(Untitled)
Somewhere in the 14th century, there were these people called Arabs. And then there was a guy named Copernicus. They were all doing essentially same thing - looking at stars, planets, and figuring out how everything in the world revolves around the Earth. They both came to the same conclusion - something doesn't figure right in this, the planets
( Read more... )
Gee, I wonder what website you were quoting *cough*bushlover*cough*. It's because of people like you that so many things are halted. Ohh, I'm sorry, we're not sure if this is going to succeed or not. Ya know, that IS why they call it RESEARCH. Because you're trying to find out what exactly it does.
Yes, stem cells can be derived from other sources. But I can quote you Mr. Bush's speech on that. This is taken straight out of your beloved Bush's speech, EXACTLY after the quote you used, "However, most scientists, at least today, believe that research on embryonic stem cells offer the most promise because these cells have the potential to develop in all of the tissues in the body. " Do you see this. Most scientists BELIEVE that the results will be fruitful, not that they have no clue.
And before you go on praising him for what he did, research EXACTLY what he did. And here it is, are you ready? Bush signed an executive order in August 2001 LIMITING federal research funding for stem cell research to 78 embryonic stem cell lines then in existence. He didn't allow anything new, on the contrary he FORBID it.
Oh yeah, before I forget - it's not a human being until it can survive on its own outside the mother. Until then it is sole property of the mother, and if she deems it proper of the father.
Reply
Anyway, I've never read through Bush's or Kerry's sites much. I figure that if you want a completely biased, distorted, and one-sided view of what's been going on, that's the best place to get it, so I don't bother. As far as political research goes, I’d much rather get my info from a third party, reputable news source, or analyze the candidates’ own actions or words, rather than what some campaign staffers decided to write for them and stick on their website.
Bush isn't against the research, as the bottom line is this: Before Bush, there was no government funding or supplying of human stem cell lines. Now, Bush opened the door for funding and for the government supplying stem cell line. He hasn't put any kind of a cap or specific limit on federal funding of the research, but has put a cap on the number of embryonic stem cell lines that will be supplied to researchers by the government. It's fair to call that a compromise, and the private sector can still do as much of whatever they wish. And according to NIH, once you have a good stem cell line, private researchers can continue to grow and expand it and make additional (completely separate) lines from it for other researchers to use, indefinitely. That’s another reason why the need to keep getting new lines from new embryos is kinda a fake issue.
Again, I wasn't quoting any political web sites, and that was my whole point: the whole debate is being waged on empty promises of miracle cures, speculation, and political spin (because it's an election year), rather than on actual scientific facts and research. I've read a number of articles (ones that actually cite scientific research rather than politicians) that discuss how adult stem cells often out perform embryonic stem cells in actual applications, and that stem cells harvested from living humans are far more versatile than originally thought. For example:
http://www.betterhumans.com/Errors/index.aspx?aspxerrorpath=/Adult_Marrow_Stem_Cells_Heal_Burns_Faster_than_Embryonic.Article.2003-10-10-4.aspx
http://www.betterhumans.com/News/news.aspx?articleID=2004-09-30-2
http://www.betterhumans.com/News/news.aspx?articleID=2004-06-01-3
Anyway, just trying to give a different viewpoint.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment