View Full Version : Embryonic stem cell research
This thing has been slowed by federal action. Whether or not you agree with the procedure, I'm not worried about. I'm wondering if this is something you view as something a state should decide for itself, or should the feds have regulation over it?
KinjaKahn
08-16-2007, 12:59 AM
This thing has been slowed by federal action. Whether or not you agree with the procedure, I'm not worried about. I'm wondering if this is something you view as something a state should decide for itself, or should the feds have regulation over it?
ROFL
ROFL
My first instinct was that this is related to the last post you put in the other thread...
My second instinct was that it's a silly question to ask you considering everything I've heard from you has been "state's rights".
Should I have a 3rd instinct?
KinjaKahn
08-16-2007, 01:14 AM
Just funny that before i was finished my last response you started this thread. I have to go to work.
Just funny that before i was finished my last response you started this thread. I have to go to work.
No worries, I will soon be in slumberland. And I didn't start this for the reasons of the other thread, just the question as stated.
Reagan Smash
08-16-2007, 11:32 AM
I hope it's state by state, because to get something like this through federally is very difficult, unfortunately.
LNGTMEGNE
08-16-2007, 01:15 PM
I think it is an issue that needs to be handled on a federal level, just like abortion should be (side note: I think that abortion is a state-issue is ridiculous). I am for embroyonic-stem cell research ONLY for cells that have already been created and are planning on being destroyed. I am not for creating embryos for the sole purpose of research.
KinjaKahn
08-16-2007, 03:33 PM
Embryonic Stem cell research should be banned worldwide. Only the baby Mengele's of the world will be horrified by such a ban.
Embryonic Stem cell research should be banned worldwide. Only the baby Mengele's of the world will be horrified by such a ban.
OK. I have a question, though. In regards to embryos that have already been made from the consent of sperm and egg donors...embryos that are not going to be used and discarded...is throwing them away a better fate than using them for potential good use?
I'm only talking about that specific instance, not mass producing embryos from sperm and egg or paying parents to donate them
Simply, some parents give consent to create them, freeze them, then no longer want/need the embryos, for whatever reason.
Or should that type of in vitro fertilization also be banned, unless used for a single case (i.e., parents want a kid and give sperm and egg, and 1 embryo is made)?
KinjaKahn
08-16-2007, 04:08 PM
OK. I have a question, though. In regards to embryos that have already been made from the consent of sperm and egg donors...embryos that are not going to be used and discarded...is throwing them away a better fate than using them for potential good use?
From arguments put forth by the funding beggars, these are useless, and that is very close to being fact.
I'm only talking about that specific instance, not mass producing embryos from sperm and egg or paying parents to donate them
Simply, some parents give consent to create them, freeze them, then no longer want/need the embryos, for whatever reason.
I do not approve of creating them for future consideration. Perhaps the energy conservationists could be consistent concerning the storage of these embryo's.
Or should that type of in vitro fertilization also be banned, unless used for a single case (i.e., parents want a kid and give sperm and egg, and 1 embryo is made)?
My personal opinion regarding infertility is that it an unfortunate condition. There are plenty of children desperate for caring parents.
From arguments put forth by the funding beggars, these are useless, and that is very close to being fact.
I do not approve of creating them for future consideration. Perhaps the energy conservationists could be consistent concerning the storage of these embryo's.
My personal opinion regarding infertility is that it an unfortunate condition. There are plenty of children desperate for caring parents.
Regarding your first point, do you mean that the embryonic stem cells offer little to nothing, or that these particular embryos offer little to nothing?
As for your personal opinion, I agree. There are a hell of a lot of kids out there that could use a loving home.
KinjaKahn
08-16-2007, 04:12 PM
Regarding your first point, do you mean that the embryonic stem cells offer little to nothing, or that these particular embryos offer little to nothing?
As for your personal opinion, I agree. There are a hell of a lot of kids out there that could use a loving home.
Those particular embryos.
Those particular embryos.
Gotcha.
KinjaKahn
08-16-2007, 05:33 PM
I hope it's state by state, because to get something like this through federally is very difficult, unfortunately.
Can a state fund this on its own or is there legislation prohibiting it?
