Ask Me Help Desk - Obama - WRONG on embryonic stem cells

This is the typical MSM depiction of the issue

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/07/us...ef=todayspaper

Quote:

Because embryonic stem cells are capable of developing into any type of cell in the body, many scientists believe that they may one day be able to provide tissues to replace worn-out organs or nonfunctioning cells and, thus, offer powerful new treatments for diabetes, heart disease, Parkinson’s disease and other ailments. Some researchers say the stem cells may even be used someday to treat catastrophic injuries like damage to the spinal cord.

This is the theory.

This is the REALITY

Fetal stem cells cause tumor in a teenage boy: Scientific American Blog

Quote:

Then he was diagnosed with a brain tumor in 2005. That tumor, it turns out, grew out of the stem cells, obtained from at least two aborted fetuses, used in his brain.

I'm not against research. I'm not against facts.

I'm against wasting taxpayor money on a political agenda that has NO FACTS to back up its claim.

Why Embryonic Stem Cells Are Obsolete - Heart to Heart (usnews.com)

This is a good piece written by an MD with factual evidence to prove their point. This can be verified with a simple internet search, which reporters at the NYT apparently neglect to do.

Quote:

These advances involve human stem cells that are not derived from human embryos. In fact, adult stem cells, which occur in small quantities in organs throughout the body for natural growth and repair, have become stars despite great skepticism early on.

James Thompson, the stem cell pioneer from the University of Wisconsin who was the first to grow human embryonic stem cells in 1998, is an independent codiscoverer of iPS cells along with Japanese scientists. Already these reprogrammed cells have eclipsed the value of those harvested from embryos, he has said, because of significantly lower cost, ease of production, and genetic identity with the patient. They also bring unique application to medical and pharmaceutical research, because cells cultivated from patients with certain diseases readily become laboratory models for developing and testing therapy.That iPS cells overcome ethical concerns about creating and sacrificing embryos is an added plus.

The more ethically charged decision—less understood by the public and one Congress has avoided—involves the ban on creating human embryos in the laboratory solely for research purposes. In fact, President Clinton is the one who balked at allowing scientists to use government money for embryo creation and research on stem cells harvested from such embryos; Bush only affirmed the Clinton ban. The scientific community has been able to attract nonfederal money for such work, and it is going on all the time in stem cell institutes. Scientists want relief from the inconvenience and expense of keeping that work and the money that supports it separate from federal dollars.

Here is more fact against ESCs

Stem Cell - News - Paralyzed Woman Walks Again After Stem Cell Therapy

Quote:

The use of stem cells from cord blood could also point to a way to side-step the ethical dispute over the controversial use of embryos in embryonic stem-cell research.

and

Twenty Disease-specific Stem Cell Lines Created

Quote:

robust new collection of disease-specific stem cell lines, all of which were developed using the new induced pluripotent stem cell (iPS) technique

and

Highlights of Stem Cell Research [Stem Cell Information]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Where is the proof/ the facts that spending tax dollars on the wrong type of stem cells is either 1] scientificallty sound or 2] fiscally prudent?

G&P

It's wrong but it's BIG BUSINESS. And $$$ talks so it will continue until it is proved after a few thousand people die or have horrible consequences.

Right now a lot of fetus tissue is essentially imported from other countries. This will not be necessary as we soon will have all the "raw material" we need. Hospitals who receive the federal funding will be forced to go along with this raw material collection.

I personally think this is wrong.

There is already private funding for fetal stem cell research and President Bush allowed for existing cells to be used . The objection is the creating embryos for the purpose of the research .

It is a true point that there are tremendous advancements being made in adult stem cell study; and for practical reasons like less possibility of rejection ,along with satisfying the ethical and moral objections ,adult stem cell research is preferred .

ABC News: Obama to Lift Stem Cell Restrictions

This is typical of the MSM

Quote:

The president will also sign a memorandum that Barnes says will "restore scientific integrity in government decision making." It will help ensure public policy is "guided by sound scientific advice," she said.

The memorandum will cover all scientific research, including such areas as energy and climate change. The Bush administration was often accused of allowing politics to color its scientific decisions, something the administration denied.

Talk about Orwellian double speak.

This is insulting. They talk about science but offer no facts for or against ESC research in 4 pages, other than theory. Then they appeal to emotion by bringing up of Michael J Fox and Christopher Reeves.

