stem cell research

[jOHN rODRIGUEZ]

Originally Posted by Deckard

(Btw, should also add thanks to Cacophony for showing that not every opponent of it is a foaming-at-the-mouth Bible basher!)

Then they must be on the losing $$ side of the arguement.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Deckard

(Btw, should also add thanks to Cacophony for showing that not every opponent of it is a foaming-at-the-mouth Bible basher!)

Yeah - that's actually why I went back and added this story to this thread instead of starting a new one. Lots of interesting points were made here already, and I'd love to hear more now that this ban is being overturned.

[Rog]

i've deleted your other thread Sean..........my first act as a moderator

[IsiliRunite]

Quick question... do any organizations still do research or treatment with stem cells that come to be as a result of sexual human zygote formation?

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Rog

i've deleted your other thread Sean..........my first act as a moderator

Thanks Rog! Well done!

[BeautifulBurnout]

Just heard a very interesting chap from the U of Michigan on Radio 4 explaining that Bush span this whole thing as being "killing embryos that could be babies" as such, which is completely false.

The embryos used are ones that, for a variety of reasons, would never be used for in vitro fertilisation or any other form of fertility treatment and would have been discarded. So they would never develop into human beings as such.

[IsiliRunite]

Its funny you mention UM because today's school paper mentions their editor's prediciton that Obama lifting stem cell research is going to make our various research departments successful.

"He made the point that in his administration, there will be an open and honest discussion of science underlining their decisions, and that science policy with be based on science and not based on ideology."

Sounds slightly arrogant, as though ideology and misinformation are prerequisites for one another.

[BeautifulBurnout]

Originally Posted by IsiliRunite

Sounds slightly arrogant, as though ideology and misinformation are prerequisites for one another.

I don't think that's arrogant - I think it is a realistic take on things, personally.

Res ipsa loquitur, as us weird guys say. "The thing speaks for itself". Are you able to give me any examples of ideological-based policy decisions that weren't based on misinformation of some form or another?

[Deckard]

Originally Posted by IsiliRunite

Its funny you mention UM because today's school paper mentions their editor's prediciton that Obama lifting stem cell research is going to make our various research departments successful.

"He made the point that in his administration, there will be an open and honest discussion of science underlining their decisions, and that science policy with be based on science and not based on ideology."

Sounds slightly arrogant, as though ideology and misinformation are prerequisites for one another.

I understand what you're saying, but I think it's clear what (s)he probably means, no?

Kind of like the difference between evidence and dogma, or between fluid views and fixed ones. Yes people can be dogmatic about science, even about a particular aspect of it. But science by its definition is open, not closed.

[cacophony]

Originally Posted by IsiliRunite

Quick question... do any organizations still do research or treatment with stem cells that come to be as a result of sexual human zygote formation?

yes. they're simply not eligible to receive funding from the US government. at least before now.

the thing is, this is a largely symbolic action. private funding for human embryonic stem cell research exists so it's not like this kind of research was on the verge of stagnation. and the US gov't still allowed funding for research based on pre-existing cell lines. meaning some embyronic lines were grandfathered and didn't violate the funding ban. other research has focused on pluripotent stem cells, which are non-embryonic.

i know a guy who works in stem cells and i keep trying to get him to post here and share. he'd be able to speak more intelligently about it than i can.