Why I support stem cell research, why don't you?

[Lerxst]

Basically I suffer from a degenerative eye disease called retinitis pigmentosa. It is slowly robbing me of my eyesight, and has already robbed me of my night vision. I have lived for years knowing that I will probably go blind in my 50's. All of my brothers are already legally blind and so is one of my sisters, but this is more from macular degeneration than RP...although they also suffer from RP.

I have recently read some research articles about stem cell research in which human retinal stem cells were found to be able to regenerate in mice. The researchers believed this held great promise. Whether or not they can perfect this treatment to save or correct my vision and that of my siblings, they may be able to save my youngest son's as well as my nieces and nephews. The other implications are just so great with regard to other diseases and disorders it's truly like we are knocking on the door of a medical miracle. Yet there are those out there who are fighting it.

Basically I am not sure why any decent human would protest stem cell research, especially based upon a religious dogma. This is probably an old argument but one I just felt like brining up.

Do you support stem cell research? If not why?

 

[DarkWizard12]

No one is against stem cell research. Only embryonic stem cell research. And since you don't need embryonic stem cells for your disease well, LETS FUND ASC(adult stem cell) RESAERCH! YEA!

 

[azura28]

Basically I suffer from a degenerative eye disease called retinitis pigmentosa. It is slowly robbing me of my eyesight, and has already robbed me of my night vision. I have lived for years knowing that I will probably go blind in my 50's. All of my brothers are already legally blind and so is one of my sisters, but this is more from macular degeneration than RP...although they also suffer from RP.

I have recently read some research articles about stem cell research in which human retinal stem cells were found to be able to regenerate in mice. The researchers believed this held great promise. Whether or not they can perfect this treatment to save or correct my vision and that of my siblings, they may be able to save my youngest son's as well as my nieces and nephews. The other implications are just so great with regard to other diseases and disorders it's truly like we are knocking on the door of a medical miracle. Yet there are those out there who are fighting it.

Basically I am not sure why any decent human would protest stem cell research, especially based upon a religious dogma. This is probably an old argument but one I just felt like brining up.

Do you support stem cell research? If not why?

I definitely support it - hope you get help with your eyes before it's too late and it does not affect your job as a cop.

 

[missypea]

Basically I suffer from a degenerative eye disease called retinitis pigmentosa. It is slowly robbing me of my eyesight, and has already robbed me of my night vision. I have lived for years knowing that I will probably go blind in my 50's. All of my brothers are already legally blind and so is one of my sisters, but this is more from macular degeneration than RP...although they also suffer from RP.

I have recently read some research articles about stem cell research in which human retinal stem cells were found to be able to regenerate in mice. The researchers believed this held great promise. Whether or not they can perfect this treatment to save or correct my vision and that of my siblings, they may be able to save my youngest son's as well as my nieces and nephews. The other implications are just so great with regard to other diseases and disorders it's truly like we are knocking on the door of a medical miracle. Yet there are those out there who are fighting it.

Basically I am not sure why any decent human would protest stem cell research, especially based upon a religious dogma. This is probably an old argument but one I just felt like brining up.

Do you support stem cell research? If not why?

That's just the pits and I'm sorry to hear that Jeff. I do support stem cell research (all kinds) and I truly hope that we make enough strides forward that you're able to benefit from it.

My mother also suffers from macular degeneration. She's blind in one eye and losing the eyesight in her other. My grandmother also had it and went blind. Poor thing couldn't understand why the doctors just couldn't make her stronger glasses

:-(

 

[Lerxst]

No one is against stem cell research. Only embryonic stem cell research. And since you don't need embryonic stem cells for your disease well, LETS FUND ASC(adult stem cell) RESAERCH! YEA!

Okay, I'm a little new to the whole stem cell argument. So what is the deal with embryonic stem cell research? Is it the "it's a baby thing?"

EDIT: Okay now I understand more about the controversy. Personally, I don't see the issue human embryonic stem cell research...then again I'm a human who needs this research to progress. I guess that makes me biased.

 

[DarkWizard12]

Okay, I'm a little new to the whole stem cell argument. So what is the deal with embryonic stem cell research? Is it the "it's a baby thing?"

EDIT: Okay now I understand more about the controversy. Personally, I don't see the issue human embryonic stem cell research...then again I'm a human who needs this research to progress. I guess that makes me biased.

No, it just makes you another American who wants to waste embryos the same way we waste perfectly good meat for processesd Big Macs.

I get your point though. NEvermind adult stem cells which are proven to have the same capabilities and are quite much more abundant. Lets go take the time to kill a fetus instead! We don't just want progress, we want progress knowing we are killing future productive taxpayers, I-I mean, human beings in the process! After all, how much is life worth? NOTHING!

 

[1069]

No, it just makes you another American who wants to waste embryos the same way we waste perfectly good meat for processesd Big Macs.

Like they're not going to waste sitting in vast storage facilities frozen in liquid nitrogen. There are millions of them. What are we saving them for? To breed some mutant army with, two hundred years from now when we develop a cost efficient artificial womb?

:roll:

More are discarded each year, byproducts of IVF, than are stored.
Millions.

 

[jfuh]

It's horrible to loose any one of our senses. It's even worse if nor horrifying to see a looming dark cloud on the horizon telling you that one day it will come. I applaud your courage and desire to sacrifice yourself as long as it may be of any assistance to our future generations.
Truth be told though any medical procedural breakthrough even with the laboratory phase successfully produced, given the approval process that takes ages as well as political obstacles in the way it will be a while before this will materialize.
A stem cell is a stem cell irregardless of. But there is a crowd that insists on distinguishing between embryonic state and embryonic state. (ie post #2) even though the two are one and the same. An adult stem cell that has been converted back to an embryonic state is then in every sense an embryo but our religious section doesn't seem to think so.

 

[jfuh]

No, it just makes you another American who wants to waste embryos the same way we waste perfectly good meat for processesd Big Macs.

I get your point though. NEvermind adult stem cells which are proven to have the same capabilities and are quite much more abundant. Lets go take the time to kill a fetus instead! We don't just want progress, we want progress knowing we are killing future productive taxpayers, I-I mean, human beings in the process! After all, how much is life worth? NOTHING!

Can you explain to me, aside from the obvious genetic variation, what the difference between a stem cell line derived from boy meets girl embryo vs that from asexually derived embryo?

 

[Lerxst]

No, it just makes you another American who wants to waste embryos the same way we waste perfectly good meat for processesd Big Macs.

I get your point though. NEvermind adult stem cells which are proven to have the same capabilities and are quite much more abundant. Lets go take the time to kill a fetus instead! We don't just want progress, we want progress knowing we are killing future productive taxpayers, I-I mean, human beings in the process! After all, how much is life worth? NOTHING!

How do we "waste" them? Are we running out? From what I have read there are certain benefits to embryonic stem cells, although I am just reading what may be opinion. I don't really know enough to say it's a fact one way or the other. How is an embryo that is frozen a human? Why the hell are we keeping them? I tend to ask the question along the lines of what 10 is getting at...how the hell do you put human value on something you are keeping in a jar in a freezer for years?

Sorry, I just don't get that.

 

[Lerxst]

It's horrible to loose any one of our senses. It's even worse if nor horrifying to see a looming dark cloud on the horizon telling you that one day it will come. I applaud your courage and desire to sacrifice yourself as long as it may be of any assistance to our future generations.
Truth be told though any medical procedural breakthrough even with the laboratory phase successfully produced, given the approval process that takes ages as well as political obstacles in the way it will be a while before this will materialize.
A stem cell is a stem cell irregardless of. But there is a crowd that insists on distinguishing between embryonic state and embryonic state. (ie post #2) even though the two are one and the same. An adult stem cell that has been converted back to an embryonic state is then in every sense an embryo but our religious section doesn't seem to think so.

Yeah I know it will take a while, maybe they will have some more progress in ten years or something will be approved. I am only 39 so I have some time. I'm a little heavy for my size but in decent health (well stress and sleep apnea related blood pressure is an issue but it's under control).

