• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Stem Cell Bill passes 63-37

knicksin2010

New member
Joined
Oct 15, 2005
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
Location
NJ, USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
The most controversial of the 3 bills passed 63-37 however that is 4 short of the 67 required to over turn what will be Bush's 1st veto

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060718/ap_on_go_co/stem_cells


It's a sad day for millions of Americans who are affected in some way by loved ones being inflicted by diseases to be told that frozen Petri dishes should be thrown away without researching potential gains we could get from them that could one day save their loved ones
 
Last edited:

talloulou

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
15,998
Reaction score
3,962
Location
Tiamat's better half
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
knicksin2010 said:
The most controversial of the 3 bills passed 63-37 however that is 4 short of the 67 required to over turn what will be Bush's 1st veto

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060718/ap_on_go_co/stem_cells


It's a sad day for millions of Americans who are affected in some way by loved ones being inflicted by diseases to be told that frozen Petri dishes should be thrown away without researching potential gains we could get from them that could one day save their loved ones

Why are you blaming the government? Why should the government fund this? Private companies are free to fund it on their own and lord knows they will bel the ones who make money in the end. If the research is as promising as some make it out to be then I'm sure it will get funding somewhere else. What's wrong with that?
 

Alex

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
2,963
Reaction score
855
Location
Milwaukee, WI
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
talloulou said:
Why are you blaming the government? Why should the government fund this? Private companies are free to fund it on their own and lord knows they will bel the ones who make money in the end. If the research is as promising as some make it out to be then I'm sure it will get funding somewhere else. What's wrong with that?

I agree with this. It is not the government's responsibility to fund medical research.
 

DeeJayH

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
11,728
Reaction score
1,688
Location
Scooping Zeus' Poop
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
not to mention this is in regards to Govt Funded EMBRYONIC stem cell research ONLY, unless i am mistaken
and it is not necessary to begin with
plenty of room in the private sector which IS ALREADY ENGAGED IN SUCH RESEARCH
so dont sit there with crocodile tears over a BS non-issue
 

Binary_Digit

DP Veteran
Joined
May 21, 2005
Messages
5,304
Reaction score
3,003
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Are you three suggesting there should be no Federal funding for AIDS or cancer research either? How much Federal money is spent treating cancer today, and wouldn't that money be better spent investing in the cure? Or would you just rather have that 20 bucks back in your own paycheck?
 

26 X World Champs

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
7,536
Reaction score
429
Location
Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
talloulou said:
Why are you blaming the government? Why should the government fund this? Private companies are free to fund it on their own and lord knows they will bel the ones who make money in the end. If the research is as promising as some make it out to be then I'm sure it will get funding somewhere else. What's wrong with that?
Not exactly a pro-life stance, now is this? How can anyone pretend to be "pro-life" yet be against SCIENCE that can save millions of lives, cure diseases like Diabetes (which I have), help people who are paralyzed to walk again, cure cancer, Alzheimer's etc.?

Do you think we'd have stopped Polio without government funding? How about AIDS? Where would we be today without that money? How about a zillion others like Measles, Mumps, et al?

How can anyone be for funding rebuilding Iraq ahead of funding medical research that has the potential to save millions of lives and alter the course of disease for all mankind?

I truly believe that to be against this science is unconscienable...it reminds me of the Amish who refuse to take the medicines we have today and some die in that community due to this stilted and insane reasoning.

If Bush vetoes this bill it will HURT the GOP a LOT but you know what? That means $hit because the real people getting hurt are all of us and political party has nothing to do with it.

Remember we're talking about using embryos that would otherwise be destroyed, not used!

Bush continues to be the very worst President in our history and this is another sad example of how retarded his "thinking" (if you can call it thinking) is.

Let's set the record straight! By vetoeing this bill Bush is coming out against Science, Medicine, Nursing, Health Care and the general well being of all of us. How can ANYONE be against DOCTORS!
 

talloulou

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
15,998
Reaction score
3,962
Location
Tiamat's better half
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Binary_Digit said:
Are you three suggesting there should be no Federal funding for AIDS or cancer research either? How much Federal money is spent treating cancer today, and wouldn't that money be better spent investing in the cure? Or would you just rather have that 20 bucks back in your own paycheck?

