Debate and Discussion

The Stem Cell debate
shaneronzio at 4:33PM, July 19, 2007
(online)
posts: 497
joined: 12-4-2006
HEY HEY!
Why stop there!
why not just boil down Babies the moment they are born…It's all in the name of science…while we are at it…lets start testing all forms of science on our prisoners…lets operate on live Humans…Lets bring back the Nazi Death Camps and Round up all the Natural Born inferiors…
Lets make a Master Race of Genetic super Men…Let only the Strong survive, Kill the Weak!
Never give these embryos a chance to do anything but Be a Twisted science experiment.

While we are at it…Why not start mixing D.N.A. of Animals with people…perhaps the new Ox shark men can keep those genetic inferiors back in the Death camps in line!

We can bring back the Ovens, roast all those filthy swine like cord wood.
After All…WE are the ones who have the world today…fuck these children of the future…why should They have thier dance in the sun…why should They be free…no no no…
Because in this day and age its all about ME ME ME…
Burn the sky with Nuclear testing!
Poison all the food and water supply…cut down every forest…make this world an industrial cesspool.

and for Science Sake…
Kill the Babies before they ever can draw a breath to cry out “Why?”


HARVEST THE CLONED ORGANS SO WE CAN LIVE FOREVER!



ALL HAIL THE GENETIC SUPER MEN…IN SCIENCE WE TRUST…DOWN WITH THE Natural Born!



—————————————————————————-

Seriously, I ask you…
Where does it stop?

Where does it stop?



Can't this Disposeable society just use what the Earth has given us?

When did we as a society start to have more faith in a bunch of Experimental Chemists than in the divine works of the infinite creator?


I think these Mad men have wrecked this Eden planet enough.

I think that Adam and Eve are just a Metaphore…and man through his excessive egotistical quest for “knowledge” becomes Blind to the Paradise that is all around him.

Society needs to take a Giant leap…Backward.

and I do believe that if we keep meddling, the Universe will arrange that giant leap backwards for us in its own way.

yes, we keep on this road and WE are going to be on top of the Endangered species list.


(steps off oversized soap box…goes back to work)






Current Project:CROSS WORLDS NEXUS
Updates Monday, Wenzday & FRIDAY
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:32PM
Insanity at 6:21PM, July 19, 2007
(offline)
posts: 1,029
joined: 5-7-2007
Babies can live on their own. Embryos can't. When the embryo isn't even an embryo yet, the stem cells are taken out. Some Embryos will die anyway.

AwesomeUnicorn
I feel a little bit like Hitler right now, too.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:01PM
Aurora Moon at 11:58PM, July 19, 2007
(offline)
posts: 2,630
joined: 1-7-2006
sigh. Sometimes I feel as if people are overlooking my posts.

It's A KNOWN FACT THAT NOT ALL STEM CELLS COME FROM EMYBROS!! ALOT OF STEM CELLS COMES FROM THE FOLLOWING:

BONE MARROW–USED TO MAKE ADULT STEM CELLS. USING THAT TYPE OF STEM CELL HAS ALREADY MADE MAJOR BREAKTHOUGHS SUCH AS REDUCING THE GROWTH OF CANCER CELLS IN ORDER TO HELP PEOPLE FIGHT CANCER!!

AFTERBIRTH–UMBEBICAL CORDS, PLANETCAS (THE WOMB LINING) IS USED TO MAKE OTHER TYPE OF STEM CELLS THAT ALSO HELPS IN GOING TOWARDS MAJOR BREAKTHOUGHS!

AND GUESS WHAT? NOBODY OR NOTHING HAD TO DIE IN ORDER TO OBTAIN THOSE STEM CELLS!

SO PLEASE, STOP MAKING SUCH STUPID, BASELESS POSTS ABOUT HOW YOU THINK STEM CELLS ARE ALL EVIL AND THAT THE ONLY WAY TO GET THEM IS IF SOMETHING “DIES”. BECAUSE THAT'S SO COMPETELY UNTRUE!!! IT'S THINGS LIKE THAT MAKES ME LOSE MY FAITH IN HUMANITY EVER BECOMING A FULLY EDUCATED AND REASONABLE RACE!!

ARGH.
I'm on hitatus while I redo one of my webcomics. Be sure to check it out when I'n done! :)
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:10AM
Hawk at 7:07AM, July 20, 2007
(online)
posts: 2,760
joined: 1-2-2006
Look out! The ALL CAPS Police are on alert!

It's just kind of a sad reality of forums when the thread gets long enough that people don't read all of the posts before throwing in their opinion. Aurora's right that stem cells come from many sources. It's sad that stem cell research has to be hindered because people don't realize this.