And yes, the gradual deterioration, which has been slow, is scary. I have began getting depressed over it as of late. I worry about not being able to take care of family issues and such. I'm fully vested in my retirement, I have been paying off all my debts so I can go into my disability years debt free. I'm getting ready to build a good size yet very energy efficient home which I hope to have paid off in five or six years. And if all goes right as my vision does finally sideline me from my ability to earn, I hope to sell of my two companies and put enough coin in the bank to take care of any issues.

I can only hope. Hey, I know I am not the only one praying for some miracle breakthroughs on this.

 

[jfuh]

Yeah I know it will take a while, maybe they will have some more progress in ten years or something will be approved. I am only 39 so I have some time. I'm a little heavy for my size but in decent health (well stress and sleep apnea related blood pressure is an issue but it's under control).

And yes, the gradual deterioration, which has been slow, is scary. I have began getting depressed over it as of late. I worry about not being able to take care of family issues and such. I'm fully vested in my retirement, I have been paying off all my debts so I can go into my disability years debt free. I'm getting ready to build a good size yet very energy efficient home which I hope to have paid off in five or six years. And if all goes right as my vision does finally sideline me from my ability to earn, I hope to sell of my two companies and put enough coin in the bank to take care of any issues.

I can only hope. Hey, I know I am not the only one praying for some miracle breakthroughs on this.

It's something that I think everyone is wishing for.

 

[Bones]

I support stem cell research, provided those cells come from adults, and not embryos. I am against embryonic stem cell research as it has not yet been proven to work, and adult stem cells have.
I also find it rather off putting that embryos can now be created in science labs for the sole purpose of being destroyed.
Adults stem cells I am in support of, in fact, any stem cell research I'd be in support of, as long as it doesn't involve embryos.

 

[jfuh]

I support stem cell research, provided those cells come from adults, and not embryos. I am against embryonic stem cell research as it has not yet been proven to work, and adult stem cells have.
I also find it rather off putting that embryos can now be created in science labs for the sole purpose of being destroyed.
Adults stem cells I am in support of, in fact, any stem cell research I'd be in support of, as long as it doesn't involve embryos.

To the bold. That's a bit of a predicament to overcome then. How can something even have the slightest ability to work when it's not allowed to be researched first?
Also adult stem cells are simply a differed stage of differentiation - does not necessitate that they are from cells of adult human beings.
Once it becomes as differentiated as adult stem cells are it's dedicated to only become what it was pre-designated to become. Thus a liver stem cell can only become a liver organ or liver cell.
Embryonic, is a state, embryonic does not equate to baby.
An embryonic stem cell has the ability to become ANY cell in the body.
And with Yamanaka's work that means the ability to convert ANY mature cell into another embryonic stem cell.
This embryonic stem cell unless otherwise manipulated can also become another "baby".
So, what's the difference?

 

[Bones]

To the bold. That's a bit of a predicament to overcome then. How can something even have the slightest ability to work when it's not allowed to be researched first?

It angers me that scientists can say that it will work, when they have nothing to show for it. If they say that it will work, then show us. But so far they claim it will work yet they cannot prove it.

An embryonic stem cell has the ability to become ANY cell in the body.
And with Yamanaka's work that means the ability to convert ANY mature cell into another embryonic stem cell.
This embryonic stem cell unless otherwise manipulated can also become another "baby".
So, what's the difference?

I know an embryonic stem cell can become any cell, but I don't think it should.
Even though I am of the belief that an embryo is not a baby, I just don't like the idea of creating an embryo, then sucking it's cells out to create different cells.
I am having great difficulty getting past this, as I do not think it is right

 

[Lerxst]

It angers me that scientists can say that it will work, when they have nothing to show for it. If they say that it will work, then show us. But so far they claim it will work yet they cannot prove it.