There's no guarantee that embryonic stem cells will produce a cure for anything. Certainly the research wouldn't be as specific or geared towards a particular outcome as AIDS or various cancer research.

Plus I personally have many questions regarding embryonic stem cell research. I do find it an "ethical" thing to ponder.

I understand that embryos in a freezer that would otherwise be thrown out in the trash can't constitute human life. How could they? Human life can't be frozen or put on hold right?

However embryonic stem cell research without question is taking another step in a direction that I'm not sure we should necessarily go without an "ethical discussion." When people spoke out against IVF and the first test tube babies start showing up I thought they were silly. I mean clearly IVF was a "gift" for couples needing help with fertility...how could that be wrong? But others complained that it was a giant step in a particular direction that might not always be benign. Now we are talking about allowing these test tube creations to grow for a bit outside the uterus so we can take them apart for parts. Surely there must be some ethical concerns with the road we are traveling down. People don't want to talk about ethics and they sort of blow you off as if ethics and religion are one in the same but they are not.

Plus they "clone" these embryos as well to increase the number available. And cloning is another area thats highly questionable.

So basically I don't think the government should federally fund embryonic stem cells especially in light of the fact that the research is very all over the place and seems to be more about monkeying around with these fertilized embryos in general vs working to meet a particular specific goal like curing AIDS.

I guess I don't believe that this is the "MAGIC CURE ALL" that hype would suggest.

And not for nothing but we are highly in debt right now.
 
Last edited:

talloulou

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
15,998
Reaction score
3,962
Location
Tiamat's better half
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
26 X World Champs said:
Let's set the record straight! By vetoeing this bill Bush is coming out against Science, Medicine, Nursing, Health Care and the general well being of all of us. How can ANYONE be against DOCTORS!


I think that's slightly absurd.....not to mention hysterical.
 

talloulou

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
15,998
Reaction score
3,962
Location
Tiamat's better half
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
26 X World Champs said:
I truly believe that to be against this science is unconscienable...it reminds me of the Amish who refuse to take the medicines we have today and some die in that community due to this stilted and insane reasoning.

To put it in perspective there are people in the world who are dying because they can't afford ANTIBIOTICS which are known to cure all manner of infections that could otherwise kill you. I consider that a much bigger problem. How can it be unconscienable to believe the government shouldn't spend tons of $$$$ on research that is contraverial as well as ???? as to what the results of the research will be all the while there are people who are dying because they don't have $$$ for medicine that definitely will help them and is readily available? I consider that much worse.

And embryonic stem cell research is being done right this very minute in more than one state so I don't see why all the hysteria.
 

Binary_Digit

DP Veteran
Joined
May 21, 2005
Messages
5,304
Reaction score
3,003
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
talloulou said:
There's no guarantee that embryonic stem cells will produce a cure for anything. Certainly the research wouldn't be as specific or geared towards a particular outcome as AIDS or various cancer research.
It's the most promising possibility for a cure to cancer, diabetes, and AIDS that we've ever discovered. They have already helped mice with severed spinal chords regain the use of their hind legs and bowels. Besides these people aren't idiots, if most of them agree it's possible then I'm inclined to believe them.

talloulou said:
Plus I personally have many questions regarding embryonic stem cell research. I do find it an "ethical" thing to ponder.

I understand that embryos in a freezer that would otherwise be thrown out in the trash can't constitute human life. How could they? Human life can't be frozen or put on hold right?

However embryonic stem cell research without question is taking another step in a direction that I'm not sure we should necessarily go without an "ethical discussion." When people spoke out against IVF and the first test tube babies start showing up I thought they were silly. I mean clearly IVF was a "gift" for couples needing help with fertility...how could that be wrong? But others complained that it was a giant step in a particular direction that might not always be benign. Now we are talking about allowing these test tube creations to grow for a bit outside the uterus so we can take them apart for parts. Surely there must be some ethical concerns with the road we are traveling down. People don't want to talk about ethics and they sort of blow you off as if ethics and religion are one in the same but they are not.