Can a state fund this on its own or is there legislation prohibiting it?
As far as I know (which is pretty superficially) the only restrictions are that federal funds are limited (if any) and cell lines are limited.
KinjaKahn
08-16-2007, 05:39 PM
I think it is an issue that needs to be handled on a federal level, just like abortion should be (side note: I think that abortion is a state-issue is ridiculous).
Should opposition be allowed to opt out of what can clearly go against morality, and spin-off technology more dangerous than any nuclear weapon.
I am for embroyonic-stem cell research ONLY for cells that have already been created and are planning on being destroyed. I am not for creating embryos for the sole purpose of research.
Please explain to me how this provide a cure for something.
KinjaKahn
08-16-2007, 05:40 PM
As far as I know (which is pretty superficially) the only restrictions are that federal funds are limited (if any) and cell lines are limited.
What is stopping any billionaire from attempting this on his own? Other than the danger of going broke.
What is stopping any billionaire from attempting this on his own? Other than the danger of going broke.
I can't say for sure, but I have a few guesses.
You list one: return of investment.
Others would include knowledge and/or ability to put together a staff, not enough knowledge of the field in general, the need for equipment and facilities, the time it takes to put all this together, and likely the restrictions. He may have a cool billion, but would probably like all the funds he could get, and with the restrictions on cell lines, it may not be feasible anyway.
Also playing into it would be the fact that it's a pretty young science and relatively small (at least the embryonic side of it). That means there's not a basis yet, and his staff would, in the beginning, be working their asses off just to figure out some of the basic biology of the whole system. And basic biology isn't profitable.
Stem cells won't be profitable until they're on the verge of cures...I mean, standing on the doorstep. Then, some investment and a short time could give you some big cures. Until then, there's a ton of work to be done.
From what I know of any type of stem cell, they show a lot of potential, but there are no hard and fast cures for anything...yet.
LNGTMEGNE
08-16-2007, 05:51 PM
Should opposition be allowed to opt out of what can clearly go against morality, and spin-off technology more dangerous than any nuclear weapon.
Please explain to me how this provide a cure for something.
I didn't say it was a cure. There is speculation that it could provide cures, I suppose, thus the reason why they want to do research.
As far as abortion goes, you shouldn't put your morals on other people. Besides, there are plenty of examples and circumstances where it would have been far better to abort then to go foward with the pregnancy. There ARE people out there who shouldn't be parents. There ARE circumstances where children are born into horrible circumstances. However, I do think there should be severe restrictions...
KinjaKahn
08-16-2007, 06:11 PM
I didn't say it was a cure. There is speculation that it could provide cures, I suppose, thus the reason why they want to do research.
Whats the point of this if not to cure something? Perhaps a sick fascination with experimenting on humans? March your little motive down the road to a cure and tell me about it.
As far as abortion goes, you shouldn't put your morals on other people.
Wally Woofer wants to put the recently passed in a blender for a protein shake, gonna push your morality on him to stop it or back him up politically? Or sit the fence and say, "Personally I'm against it but its ok for him to do it."
Besides, there are plenty of examples and circumstances where it would have been far better to abort then to go foward with the pregnancy.
Please list the criteria you employ to determine who is not allowed to breed.
There ARE people out there who shouldn't be parents. There ARE circumstances where children are born into horrible circumstances. However, I do think there should be severe restrictions...
Simple solution... be responsible for your own actions and reactions.
LNGTMEGNE
08-16-2007, 06:23 PM
Whats the point of this if not to cure something? Perhaps a sick fascination with experimenting on humans? March your little motive down the road to a cure and tell me about it.
Wally Woofer wants to put the recently passed in a blender for a protein shake, gonna push your morality on him to stop it or back him up politically? Or sit the fence and say, "Personally I'm against it but its ok for him to do it."
Please list the criteria you employ to determine who is not allowed to breed.
Simple solution... be responsible for your own actions and reactions.
First of all, how many people are actually responsible for their own actions and reactions in this world? We are currently not even holding the damn administration responsible for their own actions and reactions.