I'm wondering, though… is the quality of all stem cells equal? Are the stem cells from embryos more helpful than other kinds?
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:46PM
Aurora Moon at 7:56AM, July 20, 2007
(offline)
posts: 2,630
joined: 1-7-2006
Heh, sorry. but sometimes I feel like people wouldn't even notice I was posting unless I virtually “shout” to get people's attention drawn to the facts that I've laid out on the table. That, and it's a great way to vent my annoyance.

Here's some information about stem cells:
Stem cells are unspecialized. One of the fundamental properties of a stem cell is that it does not have any tissue-specific structures that allow it to perform specialized functions. A stem cell cannot work with its neighbors to pump blood through the body (like a heart muscle cell); it cannot carry molecules of oxygen through the bloodstream (like a red blood cell); and it cannot fire electrochemical signals to other cells that allow the body to move or speak (like a nerve cell). However, unspecialized stem cells can give rise to specialized cells, including heart muscle cells, blood cells, or nerve cells.

Stem cells are capable of dividing and renewing themselves for long periods. Unlike muscle cells, blood cells, or nerve cellsâ??which do not normally replicate themselvesâ??stem cells may replicate many times. When cells replicate themselves many times over it is called proliferation. A starting population of stem cells that proliferates for many months in the laboratory can yield millions of cells. If the resulting cells continue to be unspecialized, like the parent stem cells, the cells are said to be capable of long-term self-renewal.

And the main reason why Human embryonic stem cells are favored over adult stem cells in some laboratories is because of their ability to “proliferate” for a year or more in the laboratory without “differentiating”…. Most adult stem cell types cannot, save for the bone marrow stem cell type which has been proven to have the ability to proliferate, even though limited in certain conditions.
some Scientists want to study on how the embryonic stem cells can have “renewing” cells in order to give them a better understanding of how our cells in our bodies might work, and how to use this ability to heal and save lives.

Of course, OTHER scientists are much more interested in results, and would prefer finding different ways to cure various disease with some stem cell types fast as they could hope to do. And well, Adult Stem cells and the stem cells that comes from umbilical cords and the rest of the junk that comes out of a woman after she gives birth…
Those stem cells are mostly to yield faster results sometimes.

Of course, people, you got to keep in mind that not all laboratories in the world prefer embryonic stem cells…there are a fair amount of laboratories everywhere who would rather use umbilical cords/planeticas from the afterbirth, or the bone marrow types as seeing they have very unique proprieties and possible for curing certain disease that they're currently trying to find a cure for.

V. What are the similarities and differences between embryonic and adult stem cells?
Human embryonic and adult stem cells each have advantages and disadvantages regarding potential use for cell-based regenerative therapies. Of course, adult and embryonic stem cells differ in the number and type of differentiated cells types they can become. Embryonic stem cells can become all cell types of the body because they are pluripotent. Adult stem cells are generally limited to differentiating into different cell types of their tissue of origin. However, some evidence suggests that adult stem cell plasticity may exist, increasing the number of cell types a given adult stem cell can become.

Large numbers of embryonic stem cells can be relatively easily grown in culture, while adult stem cells are rare in mature tissues and methods for expanding their numbers in cell culture have not yet been worked out. This is an important distinction, as large numbers of cells are needed for stem cell replacement therapies.

A potential advantage of using stem cells from an adult is that the patient's own cells could be expanded in culture and then reintroduced into the patient. The use of the patient's own adult stem cells would mean that the cells would not be rejected by the immune system. This represents a significant advantage as immune rejection is a difficult problem that can only be circumvented with immunosuppressive drugs.

Embryonic stem cells from a donor introduced into a patient could cause transplant rejection. However, whether the recipient would reject donor embryonic stem cells has not been determined in human experiments.

Data above, From this site.

For those who would rather not use stem cells from emybros, you should visit this site:
http://www.stemcellresearch.org/

It's a intersting site… it provides an viewpoint on how one can support stem cell and still not stand for the usage of emybrotic stem cells. It talks about all the alteratives, such as data about adult stem cells.
I'm on hitatus while I redo one of my webcomics. Be sure to check it out when I'n done! :)
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:10AM
Emma_Clare at 5:48PM, July 25, 2007
(online)
posts: 33
joined: 6-2-2006
my mother has a neurological process occurring in her head which causes her discomfort. She experiences muscle twitches, inflamed eyes, convulsions and loss of speech. In extreme cases she has had to go to hospital! To be honest, if stem cell research can help my mum then I support it! Because one day it may happen to me! Seeing people lying their unable to control what is happening to their body is one of the most frightening things anyone can witness. I'm sorry.