Plus they "clone" these embryos as well to increase the number available. And cloning is another area thats highly questionable.
That's fair enough. It depends on what kind of value you place on the embryo, whether it's a person or not. I would bet money that most anti-stem cell people are also anti-abortion. I personally give it less value than the mice they use.

talloulou said:
So basically I don't think the government should federally fund embryonic stem cells especially in light of the fact that the research is very all over the place and seems to be more about monkeying around with these fertilized embryos in general vs working to meet a particular specific goal like curing AIDS.
That's a good point actually, maybe they should compromise and fund a small team of reserachers who have specific goals to prove using mice what stem cells can do, then decide whether or not it's worth funding research for human treatment based on their findings.

talloulou said:
And not for nothing but we are highly in debt right now.
That's only a reason to not fund it right now, but that reason will go away....eventually.
 

Binary_Digit

DP Veteran
Joined
May 21, 2005
Messages
5,304
Reaction score
3,003
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
talloulou said:
To put it in perspective there are people in the world who are dying because they can't afford ANTIBIOTICS which are known to cure all manner of infections that could otherwise kill you. I consider that a much bigger problem. How can it be unconscienable to believe the government shouldn't spend tons of $$$$ on research that is contraverial as well as ???? as to what the results of the research will be all the while there are people who are dying because they don't have $$$ for medicine that definitely will help them and is readily available? I consider that much worse.
Another good point Tall, but that is a tough ultimatum. You're asking us to decide between two people which one will die. If one of them is American, and the money was paid by Americans, then I think the American life should be saved, based on that alone.

talloulou said:
And embryonic stem cell research is being done right this very minute in more than one state so I don't see why all the hysteria.
The hysteria is for Federal funding. I'll admit the government pays for some stupid programs, but I don't think this would be one of them.
 

DeeJayH

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
11,728
Reaction score
1,688
Location
Scooping Zeus' Poop
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Binary_Digit said:
It's the most promising possibility for a cure to cancer, diabetes, and AIDS that we've ever discovered. They have already helped mice with severed spinal chords regain the use of their hind legs and bowels.

mind backing this up with a source
I have heard of numerous advances as a result of Stem Cell Research
But not a single advance due to EMBRYONIC Stem Cell research
 

tecoyah

Illusionary
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
10,450
Reaction score
3,843
Location
Louisville, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Most research at this point is shifting away from Embyonic stem cells....to Adult stem cells. The reasons are complex and are in some ways effected by the ethics crowd....but mostly its just that adult cells seem to work better in most cases.
 
Last edited:

talloulou

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
15,998
Reaction score
3,962
Location
Tiamat's better half
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
tecoyah said:
Most research at this point is shifting away from Emvyonic stem cells....to Adult stem cells. The reasons are complex and are in some ways effected by the ethics crowd....but mostly its just that adult cells seem to work better in most cases.

I thought it was 'cause there is apparently some unregulated growth problem with embryonic stem cells that they haven't figured out how to control yet so the potential for tumors and what not is too high.
 

tecoyah

Illusionary
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
10,450
Reaction score
3,843
Location
Louisville, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
talloulou said:
I thought it was 'cause there is apparently some unregulated growth problem with embryonic stem cells that they haven't figured out how to control yet so the potential for tumors and what not is too high.

That would definately be part of "Not Working as Well"....heh
 

ProudAmerican

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 13, 2005
Messages
2,694
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Binary_Digit said:
Are you three suggesting there should be no Federal funding for AIDS or cancer research either? How much Federal money is spent treating cancer today, and wouldn't that money be better spent investing in the cure? Or would you just rather have that 20 bucks back in your own paycheck?


