical, well documented and repeatable. Not random.

Also, any form of research, thought or discovery could lead to some kind of damage, which is why things are regulated.
-Kim

User avatar
elfprince13
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1991
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 11:27 pm
Title: The Bombadil
Location: 127.0.0.1
Contact:

Postby elfprince13 » Mon Mar 02, 2009 5:25 pm

I support stem cell research, I don't know anyone who doesn't. The real question is whether or not you support embryonic stem cell research, which I don't, because I belief human life begins at conception, and in fact embryonic stell cell research really ought to be an irrelevant question at this point, since I just read an article about scientists creating electrically active neurons from induced Pluripotent Stem Cells (stem cells created from adult somatic cells).

http://www.examiner.com/x-1242-Science- ... atic-cells


[edit]
and just today, creating stem cells from skin cells: http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=1342585
"But the conversation of the mind was truer than any language, and they knew each other better than they ever could have by use of mere sight and touch."

User avatar
powerfulcheese04
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1392
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 2:49 pm
Title: Momma Cat
Contact:

Postby powerfulcheese04 » Tue Mar 03, 2009 3:49 pm

iPSC are an interesting idea, but often run into a number of technical problems, usually involving their reprogramming. However, I am avidly following the journals about them.

(Also, be careful with pop science articles. Both of those have misrepresented facts in them.)
-Kim

User avatar
elfprince13
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1991
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 11:27 pm
Title: The Bombadil
Location: 127.0.0.1
Contact:

Postby elfprince13 » Tue Mar 03, 2009 5:29 pm

iPSC are an interesting idea, but often run into a number of technical problems, usually involving their reprogramming.
which has now been accomplished successfully (that being the point of the above article) :P
(Also, be careful with pop science articles. Both of those have misrepresented facts in them.)
for the most part they're all I have to work from, since I don't have access to any real journals :( for the most part though, they're pretty good for keeping up with recent developments.
"But the conversation of the mind was truer than any language, and they knew each other better than they ever could have by use of mere sight and touch."

User avatar
powerfulcheese04
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1392
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 2:49 pm
Title: Momma Cat
Contact:

Postby powerfulcheese04 » Tue Mar 03, 2009 8:30 pm

Actually, it has been shown that they think they can successfully create iPCS. I know you think you caught me out, but, no. These are still so new they are being characterized. It also hasn't really been proven how well they differentiate into functional adult cells. Yes, they have electrically active neuronal cells. That is not the same thing as a functional neuron. It also fails to mention whether or not they controlled it such that the neurotransmitters are the correct ones.

Also, if you are reading pop science, be careful acting like an expert. I know that it's all that's generally available to the public, but it's also generally written by people who don't understand the subject, so it's being filtered to you through people who don't get it. So, while the gist is usually ok, the details are often not.
-Kim


Return to “Milagre Town Square”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot] and 10 guests