Second of all, I believe there is enough evidence to give reason why there should be--so you can take the time and research yourself that lends cause as to why there should be stem-cell research solely on embryos already created and intended to be destroyed. I am not doing the leg-work to educate you. I DO NOT BELIEVE we should create embryos solely for the purpose of research.
There also is belief that cells from an umbilical cord that could produce the same effect--regeneration of cells that help fight cell-degenerative diseases. Would you consider that immoral? IS an umbilical cord a baby?
I will not even entertain your comment on Wally what's his name using and his protein shake because that is a ridiculous statement and not worthy of a response, IMO.
I ALSO did not say people should not be allowed to breed. IF people know that they are not fit or financially responsible to be a parent--than there's your damn personal responsibility and they DO have the choice to terminate.
HOWEVER, I also do not believe that 6 month term pregnancies should be terminated like they are allowed in States like GA, for example.
I see no reason why they cannot be restricted to 4-6 week terms only. Doing so would encourage more personal responsibility!
And so would teaching youngsters about birth control and teaching young women (and some older women) to take a damn test if they think they are pregnant and not to just wait and see what happens!
Umbilical stem cell research isn't restricted.
LNGTMEGNE
08-16-2007, 06:28 PM
Umbilical stem cell research isn't restricted.
I know this. But somebody people think that it is just as immoral because it came from a baby and it's mother.
I know this. But somebody people think that it is just as immoral because it came from a baby and it's mother.
Huh. I've never heard any complaints of stem cell research, aside from the embryonic sort.
LNGTMEGNE
08-16-2007, 06:35 PM
Huh. I've never heard any complaints of stem cell research, aside from the embryonic sort.
I am not implying you did. But an embryo does not equate to a baby. Ask the people who try to conceive via Invitro and produce six embryos but no baby! So, it is ridiculous that it even has to be restricted--especially if they are going to THROW IT AWAY! Why not use it for the greater good of man! But no, the moral high road is to throw the embryo (and in some minds a baby) away!
KinjaKahn
08-16-2007, 06:54 PM
First of all, how many people are actually responsible for their own actions and reactions in this world? We are currently not even holding the damn administration responsible for their own actions and reactions.
Why hold the administration responsible and not the irresponsible sexually promiscuous? Can I ask for some consistency?
Second of all, I believe there is enough evidence to give reason why there should be--so you can take the time and research yourself that lends cause as to why there should be stem-cell research solely on embryos already created and intended to be destroyed. I am not doing the leg-work to educate you. I DO NOT BELIEVE we should create embryos solely for the purpose of research.
My questions serve to push you sir, to look at the issue. I have debated this topic with those in the profession and the result more often then not is them fleeing, whining about they, "just want to help people..."
There also is belief that cells from an umbilical cord that could produce the same effect--regeneration of cells that help fight cell-degenerative diseases. Would you consider that immoral? IS an umbilical cord a baby?
Not at all... however... I didn't preserve mine, did you? Ask yourself why parents are opting to preserve their child's umbilical cord rather then donate it?
I will not even entertain your comment on Wally what's his name using and his protein shake because that is a ridiculous statement and not worthy of a response, IMO.
Typical of those who hide behind own morality and fail to accept a solution that would encompass their morality along with the morality of others.
I ALSO did not say people should not be allowed to breed. IF people know that they are not fit or financially responsible to be a parent--than there's your damn personal responsibility and they DO have the choice to terminate.
Yet you just below you push YOUR own morality that makes no room for anothers morality.
HOWEVER, I also do not believe that 6 month term pregnancies should be terminated like they are allowed in States like GA, for example.
I see no reason why they cannot be restricted to 4-6 week terms only. Doing so would encourage more personal responsibility!
See above.
And so would teaching youngsters about birth control and teaching young women (and some older women) to take a damn test if they think they are pregnant and not to just wait and see what happens!
I see no value in offering an option that encourages irresponsibility. I favor honesty. Sexual intercourse is the natural method of procreation, and it is truly wonderful. Offering options to overshadow that glaring reality is pushing the ideals that lead to unwanted and unintended pregnancies.
LNGTMEGNE
08-16-2007, 06:57 PM
Sexually promiscuous???