St. Judes would continue to function decades into the future if there was never another dollar donated. This is according to a friend of mine whos wife works in their financial dept.

so, YES.....I am saying the government should have no part in funding Aids or Cancer research.

they are funded fully through private donations.
 

26 X World Champs

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
7,536
Reaction score
429
Location
Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
ProudAmerican said:
St. Judes would continue to function decades into the future if there was never another dollar donated. This is according to a friend of mine whos wife works in their financial dept.

so, YES.....I am saying the government should have no part in funding Aids or Cancer research.

they are funded fully through private donations.
How can you write stuff like this? Not only is it an utter untruth it is also, IMHO, socialogically inept. What sort of person is against our government spending our tax money on scientific research? It boggles the mind to think that some of you are so selfish, so greedy, so uncaring of your neighbors that you would be against providing significant funding to finding cures for diseases that are killing millions of Americans!

The fact that you, "Proud American" are pro war and anti-science makes your DP screen name an oxymoron.

If our history had followed your inept rationale the health of our nation and the world for that matter would be significantly worse than it is today.

I suppose the concept of "preventive medicine" is too deep for your intelect?
 

talloulou

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
15,998
Reaction score
3,962
Location
Tiamat's better half
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
ProudAmerican said:
St. Judes would continue to function decades into the future if there was never another dollar donated. This is according to a friend of mine whos wife works in their financial dept.

so, YES.....I am saying the government should have no part in funding Aids or Cancer research.

they are funded fully through private donations.

Well if that's true it's most likely because their primary function is children. It's easy to collect money for sick kids. I'm not sure other organizations fair as well. Their advertising campaigns with celebs are huge and powerful and most can't resist helping sick children. I imagine funding for AIDS research might be harder to come by.
 

faithful_servant

DP Veteran
Joined
May 18, 2006
Messages
12,533
Reaction score
5,659
Location
Beautiful Central Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
HELLO MCFLY!!! There has been NO successful use of embryonic stem cells and in fact the times they have been used have had some hugely negative resutls (tumors, tissue rejection, etc.). Adult stem cells, OTH, have been highly successful in a vast number of areas. If my tax dollars are to be spent on any stem cell research, I want it spent on the line that is actually producing results, instead of political hay.
 

faithful_servant

DP Veteran
Joined
May 18, 2006
Messages
12,533
Reaction score
5,659
Location
Beautiful Central Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Binary_Digit said:
It's the most promising possibility for a cure to cancer, diabetes, and AIDS that we've ever discovered. They have already helped mice with severed spinal chords regain the use of their hind legs and bowels. Besides these people aren't idiots, if most of them agree it's possible then I'm inclined to believe them.
Sorry, but that's not true. The only reported success in thias area turned out to be a fraud. The biggest reason this is ven an issue is that there is a bunch of federal money to be sucked up by the researchers. If this line of research had any real potential, investors would be lining up to invest in it. But strangely enough they aren't. I wonder why......
 

Goobieman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
17,343
Reaction score
2,876
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
knicksin2010 said:
It's a sad day for millions of Americans who are affected in some way by loved ones being inflicted by diseases to be told that frozen Petri dishes should be thrown away without researching potential gains we could get from them that could one day save their loved ones

Nothing precludes PRIVATE funding of this research.
 

Goobieman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
17,343
Reaction score
2,876
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Binary_Digit said:
Are you three suggesting there should be no Federal funding for AIDS or cancer research either? How much Federal money is spent treating cancer today, and wouldn't that money be better spent investing in the cure? Or would you just rather have that 20 bucks back in your own paycheck?

Doesnt matter.
Fact is, that the government doesnt fund it doesnt mean it won't be funded.

Your position presupposes that government -should- fund this, but that's just a presupposition on your part.
 

tecoyah

Illusionary
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
10,450
Reaction score
3,843
Location
Louisville, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
My Grandfather suffers from Parkinsons, I am not upset at this Veto. At least not for the reasons most are. Truth be told, science has all but abandoned Embryonic Stem Cells for many reasons, not the least of which is the recent findings in Adult stem cell research:

"
Ultimate stem cell discovered

A stem cell has been found in adults that can turn into every single tissue in the body. It might turn out to be the most important cell ever discovered.