I know an embryonic stem cell can become any cell, but I don't think it should.
Even though I am of the belief that an embryo is not a baby, I just don't like the idea of creating an embryo, then sucking it's cells out to create different cells.
I am having great difficulty getting past this, as I do not think it is right

I suppose my question would be that if it's not a baby, and say the cells are going to improve the life of a child suffering from cancer, then what is wrong with that? Nobody is playing at God here or whatever (not saying that is your argument, maybe it is...I don't know thought). We are just trying to find a way to improve quality of life and relieve suffering and premature death.

Although if you are of the "hey let disease thin the heard otherwise we are going to be way overcrowded too soon" than I suppose this ins't something one would be interested in.

From my perspective, a cure would mean retaining my sight and maybe even getting my family members theirs back. Most importantly it would save my child's sight.

 

[jfuh]

It angers me that scientists can say that it will work, when they have nothing to show for it. If they say that it will work, then show us. But so far they claim it will work yet they cannot prove it.

You're asking for something that has no absolute proof yet. The point is stem cell RESEARCH. So how can someone research something that everyone prohibits them from researching to begin with? Of course there will never be any results. Thus it's rediculously unfair to oppose the investigation of something because thus far the investigation has not yielded any results yet.

I know an embryonic stem cell can become any cell, but I don't think it should.
Even though I am of the belief that an embryo is not a baby, I just don't like the idea of creating an embryo, then sucking it's cells out to create different cells.
I am having great difficulty getting past this, as I do not think it is right

I'm not sure if I understand you here. so I'll reserve response after further clarification.
Is it your assumption that individuals are being farmed to harvest cells?
Because you first have the statement that an embryonic stem cell (which is essentially an embryo as it can develop into an individual entity) can become any cell. But then state of "sucking out it's cells". So if you could please clarify that bit - thanks

 

[jfuh]

I suppose my question would be that if it's not a baby, and say the cells are going to improve the life of a child suffering from cancer, then what is wrong with that? Nobody is playing at God here or whatever (not saying that is your argument, maybe it is...I don't know thought). We are just trying to find a way to improve quality of life and relieve suffering and premature death.

Although if you are of the "hey let disease thin the heard otherwise we are going to be way overcrowded too soon" than I suppose this ins't something one would be interested in.

From my perspective, a cure would mean retaining my sight and maybe even getting my family members theirs back. Most importantly it would save my child's sight.

Further research could potentially rid that genetic defect all together.

 

[Bones]

I suppose my question would be that if it's not a baby, and say the cells are going to improve the life of a child suffering from cancer, then what is wrong with that? Nobody is playing at God here or whatever (not saying that is your argument, maybe it is...I don't know thought). We are just trying to find a way to improve quality of life and relieve suffering and premature death.

And we can do that without involving embryos.
I would love for people to be cured of cancer, but I do not support the use of embryonic stem cells to do this.
Harsh, but just the way I feel.

You're asking for something that has no absolute proof yet. The point is stem cell RESEARCH. So how can someone research something that everyone prohibits them from researching to begin with? Of course there will never be any results. Thus it's rediculously unfair to oppose the investigation of something because thus far the investigation has not yielded any results yet.

This is true, but the point I was trying to make was that we already have scientists saying that embryonic stem cells WILL be able to do this and that, but they cannot provid proof. It would be better if they said that these cells could POSSIBLY do this or that. They should not say they can do something without having proof of what they claim.

But then state of "sucking out it's cells". So if you could please clarify that bit - thanks

Well, a big needle is inserted into the embryo, and the stem cells extracted, ie: sucked out. The embryo is then discarded.
I do not like the idea of this happening. I do not know why. I do not care for an embryo/fetus when it is the mother deciding what happens to it, but these are adults, who are manipulating science in a way I just don't agree.
It's hard to say why I feel the way I do, considering how I feel about abortion. All I can say is, I just don't like the idea, and I think we are messing with nature, which should be left well alone.

 

[DarkWizard12]

Like they're not going to waste sitting in vast storage facilities frozen in liquid nitrogen. There are millions of them. What are we saving them for? To breed some mutant army with, two hundred years from now when we develop a cost efficient artificial womb?