The sad irony is that by wasting taxpayor dollars on Embryonic stem cells, this takes money away from where the recent advances and beneficial results have actually occurred - NON-EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS.

I purposely did not put this in the science or biology section because this will effect us all, not just those doing bench research or rely on the government for grants. In addition this is now a MSM headline.

G&P

Hello in:

Me thinks all your scientific gobbledegook, is just subtrafuge...

Me thinks further, that you don't want embryonic stem cell research because of your religious beliefs...

Besides, if your facts are correct, science will catch up to you. They're not really interested in infecting us all with terrible diseases, after all.

Or, do you think science is going to miss it?

excon

You mean the clear breakthroughs that have been made by science using adult stem cells is gobbledegook ?

The Case for Adult Stem Cell Research

Adult Stem Cells Reprogrammed In Their Natural Environment

Bristol University | News from the University | Adult stem cells

Single Adult Stem Cell Can Self Renew, Repair Tissue Damage In Live Mammal

Above are just a very few of the many reports being published in scientific journals in the last year . There has been huge breakthroughs in the research which opens up the question about the utility of using embryonic stem cells.

Also advancements in stem cells from umbilical cords and placentas are promising .

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

There has been huge breakthroughs in the research which opens up the question about the utility of using embryonic stem cells.

Also advancements in stem cells from umbilical cords and placentas are promising .

Hello tom:

Well, you know those Democrats. All they want to do is create more embryo's so they can kill 'em.

Come on tom, you can tell us. Me thinks your opposition to embryonic stem cell research is based upon your religion too.

Why do you think scientists want to study those cells? Cause they're bad people??

excon

Please show me the progress they have made in the private sector in the use of government provided frozen embryos?

The fact is that if there is an alternative that gives you results equal to or superior to utilizing embryonic stem cells then there are no moral or ethical dilemnas .

Why would someone propose the use of embryonic stem cells if there was a viable alternative unless they were promoting a political agenda themselves ?

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

Why would someone propose the use of embryonic stem cells if there was a viable alternative unless they were promoting a political agenda themselves ?

Hello again, tom:

So, they DO want to kill 'em. I'll NEVER understand you guys.

excon

I think President Bush's policy was sound. The embryo's frozen already and targeted for destruction was an ample supply to work with .
To generate fresh embryonic stem cells for the use of research is immoral and unethical any way you slice it.
I'll leave words like killing to you .I oppose harvesting them for research ,and the use of my tax money to fund inferior and unnecessary research .

Quote:

Originally Posted by excon

Hello tom:

Well, you know those Democrats. All they want to do is create more embryo's so they can kill 'em.

Come on tom, you can tell us. Me thinks your opposition to embryonic stem cell research is based upon your religion too.

Why do you think scientists want to study those cells? Cause they're bad people???

excon

Apples to apples: science to science.

Show me the scientific proof that embryonic stem cells are better, or have any proven benefit, compared to non-embryonic stem cells.

Tom [ thanks ] and I have posted links if you want to think and resaon this issue through.

G&P

Here is some more gobbledegook out of Canada that shows promise in treating Parkinson's with the patients stem cells.
ScienceDirect - Cell : Parkinson's Disease Patient-Derived Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells Free of Viral Reprogramming Factors

I hope Michael J Fox gets his hands on the study. I'd like to see him act again.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

To generate fresh embryonic stem cells for the use of research is immoral and unethical any way you slice it.... I'll leave words like killing to you .I oppose harvesting them for research ,and the use of my tax money to fund inferior and unnecessary research .

Hello again, tom:

This is the point your pastor forgets to tell you: Nobody is GENERATING embryos for research.

The next point he forgot to tell you, is that the lines we're NOW going to be able to study, are destined to be KILLED anyway.

The final point he forgot to tell you, is that scientists, rather than preachers, are better able to decide which research is inferior and unnecessary.

excon

Well what do you know: my religious beliefs and science concur on this issue :D

G&P

Again IF the pro ESC faction can even come up of ONE proven benefit, case study then let us consider a head to head trial of ESC vs NON ESC.