Until now, only stem cells from early embryos were thought to have such properties. If the finding is confirmed, it will mean cells from your own body could one day be turned into all sorts of perfectly matched replacement tissues and even organs.

Ethical dilemma: Why most researchers insist embryonic stem cell studies must continue

If so, there would be no need to resort to therapeutic cloning - cloning people to get matching stem cells from the resulting embryos. Nor would you have to genetically engineer embryonic stem cells (ESCs) to create a "one cell fits all" line that does not trigger immune rejection. The discovery of such versatile adult stem cells will also fan the debate about whether embryonic stem cell research is justified.

"The work is very exciting," says Ihor Lemischka of Princeton University. "They can differentiate into pretty much everything that an embryonic stem cell can differentiate into."
Remarkable findings

The cells were found in the bone marrow of adults by Catherine Verfaillie at the University of Minnesota. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and though the team has so far published little, a patent application seen by New Scientist shows the team has carried out extensive experiments.

These confirm that the cells - dubbed multipotent adult progenitor cells, or MAPCs - have the same potential as ESCs. "It's very dramatic, the kinds of observations [Verfaillie] is reporting," says Irving Weissman of Stanford University. "The findings, if reproducible, are remarkable."

At least two other labs claim to have found similar cells in mice, and one biotech company, MorphoGen Pharmaceuticals of San Diego, says it has found them in skin and muscle as well as human bone marrow. But Verfaillie's team appears to be the first to carry out the key experiments needed to back up the claim that these adult stem cells are as versatile as ESCs.

Verfaillie extracted the MAPCs from the bone marrow of mice, rats and humans in a series of stages. Cells that do not carry certain surface markers, or do not grow under certain conditions, are gradually eliminated, leaving a population rich in MAPCs. Verfaillie says her lab has reliably isolated the cells from about 70 per cent of the 100 or so human volunteers who donated marrow samples.
Indefinite growth

The cells seem to grow indefinitely in culture, like ESCs. Some cell lines have been growing for almost two years and have kept their characteristics, with no signs of ageing, she says.

Given the right conditions, MAPCs can turn into a myriad of tissue types: muscle, cartilage, bone, liver and different types of neurons and brain cells. Crucially, using a technique called retroviral marking, Verfaillie has shown that the descendants of a single cell can turn into all these different cell types - a key experiment in proving that MAPCs are truly versatile.

Also, Verfaillie's group has done the tests that are perhaps the gold standard in assessing a cell's plasticity. She placed single MAPCs from mice into very early mouse embryos, when they are just a ball of cells. Analyses of mice born after the experiment reveal that a single MAPC can contribute to all the body's tissues.

MAPCs have many of the properties of ESCs, but they are not identical. Unlike ESCs, for example, they do not seem to form cancerous masses if you inject them into adults. This would obviously be highly desirable if confirmed. "The data looks very good, it's very hard to find any flaws," says Lemischka. But it still has to be independently confirmed by other groups, he adds.
Fundamental questions

Meanwhile, there are some fundamental questions that must be answered, experts say. One is whether MAPCs really form functioning cells.

Stem cells that differentiate may express markers characteristic of many different cell types, says Freda Miller of McGill University. But simply detecting markers for, say, neural tissue does not prove that a stem cell really has become a working neuron.

Verfaillie's findings also raise questions about the nature of stem cells. Her team thinks that MAPCs are rare cells present in the bone marrow that can be fished out through a series of enriching steps. But others think the selection process actually creates the MAPCs.

"I don't think there is 'a cell' that is lurking there that can do this. I think that Catherine has found a way to produce a cell that can behave this way," says Neil Theise of New York University Medical School."


With the Religious outcry (my actual reason for disliking the Veto, as I feel Bush is legislating religion), there is no reason to upset the minority by following a "not quite dead....but not feeling real good" end.
 
Top Bottom