A sad day for science

[ChaoticGemini]

The ruling was legit because the question was did it violate this 90's law, which it clearly did. My question is why we are not repealing said law so we can move forward into the future.

I agree with this ^^^

IMHO, the paranoid people are welcome to sit on the sidelines to watch and die as the rest of us study this and find cures.

[WickedKitchen]

How could anyone in good conscience not be for this type of research? I suppose the invisible man in the sky might not like it, but nobody truly knows that either. To me, this is an opportunity for the success of America as we know it. The laws banning this sort of research are asinine and it's proven that more research can and most-likely will lead to tremendous gains in medical science. Stopping this type of science is hindering the proliferation of human existence. There will come a time when this is necessary and we will look back at the foolishness of our current age. Hell, I'd even advocate for the payment for embryos. I could come up with several points to support it but that would surely ruffle some feathers.

I had better keep my trap shut now. Y'know there was a time where people feared having electricity in their homes because they actually thought that the current would shoot forth from the outlet across the room and kill them. Humans are so weird.

[Simplysnus]

Im sorry, perhaps i missed it. In what way was my "alarmist reaction" countered by your article? I didnt read the end of it.


Either way, it doesnt matter, this anti-stem cell thing is like fighting against the use of penecilin or of sterylizing hospital equipment after each use. The implications of stem cell research are too large to not have an "alarmist reaction" when i hear its being blocked, yet again. Of all the shit we waste money on, the one thing we wont spend for is to help research something that could save our civilians, and give our military a leading edge.


No one bats an eye when they hear we are 13 trillion in debt, yet if americans finds out that somewhere a poor person is getting a free lunch or that evil science is at it again, everyone goes into a panic about how we must stop this immediately.




The ruling was legit because the question was did it violate this 90's law, which it clearly did. My question is why we are not repealing said law so we can move forward into the future.

You didn't read the end of it? lol!

Anyways, treatments are already coming out for other types of stem cell research, but not this one. Who knows, it may be by the time that using embryonic stem cells is actually feasible we've already solved those problems, and it went for naught. Probably one of the reasons private investment is not flowing as quickly to ESC research.

The debt analogy is a red herring, most people I know aren't happy about the debt either.

[Simplysnus]

How could anyone in good conscience not be for this type of research? I suppose the invisible man in the sky might not like it, but nobody truly knows that either. To me, this is an opportunity for the success of America as we know it. The laws banning this sort of research are asinine and it's proven that more research can and most-likely will lead to tremendous gains in medical science. Stopping this type of science is hindering the proliferation of human existence. There will come a time when this is necessary and we will look back at the foolishness of our current age. Hell, I'd even advocate for the payment for embryos. I could come up with several points to support it but that would surely ruffle some feathers.

I had better keep my trap shut now. Y'know there was a time where people feared having electricity in their homes because they actually thought that the current would shoot forth from the outlet across the room and kill them. Humans are so weird.

I'm just curious, should people be allowed to sell any organ they so choose? Say someone living in poverty who wants to sell his heart so that his family is well taken care of.

[Simplysnus]

In my view people who are against abortion are against ESC because it causes us to be addicted to the million plus abortions that happen each year, provides extra incentive if you will to look the other way, and when someone is benefiting they can rationalize almost anything.

[WickedKitchen]

I'm just curious, should people be allowed to sell any organ they so choose? Say someone living in poverty who wants to sell his heart so that his family is well taken care of.

Yes. I don't think that you could make a blanket rule about that though. Each and every case would have to be taken individually which we seem to have a hard time doing in this country. Just because it's good for one person doesn't mean that it's good for another. For this same reason I would sacrifice myself for my children if I were unable to provide for them in a catastrophic situation. I'm not talking insurance money or anything nor suicide...that is for the weak. If the family would perish dragging me though the wilderness and they would survive without me then I should be left behind. I guess I can't give you a comprehensive answer without knowing more facts but if you're asking for a quick answer to a quick question then the answer would be yes.

[RobsanX]

What would Mr. Dolby think?

[WickedKitchen]

I could come up with some arguments on how we might be better off if there were millions more abortions...

[RobsanX]

I could come up with some arguments on how we might be better off if there were millions more abortions...

Some estimates put the number of abortions since 1973 at around 50,000,000. I would like to know who would have taken care of 50,000,000 unwanted children.

[dEFinitionofEPIC]

I'm just curious, should people be allowed to sell any organ they so choose? Say someone living in poverty who wants to sell his heart so that his family is well taken care of.

I say absolutely not. Creating a market for organs would set a horrible precedent. Ever seen Repoman-the Genetic Opera?

[tom502]

Or COMA.

[texastorm]

I will donate several members of my family to science if someone will take them. Call it extreme late term abortion if you will. It's never to late to fix a mistake!

[sgreger1]

I say absolutely not. Creating a market for organs would set a horrible precedent. Ever seen Repoman-the Genetic Opera?

Yah, I could see that leading downa bad road. I am a donor on my driverse license, so if I die ina car crash they can have whatever they want for free. but charging for it will lead to desperate people giving theirs up for money which probably isn't a great idea. Anyone ever see Repo-man I think it was called? Where they repo the transplanted organs by cutting them out of your body? Lol

[sgreger1]

You didn't read the end of it? lol!

Anyways, treatments are already coming out for other types of stem cell research, but not this one. Who knows, it may be by the time that using embryonic stem cells is actually feasible we've already solved those problems, and it went for naught. Probably one of the reasons private investment is not flowing as quickly to ESC research.

The debt analogy is a red herring, most people I know aren't happy about the debt either.

Private investors are afraid of doinga lot if embryonic stem cells because the anti-science crowd may convince government to shut down research on it all together,a nd then their money will have been wasted. The fact is the ESC's can turn into any type of cell and grow any organ, whereas adult stem cells from bone marrow etc can only grow the same organ it came from. So there is a much wider use for ESC's. I still contend that in the future we will find a way around it and be able to do it without embryonic stem cells, but cutting funding is probably not going to get us there any faster.


Sorry I didn't read to the end of it, I was at work and didn't have time. They are about to start human trials on paraplegics to restore movement to those who cannot walk. If they can accomplish that, hopefully it will show some people how important this research is.


I'm not big on abortion and in my family I wouldn't get an abortion, but I think that if it's happening anyways, why let it go to waste. It is a reasonable argument though that it would lead to more pro-abortion laws since there is profit/benefit in it if we are allowed to use them for medical research. And we only need a small amount for research, once we perfect it and begin using them on humans, we will need millions more. Knowing this country, that could lead to some bullshit like child rationing or one child policies, with mandatory embryo donation or something. So I can certainly see both sides of this argument.

[deebocools]

has the whole world become stupid? Have we all forgotten what "dead" means? NOT ALIVE. Not good for anything except to help the living. This is a such a non-debate it's like transcendental to me.