What does THAT have to do with embryo research and abortion? Oh, because only sexually promiscuous people get abortions, is that it?
As far as saving the umbilical cord? I guess you would have to ask them that. If I wanted to use the logic you have given me, I would state that some people have been known to eat the umbilical cord. WHY would they do that?
When you answer why you brought up sexual promiscuity, I will answer the other moral questions!
LNGTMEGNE
08-16-2007, 06:59 PM
I see no value in offering an option that encourages irresponsibility. I favor honesty. Sexual intercourse is the natural method of procreation, and it is truly wonderful. Offering options to overshadow that glaring reality is pushing the ideals that lead to unwanted and unintended pregnancies.
And do you only have sexual intercourse for the sole purpose of procreation??? Or do you spill your seed for other purposes as well???
KinjaKahn
08-16-2007, 07:07 PM
Sexually promiscuous???
What does THAT have to do with embryo research and abortion? Oh, because only sexually promiscuous people get abortions, is that it?
As far as saving the umbilical cord? I guess you would have to ask them that. If I wanted to use the logic you have given me, I would state that some people have been known to eat the umbilical cord. WHY would they do that?
When you answer why you brought up sexual promiscuity, I will answer the other moral questions!
Clue: "irresponsible sexually promiscuous" please keep quotations accurate. If you do not like expanding the conversation, by all means don't feel like I am forcing you to do so.
KinjaKahn
08-16-2007, 07:09 PM
And do you only have sexual intercourse for the sole purpose of procreation??? Or do you spill your seed for other purposes as well???
Is responsibility allowed or must I be irresponsible to conform to this question?
LNGTMEGNE
08-16-2007, 07:09 PM
Clue: "irresponsible sexually promiscuous" please keep quotations accurate. If you do not like expanding the conversation, by all means don't feel like I am forcing you to do so.
Some moral high roaders would say that sex is only intended for procreation, and I was just wondering you were one of those--because then I would better understand your logic.
KinjaKahn
08-16-2007, 07:14 PM
Some moral high roaders would say that sex is only intended for procreation, and I was just wondering you were one of those--because then I would better understand your logic.
I'll help you out... do not pigeon hole me into a group that you can prejudge, and discuss the issue.
LNGTMEGNE
08-16-2007, 07:17 PM
I'll help you out... do not pigeon hole me into a group that you can prejudge, and discuss the issue.
you pigeon holed yourself with your response.
KinjaKahn
08-16-2007, 07:20 PM
you pigeon holed yourself with your response.
Only in the eyes of the prejudice.
LNGTMEGNE
08-16-2007, 07:23 PM
Only in the eyes of the prejudice.
That's just a gross exaggeration.
Here's the President's stand on embryonic stem cell research.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/08/20010809-1.html
IF you want to continue the discussion--pull from this piece.
I am not implying you did. But an embryo does not equate to a baby. Ask the people who try to conceive via Invitro and produce six embryos but no baby! So, it is ridiculous that it even has to be restricted--especially if they are going to THROW IT AWAY! Why not use it for the greater good of man! But no, the moral high road is to throw the embryo (and in some minds a baby) away!
Preacher, I'd like to introduce myself. My name is Choir.
KinjaKahn
08-16-2007, 07:40 PM
That's just a gross exaggeration.
Here's the President's stand on embryonic stem cell research.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/08/20010809-1.html
IF you want to continue the discussion--pull from this piece.
Pick up from umbilical cord. I leave for work in 5 mins. I will be back to continue the conversation. Sometime tomorrow. Keep in mind it is hilarious that you try to limit my side of this conversation/debate to what you "know" as of 6 years ago. Rest assured, If you do not take a crash course on this Embryonic Stem cell topic... nevermind. What you have put forth so far is disappointing.
LNGTMEGNE
08-16-2007, 07:40 PM
Preacher, I'd like to introduce myself. My name is Choir.
I was not posting to you, LSU. See the person above who's comments I was directed mine to! Geez!