If we take the argument “why can't people use what god has given us?” then why aren't we using embryo's for stem cell research? tell me that! Think of it as a trade off… one embryo can save a human life! Is that so wrong? I don't think this is going to mean people will start cloning things. I don't think we are going to create “Super humans” but why is saving someone from neurological diseases like MS and Parkinsons disease so morally wrong. We may as well hand them the gun and say “use it”
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:21PM
Loud_G at 6:29PM, Aug. 23, 2007
(online)
posts: 389
joined: 8-13-2007
This is a very interesting discussion. I for one have learned a few extra facts about stem cells. I WAS previously aware that adult stem cells existed. I was NOT aware however of the existence of placenta and umblical sources for stem cells. This I find to be great news.

Personally, I am anti-abortion (except in the case of rape or in order to save the mother's life). So the use of embryos in this is not something that I support. If the child naturally dies (stillbirth/complications/etc) I see no problem in using its cells for science, if the mother agrees. I do not like the fertility clinic method of “keep trying until you get the ”perfect“ collection of traits”, I think this leads to a lot of wasted life. But that is almost unrelated to the question.

As long as it does not involves embryos, I am all for stem cell research. Like its been said, using the patients own cells is often a better choice. I feel that the options for retrieving stem cells witout resorting to embryos are plentiful enough that we can focus on those. Use those placentas. Educate the mothers of the country that they can donate the expendable womb lining to help further science and medice. That way, when the time comes they won't be surpised and more women will be willing to allow the womb lining to be used.

I also agree that education should be given to the population at large. That way we can legalise the use of non-embryo stem cell research and hopefully make some steps forward.
Find out what George is up to:

 
 
Go! Visit George or he may have to eat you!*
*Disclaimer: George may or may not eat violators depending on hunger level and scarcity of better tasting prey.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:45PM
Shar at 6:35PM, Aug. 23, 2007
(offline)
posts: 59
joined: 8-12-2007
Sacrifies are needed in anything. Be it chess or real life.

It reminds me of a episode of a weird late night mtv show (Late night mtv is really weird >.<)

Teenage beauty queens where asked if they would kill a pony if it would end all wars.
They answered no.

I wonder if people understand exactly the whole ratio of life/death this constitutes ?

But seriously i don't get the opposing sides argument at all. I might be too much of a utilitarian person but still ….
Are people really saying they wouldn't offer some “potential” life's to save people alive now and in the future ?
And that is only if you consider the cells that actually can become persons :/

The greatest use of life is to spend it for something that will outlast it. //William James


I'm With Shar.
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:33PM
bobhhh at 8:15PM, Aug. 23, 2007
(offline)
posts: 893
joined: 5-12-2007
shaneronzio
HEY HEY!
Why stop there!
why not just boil down Babies the moment they are born…It's all in the name of science…while we are at it…lets start testing all forms of science on our prisoners…lets operate on live Humans…Lets bring back the Nazi Death Camps and Round up all the Natural Born inferiors…

Hey that's quite a leap there fella. Please explain again to me how using cells bound for the trash, leftover from in-vitro fertilization is the same as Nazi death camp experiments?

You know caution is good, but it's attitudes like yours, the slippery slope people, that really show their fear and paranoia, hell you even evoked the Nazi's, the ultimate boogeyman, cultural icons for evil behaviour. Clearly, to you, no one can be trusted with a sacred task like finding cures for diseases with out inevitably transforming into a 21st century Mengele.

It's not surprising you have no motivation to find cures for a race of beings you have such little respect for.
My name is Bob and I approved this signature.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:29AM
shadowmagi at 10:51PM, Sept. 10, 2007
(offline)
posts: 99
joined: 12-13-2006
lothar
i find the whole debate about the “morality ” of this to be a Joke, when a lot of the same people have no qualms about bombing foreigners !!!
it's just a blob of cells that could possibly save lives ! wtf?

Because that blob of cells can become a conscious, living, breathing, feeling, thinking human being and the fundamentalists are very adamanently controlling about anything having to do with reproduction.

ANYWAYS.
I could go either way on the whole Stem Cell debate. If, indeed, research is done with donated embryos that have already been deemed unwanted (ie, discarded), then why not use them for something meaningful? Something that will save lives and cure god knows what kinds of diseases? HELL yes.


MY personal issue with the whole debate is this: I am a religious person, and I'm quite angered by people's definition of an embryo. Yes I know science proves that it's not “alive”. If you think about it though, our scientifivic definition for “alive” is quite limited in that manner. It's quite a cold, removed way of veiwing the way we all start out before we're “alive”. Therefore, if embryos, the very things EVERY SINGLE PERSON ON THE PLANET starts out as, are just blobs of cells not worth caring about, I guess that logic can also say “Well since we start out as worthless blobs of cells, does it matter much now? Sure we're sentient beings and all, but hey! We started out as blobs of cells!” I feel like it devalues human life, and is just a cheap excuse to do experiments with human tissues.