:roll:

More are discarded each year, byproducts of IVF, than are stored.
Millions.

You act as though I'd rather them be discarded, no, how about let them become adults for one thing?

How do we "waste" them? Are we running out?

Thats not what I mean. When we use something when there is no need to use it(because we an unlimited source of better cells, ASC.), that, in my book, is wasting. Why go through all the trouble of killing an embryo when you can just simply get some stem cells of an adult more easily and less contraversially? Everyon would win that way, don't you think?

From what I have read there are certain benefits to embryonic stem cells, although I am just reading what may be opinion. I don't really know enough to say it's a fact one way or the other.

Hey! No argument there!

How is an embryo that is frozen a human? Why the hell are we keeping them? I tend to ask the question along the lines of what 10 is getting at...how the hell do you put human value on something you are keeping in a jar in a freezer for years?

Did Is ay an embryo = human? Did I? No.

You see, I am a pacifist. Nothing in the realm of life should be murdered. I can't stand hunters. I can't stand the lumber industry destroying all that we have left of rain-forests. I can't stand the industries taking chickens after they first hatch from the egg and pump them full of steriods every week only to have them brutally turned into delicious snacks for us Americans to feast upon. For me, the same goes for Embryos. The embryos, have a purpose, to turn into full-fledged humans. those humans also have a purpose, to become full productive citizens of the country and leaders of the next generation. Let the embryonic cells do their work. Besides, you get adult stem cells in the end, which are proven to be just as effective as embryonic stem cells. Everyone wins!

I just don't get how anyone can be against letting everyone win this way.

 

[azura28]

Yeah I know it will take a while, maybe they will have some more progress in ten years or something will be approved. I am only 39 so I have some time. I'm a little heavy for my size but in decent health (well stress and sleep apnea related blood pressure is an issue but it's under control).

And yes, the gradual deterioration, which has been slow, is scary. I have began getting depressed over it as of late. I worry about not being able to take care of family issues and such. I'm fully vested in my retirement, I have been paying off all my debts so I can go into my disability years debt free. I'm getting ready to build a good size yet very energy efficient home which I hope to have paid off in five or six years. And if all goes right as my vision does finally sideline me from my ability to earn, I hope to sell of my two companies and put enough coin in the bank to take care of any issues.

I can only hope. Hey, I know I am not the only one praying for some miracle breakthroughs on this.

I have no health problems and I can only imagine how losing your eyesight would scare you. None of us should take good health for granted. If we have good health, we better not be judging someone because they are for this stem cell research to save their eyesight, and/or basically their lives.

 

[drb14]

I just don't get how anyone can be against letting everyone win this way.

I believe that is the thing: Nobody has PROVEN that ASCs are as or more beneficial, or potentially beneficial, than embrionic SCs, at least as far as I'm aware. Therefore, research is needed.

If it can be proven that ASCs are as/more effective than their controversial counterparts, great. Then lets use them.

In the meantime, I say we try to, oh, I don't know, cure/treat (inseart whatever problem disease you wish here) or the OP's problem by whatever promising means we can.

 

[Lerxst]

You act as though I'd rather them be discarded, no, how about let them become adults for one thing?

Thats not what I mean. When we use something when there is no need to use it(because we an unlimited source of better cells, ASC.), that, in my book, is wasting. Why go through all the trouble of killing an embryo when you can just simply get some stem cells of an adult more easily and less contraversially? Everyon would win that way, don't you think?

Hey! No argument there!

Did Is ay an embryo = human? Did I? No.

You see, I am a pacifist. Nothing in the realm of life should be murdered. I can't stand hunters. I can't stand the lumber industry destroying all that we have left of rain-forests. I can't stand the industries taking chickens after they first hatch from the egg and pump them full of steriods every week only to have them brutally turned into delicious snacks for us Americans to feast upon. For me, the same goes for Embryos. The embryos, have a purpose, to turn into full-fledged humans. those humans also have a purpose, to become full productive citizens of the country and leaders of the next generation. Let the embryonic cells do their work. Besides, you get adult stem cells in the end, which are proven to be just as effective as embryonic stem cells. Everyone wins!