LNGTMEGNE
08-16-2007, 07:43 PM
Pick up from umbilical cord. I leave for work in 5 mins. I will be back to continue the conversation. Sometime tomorrow. Keep in mind it is hilarious that you try to limit my side of this conversation/debate to what you "know" as of 6 years ago. Rest assured, If you do not take a crash course on this Embryonic Stem cell topic... nevermind. What you have put forth so far is disappointing.
I am not here to impress you.
I was not posting to you, LSU. See the person above who's comments I was directed mine to! Geez!
Perhaps you might take the time to notice that in that post, you replied to me. It's a bad habit of mine to think that when my name appears in the quoted portion that a post is directed at that quote...i.e., me.
LNGTMEGNE
08-16-2007, 07:45 PM
Oh GOOD FOR YOU LSU, you are so smart and intelligent to point out an honest mistake. How important you must feel now, especially with your quick, witty reply.
Oh GOOD FOR YOU LSU, you are so smart and intelligent to point out an honest mistake. How important you must feel now, especially with your quick, witty reply.
Had I known that helping to clarify your evolution argument would lead to this, I would have left you to flounder in your misinformation.
My bad.
PS. If it were just an honest mistake, a simple "It was an honest mistake" would have sufficed. And I would have replied, "No problem, dude."
LNGTMEGNE
08-16-2007, 07:57 PM
Oh, and there you go "one-upping" me with a remark that does not pertain to this discussion at all! Well, KUDOS my friend. Clearly you have a rich and fulfilling life that I am now thankfully aware of due to your last word!
LNGTMEGNE
08-16-2007, 07:59 PM
Had I known that helping to clarify your evolution argument would lead to this, I would have left you to flounder in your misinformation.
My bad.
PS. If it were just an honest mistake, a simple "It was an honest mistake" would have sufficed. And I would have replied, "No problem, dude."
Oh really, dude? I thought I made it clear when I said I wasn't referring to you but to the comment above. As if my mistake was not obvious--but THANK YOU for informing me on how to properly reply to your sarcastic and insulting remark. I am clearly a better person for it now! Sleep tight!
Oh, and there you go "one-upping" me with a remark that does not pertain to this discussion at all! Well, KUDOS my friend. Clearly you have a rich and fulfilling life that I am now thankfully aware of due to your last word!
That's kinda funny, because had I not still been here to read this, it would've been you to be the one to get the last word in. Funny how that works sometimes.
And yes, my life is very fulfilling.
But as a wise man once said, "Don't act like you really know me."
So I guess I've invoked another thread that has nothing to do with this.
Such an asshole am I.
LNGTMEGNE
08-16-2007, 08:02 PM
That's kinda funny, because had I not still been here to read this, it would've been you to be the one to get the last word in. Funny how that works sometimes.
And yes, my life is very fulfilling.
But as a wise man once said, "Don't act like you really know me."
So I guess I've invoked another thread that has nothing to do with this.
Such an asshole am I.
Oh, are you referring to this first asshole remark you gave me?? Just trying to get clarification!
Oh really, dude? I thought I made it clear when I said I wasn't referring to you but to the comment above. As if my mistake was not obvious--but THANK YOU for informing me on how to properly reply to your sarcastic and insulting remark. I am clearly a better person for it now! Sleep tight!
You did make it clear. And after that point, I made no reference to your reply. So where this comes from, I know not.
And your mistake (if the reply is your "mistake") was not obvious. First of all, the first sentence was directed at me...was I supposed to read your mind that the rest of it was not?
Oh, before I forget, you're welcome.
I'm here everyday to provide lessons for the benefit of the entire site.
Glad I can have a positive influence.
Oh, are you referring to this first asshole remark you gave me?? Just trying to get clarification!
The first, the second, I've lost track.
I've got some science to do...don't nobody go nowhere.
LNGTMEGNE
08-16-2007, 08:05 PM
That's kinda funny, because had I not still been here to read this, it would've been you to be the one to get the last word in. Funny how that works sometimes.
And yes, my life is very fulfilling.
But as a wise man once said, "Don't act like you really know me."
So I guess I've invoked another thread that has nothing to do with this.
Such an asshole am I.
It would seem so, but I do not know you personally only through what you say.
[/B]
It would seem so, but I do not know you personally only through what you say.
Ditto.
Funny how that works out, too.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.