I know, I sound pretty extreme, and that it's not all true, but it's how I feel about it, and it's just my personal opinion :)

*Psst*
….
(i like feedback~!)
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:32PM
Ronson at 4:21AM, Sept. 11, 2007
(online)
posts: 837
joined: 1-1-2006
shadowmagi
MY personal issue with the whole debate is this: I am a religious person, and I'm quite angered by people's definition of an embryo. Yes I know science proves that it's not “alive”. If you think about it though, our scientifivic definition for “alive” is quite limited in that manner. It's quite a cold, removed way of veiwing the way we all start out before we're “alive”. Therefore, if embryos, the very things EVERY SINGLE PERSON ON THE PLANET starts out as, are just blobs of cells not worth caring about, I guess that logic can also say “Well since we start out as worthless blobs of cells, does it matter much now? Sure we're sentient beings and all, but hey! We started out as blobs of cells!” I feel like it devalues human life, and is just a cheap excuse to do experiments with human tissues.

Not counting abortions, the rate of miscarriages (according to wikipedia) is about 25% in the first 6 weeks. Many women miscarry and don't even realize it.

These are fertilized embryos that DID implant on uterin wall (as opposed to stem cells which never did this) and for one reason or another they didn't take.

I know for a fact that every person who comes out against embyonic stem cells doesn't demand that these miscarriages are treated like funerals. In fact, I don't think that there are any religions demanding treating fetuses at any stage like it's the same as a born human being.

So, I feel that most people who “feel” there's some worth in an unimplanted embryo are pretty hypocritical when it comes with the embros and fetuses that are pretty much thrown away after natural loss by the woman.

Of course, the problem essentially comes down to the belief in a soul. Since a soul is unprovable and intangible, anyone can assert that the soul is created at any point in the pregnancy process. And I certainly can't prove the nonexistence of something that has absolutely no physical presence, though I can tell you that I have my doubts.

If you believe in a soul, you can decide whatever arbitrary point it enters a fertilized bunch of cells. But you can just as easily say it enters the baby the moment it takes it's first breath, as they did hundreds of years ago when they knew less about the science of reproduction.

It's an arguement not likely to be won by anyone, since the argument is tied to feelings and not to anything logical and observable we can talk about.
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:10PM
shadowmagi at 9:53PM, Sept. 11, 2007
(offline)
posts: 99
joined: 12-13-2006
oh, I know its a debate that'll never be WON, it can't be. As you said, a lot of it's based on “feelings”. And I just felt like expressing mine :)

*Psst*
….
(i like feedback~!)
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:32PM
Atom Apple at 3:21PM, Sept. 12, 2007
(online)
posts: 6,921
joined: 8-5-2006
I'd gladly have been aborted for research for the rest of you.

Meh, that's probably just the depression kicking in…
i will also like to know you the more
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:04AM
bobhhh at 3:42PM, Sept. 12, 2007
(offline)
posts: 893
joined: 5-12-2007
shadowmagi
I feel like it devalues human life, and is just a cheap excuse to do experiments with human tissues.

Ever see somebody die of Alzeimers??? I watched it chew up my grand mother until she could no longer recognize me or remember to visit the bathroom to relieve herself.I think refusing to use some bound for the trash stem cells to find a cure for that and other dieases devalues the suffering of real live breathing humans.

And for what? A lot of philosophical bunk. People are dying and you “cells are life” guys argue the eternal verities.

Nice.
My name is Bob and I approved this signature.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:29AM
mapaghimagsik at 3:48PM, Sept. 12, 2007
(offline)
posts: 711
joined: 9-8-2006
Can we have more biology in school? Please?
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:51PM
Atom Apple at 3:51PM, Sept. 12, 2007
(online)
posts: 6,921
joined: 8-5-2006
No class is safe. My world history teacher kept rambling about how without religion we couldn't make society work. In Biology, my teacher had to make sure that everyone knows a theory is a theory because of precautions.

Ah, world. Will you ever cease to amuse me?
i will also like to know you the more
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:04AM
mapaghimagsik at 4:01PM, Sept. 12, 2007
(offline)
posts: 711
joined: 9-8-2006
High school teachers? College?
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:51PM
Atom Apple at 6:13PM, Sept. 12, 2007
(online)
posts: 6,921
joined: 8-5-2006
This was back in high school. It sort of laxed up in college.
i will also like to know you the more
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:04AM

Forgot Password
©2011 WOWIO, Inc. All Rights Reserved