Stem Cell Research

what do you guys think? legit or not? i'm studying it in AP biology class; my teacher brought up the idea of it being controversial, but i dono, i'd like to hear what 'teh peoplez from teh intranet' have to think

The big hooha is over the source of the stem cells being used. Research using adult stems is pretty clean, but when you start moving back in the timeline to natal and fetal stem cells-- them's fightin' words. Unfortunately, the younger stems are much more resilient and adaptable, so the researchers would rather spend their hard-earned research money on them.

Indeed...I can hardly blame them. If they could find a way to make adult stem cells as resilient and nice to work with, we'd really see some forward movement in this field in the U.S.

The issue is so chock-full of controversy here that we might well see other countries leapfrog us in this particular area of medicine. And it's not a minor field...there are some wondrous things you can potentially do with stem cells that you might not be able to do any other way.

it's impossible to make Adult stem cells like newborns; the reason Newborn's are so awesome is because they havnt started making any real proteins; so they can be ANY cell, all the researches have to do is insert protein/dna and "POOF" it turns into whatever cell they feel like. Adult stem cells have already started production of protein, and the only way to really make it stop is to destroy that which makes proteins: the nucleus.

ugh, as well did anyone hear the Mouse genome is identicle to the Human genome?

The controversy isn't whether or not it'll work...instead, it's controversial for religious people...playing God, etc. Currently they use stuff from fertility clinics that don't need it anymore...but maybe if the demand grows, they might start paying people to get pregnant and terminate it for money...etc etc. Some people worry that we'll start cloning humans, or try and create better (evolved) humans. The majority of humans all over Earth believed in one form of God or another, hence all of the resistance.

California just passed a law opening the road to stem cell research, but they admit that it will take at least 10 years before we even see results.

I'd explain more, but you're still learning about it (that, and it's been years since I was a bio major in college...I switched to comp sci and got a degree in that instead)

i feel the same way, but about technology and future advancement in general. i feel like the US has become the fist and muscle of the world while asia and europe are becoming the intellect.

as for my opinion...

i say take the religious idiot who screams that SC research is immoral and hedonistic, snap his kneck so that he's confined to a wheel chair and needs someone to wipe his ass for him, and then ask him what he thinks about stem cell research.

i'd be willing to bet his opinion would change a tad. and i think the opinions of those who's lives would be changed for the better on behalf of SCR are most important. not those of someone who thinks he knows what God wants.

There may be a way to reset the cell to initial state... but as you pointed out, part of the problem is having the right proteins in the mix to begin with.

Actually, you would have killed him with that move.

And the arguement isn't over playing god, its about where they get the stem cells, and what they have to kill to get it. Its like abortion, so naturally its going to be controversial. I hardly think its fair to call the religous person an idiot. You sound more like an idiot there.

Personally, I figure if such research reaps rewards, then its worth it. But people are entitled to believe as they wish.

my observation is that there is remarkable correlatinon between grandstanding religious conservatives, and the line of thought that the acquisition of pluripotent stem cells from embryos and fetuses is morally obtuse. while a bit on the aggressive side , i feel that my point is valid and at the heart of the argument; i'm yet to hear the paraplegics, quadriplegics, sight impaired, even the diabetic, condemn medical research that may be life saving or life altering to them, because it is immoral to others.



alright, then, push him off a horse

....it doesnt have to be a religious nut. i think anyone who staunchly opposes the medical practices in question, may see things in a different light if they, themselves, were victim to an irreversible condition. and i'm not insinuating that people in wheel chairs and blind people want to slaughter fetuses by the thousands. i think we all would rather avoid touching embryos and fetuses, or the topic of cloning, but the possibilities of SCR are countless and could very well lead to the most miraculous medical achievements in the history of mankind.

is that a little better than my previous "put an idiot in a wheel chair" argument?

You are right in that last paragraph. Look at the late Christopher Reeves, he could've cared less about quadraplegics until it happened to him. Michael J Fox is now actively supporting Parkinson's research after he found that he had it.

Neither of these men are what I would call terrible, and evil men. In fact it's good that they have decided to be so gracious. It is human nature to become aware after the fact, and I do not condemn them for it.

However, they do not get the stem cells from fetuses, they grow embryos in a lab. To me its not something I find that controversial or objectionable. But the embryos they believe are alive. We aren't talking about bringing a man and woman into a lab and letting them fuck eachother's brains out to create test subjects. As much as I wish it were true... I'd be putting in for that research

Seriously though, I understand where you're coming from. Its just that the other side of the debate has a valid point, too, be they the religious right or not. But it is true that most of them are hard core religious citizens; I do not debate you there.

i brought the point up to my teacher (college) and he called me a "Posh fool" for even questioning Stem cell research. Bah, i hope all scientists arn't so narrow minded. He also told me, with a bright-red face, that the American Science community is the "laughing stock of the world" because we have so many restrictions here. like i said before i'm not half as religious as the next guy, but wether god exists or not, i pity the foo who thinks america, europe and soon Asia should be rivals for no reason. Other then possibly, and most likely, have another war in the future because Ireland starts a clone army.


this is the problem i have with it. Wether it has a 'soul' or not, i'm not too religious, it definately is alive at some level. Really the only problem i have with stem cell research is that it's thought of for it's purposes and not what it is. While i would absolutely love to see people who can't walk or see to get up and do it, i'm wondering if there isn't another way... like through the Mouse genome or somthing.

your professor is giving a bad name to the scientists he claims he defends.
laughing stock? i think we're laughable for many reasons, but not necessarily in this respect. we are pretty far on the right side of the political spectrum as a country, compared to other western nations. and i do believe that religious conservatisism retards the growth of technology and science - if sometimes for good reason. and many political science professors would agree with my statement from before: the US has become the fist and muscle of the world while asia and europe are becoming the intellect. the reality is, the EU is overtaking the US in practically all facets of education, science, technology, and economic strength. so while your professor comes off as a bitter old man, i suppose he has a valid point in there somewhere.

Europe isn't taking over. Their euro's worth more than the dollar because we make it that way. Why do you think they're complaining about it? They want us to increase its value next to the Euro so Made in the USA is no longer cheaper over there than Made in France, or Made in Germany.

We've always been pretty lacking compared to Europe in Education, but its not like they're perfect. Its easier to mind a system in a country the size of one of our states. Technology? Hardly the case; in fact Japan has them weened out by a land slide. We're coming in second. Its how they chose to implement their technology that in some cases is better. Science? It depends on what type of science you're talking about. Medical science based in the US seems to be doing quite well. It was an American Based Company that just made major breakthroughs in cancer treatments. Bristoll Meyer, Squibb Company.

So he's just got a case of typical Euro-jealousy.

speaking of, a LOT of my friends beleive Canada and the EU are far superior to the US... but when i think about the major medical/scientific discoveries made, in the 19th and 20th centuries, they seemed to come solely from Europe. But in the 21st centure, nearly every scientific discover has come from the US.. like Space flight, Microchips and the computers we're working on now, and cars. i dono, maybe i'm wrong, but i can't think of anything that's been coming out of europe except criticism for the US :*(

Computer viruses, Russian brides and space exploration technology.