I just don't get how anyone can be against letting everyone win this way.

I wasn't trying to quarrel with you or pass judgment, I'm just trying to sincerely get the other side of this argument as well as learn as I go. Obviously we have some different points of view on things (I like my steaks and chicken breasts and such), but I think the common ground here is that stem cell research is a good thing. We just have different views on the type of stem cells?

 

[Lerxst]

I think we are messing with nature, which should be left well alone.

Isn't disease an unhealthy "mutation" or disorder? Are we really messing with nature if we only trying to correct these abnormalities? Are injuries considered natural? And by trying to repair them and return a healthy quality of life are we really messing with nature?

I guess my thought is that we aren't trying to make these stem cells do something they aren't meant to do. We are just trying to position them to do their thing in a potentially life saving fashion.

Make sense?

 

[1069]

You act as though I'd rather them be discarded, no, how about let them become adults for one thing?

For that, they'd need a mother, and they haven't got one.
These are excess embryos created as byproducts of IVF.
That's in-vitro fertilization, a common procedure used in the US and other industrialized nations to assist infertile couples in having biological children.
Doctors extract eggs from the ovaries of the patient, fertilize them with the sperm of her partner (or whomever) in a petri dish, thereby creating zygotes, and then artificially inseminate the woman with one of these zygotes- generally, the most viable one.
Others are frozen and saved as "spares", for future IVF attempts.
Once IVF is successful, the excess zygotes are discarded, except in rare cases where they are "stored" by the biological parents, at their own expense, in an embryo storage facility such as Snowflakes. These embryos are unwanted, but "adoptable". Another, unrelated couple or female can "adopt" an embryo, have it inseminated into her uterus, and gestate it to term. The woman will then give birth to a child who is not biologically related to her, but who will be- legally- "her" child.
This has actually happened, on occasion; at last count, sixteen children had been born from "adopted" frozen embryos.

However, hundreds of thousands of embryos are currently frozen in storage in the US alone, and that's only a small fraction of the millions of embryos actually created each year in pursuit of IVF; the vast majority are simply discarded.

This whole "embryo adoption" business is a little sketchy, anyhow; vast amounts of taxpayer money fund these Christian-based "frozen embryo adoption/storage" facilities.
It's a controversial issue. Many feel it's merely a ploy, a sort of sham business set up to receive of millions of dollars of tax-payer money. Bush has allocated a great deal of federal money to Snowflakes, Inc and its ilk.

link

Increasing numbers of IVF procedures are performed each year; it is becoming increasingly popular as more medical insurance carriers cover the procedure, and as more women over 40 wish to have children (or have more children) and find that their fertility is compromised by their advanced age, and they're quickly running out of time.

It is impossible to extract just one egg from a woman's ovary; the process takes about a dozen.
All are fertilized; one, two, three, or more may be used depending upon the number of IVF attempts before implantation is successful, or the woman gives up, whichever comes first.
The remainder of the embryos are excess.

So anyway. There's our endless supply of embryonic stem cells right there.
No one is creating embryos in labs simply for the purpose of extracting stem cells from them.
Creating them from what? Embryos are created from sperm and ova.
Do you think any woman would be willing to donate eggs to such an endeavor, even if a man was willing to donate the sperm (egg donation/ extraction is an invasive procedure, akin to minor surgery. Also, eggs are finite. Women do not have an endless supply. When the last egg is gone: hello, menopause).

This is a myth, Bones and DarkWizard. I don't know who told it to you.

These embryos are slated to be discarded anyway; they are merely byproducts of fertility procedures. At best, at best, their fate is to languish frozen in storage, suspended in liquid nitrogen, until they are eventually discarded at some future time.

Unwanted, motherless embryos, at the current time, are a commodity our nation has in overabundance.

Nobody is suggesting "creating" them for research; we're merely suggesting utilizing this resource that we already have, in virtually endless supply.