G&P

Quote:

Originally Posted by inthebox

Well what do you know: my religious beliefs and science concur on this issue

Hello again, in:

Nahhh. What concurs is your religion and the science you CHOOSE to believe... Kind of like you believe the science behind Intelligent Design.

excon

Quote:

Originally Posted by inthebox

Again IF the pro ESC faction can even come up of ONE proven benefit

Hello again, in:

Science doesn't prove stuff BEFORE it does research. It does it AFTERWORDS. That's actually WHY we do science.

Look, in and tom. Nobody is fooled here by your pseudo support of science. You don't like science. Science conflicts with your religion. I'm find with that. Why don't we argue about that?

Plus, why don't you tell me why we SHOULDN'T study these lines? They're going to be destroyed anyway.

excon

Quote:

Originally Posted by inthebox

Again IF the pro ESC faction can even come up of ONE proven benefit, case study then let us consider a head to head trial of ESC vs NON ESC.

Embryonic Stem Cell Therapy Shows Steady Benefits In Rebuilding Infracted Heart

Embryonic Stem Cell Therapy Shows Steady Benefits In Rebuilding Infarcted Heart

NK.

If there is no danger in harvesting them then why is the pro-ESC research 'Center for American Progress' asking the President to come up with ethical guidelines for the research that specifically restricts harvesting ?

Quote:

At a minimum, those restrictions should include the following:

The cells must have been derived from embryos produced for reproductive purposes.
Those embryos must have been deemed in excess of medical need, were no longer being considered for transfer to a womb ,and were slated for destruction.
The embryos were freely donated by both of the adults who contributed genetic material to create them, as evidenced by proper written informed consent.
No financial inducements were offered to donors, and the donors expressed through an informed consent process their understanding that any resulting cell lines will be used for research and not for the development of therapeutic benefits for the donors.
All federally funded research on human embryonic stem cells must be conducted under the review of a Stem Cell Research Oversight committee that adheres to the standards put forth in the guidelines of either the National Academies or the International Society for Stem Cell Research.

A Call for a New Federal Embryonic Stem Cell Research Agenda

The UK has more regulations on regenerative medicine and embryonic research than the US. France, Germany and Israel have similar limits on funding.

another example of the superiority of adult stem cell research
Daley and colleagues create 20 disease-specific stem cell lines — The Harvard University Gazette

Why Embryonic Stem Cells Are Obsolete - Heart to Heart (usnews.com)

Change the framing of the debate and it may make more sense to you .

Esc uses a stem cell from a foreign source =higher chance of rejection

ASC is a source from the patient and there is less a chance of rejection .

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

Why would someone propose the use of embryonic stem cells if there was a viable alternative unless they were promoting a political agenda themselves ?

First of all, there is no viable alternative yet. But there are also not a lot of useful applications of stem cells yet.

It's not political per se; it's greed talking. It's about starting a whole new arm of the biomedical industry so that businessmen can make big bucks. Of course, it's marketed as a life saving therapy. Just like the pharmaceutical industry presents itself as caring deeply about "patients."

Stem cells will undoubtedly help a lot of people, but not as many as if we put the money into something prosaic like vaccines or education or clean water for poor kids. But that doesn't pay back cash returns that allow guys to fly around in private jets. That would just be charity. Yawn. Stem cells are a way to make a lot of money, or at least that's what investors expect.

I'm actually very leery of the stem cell business, too, but not for any of the reasons that you are.

The hype is comparable to that for gene therapy 20 years ago. That was a bust and predictably so. In terms of straight biology, stem cells have a better chance of success, though with HUGE hurdles. Basically, it's premature in terms of our understanding of how cells work.

But there are a also lot of ethical questions and human costs. I just read an article about putting human DNA into cow eggs in order to generate stem cells for therapy. The article implied that there was almost no cow DNA in these cow eggs, but of course mammal cells contain mitochondria (tiny organelles) that have their own DNA so in fact cow eggs are not just a blank slate vessel, as implied in the article. They are COW eggs! No regulatory group is going to allow anyone to put those in people. But the news article was written from a press release, which was spun by the investors. It was misleading.

WHY are they making stem cells from cow eggs? Because people like me object to the idea of creating a vast market for human eggs, which is what the stem cell industry will do otherwise. I can explain this in another post if you want.

Also, if I had my way, the fertility industry would be shut down today. They have done enough harm. And they are poised to link arms with the stem cell industry, with whom they share a lot of interests and ethics (that is to say none).