Good on you Obama.....

Now i know this is a very controversial subject,however i wanted to say that I am thrilled with the latest announcement that Obama is over-ruling the Bush Regime, with the decision to allow stem cell research to go ahead.

For many of you who are against this, i respect your opinion,so please can we keep this civil and do the same for each other.

This does affect me personally, I have a very bad hereditary disease within my family, having had an Aunt die of this already,and for me stem cell research could indeed be the answer to a cure, I don't want to die of this awful disease, and i certainly don't want my children to either, so this is Huge for me,America has the money and resources to find a cure for many of these diseases.

I think until you are personally affected,you don't realise just how important this research can be.

I know many think it is unethical,and i understand your feelings on this, and again i respect them.

However i just want to say THANK YOU Obama,your are tops in my books.

I totally agree with you, Carole.

I copied this from a chat moderated by Dr. David Scadden, who is the co-director of the Harvard Stem Cell Research center. I'm a nurse and I have a family member with infertility, so this is a really tough one for me. What it comes down to (for me) is this... If there is absolutely, positively, no way that embryo has no chance of ever being implanted and everything possible has been done to ensure that -- then go ahead and use it for stem cell research.

Thanks,
Elyse

Questioner: "If you truly believed that an embryo was a human being with a right to life, would you be against embryonic stem cell research? I understand the research potential, but am very uncomfortable with the source. ... I'm wondering how you'd encourage people who have a legitimate objection to embryonic stem cell research to overcome their qualms without sacrificing a basic tenet?"


David Scadden: "This is an extremely personal decision a person needs to make. There are at least two morally justifiable positions on this work. The first is the one you state; the other is that people are suffering from conditions that might be helped if we were to use cells that were otherwise destined for the incinerator. As a physician, I am compelled by the opportunity to relieve suffering recognizing that hundreds of thousands of stored embryos in IVF clinics will otherwise become medical waste. If and when we can move away from needing to use such cells, I assure you that scientists in the field are anxious to do so. (emphasis: mine) At the moment, these are still the gold standard pluripotent cells. We hope to move away from them with more understanding of the so called iPS (induced pluripotent cells), but we are not yet at that point."

Thank you for posting those comments. As a retired nurse, I feel just as the doctor does - I am compelled by the opportunity to relieve suffering recognizing that hundreds of thousands of stored embryos in IVF clinics will otherwise become medical waste.

Why not put these embryos to good use - perhaps helping to save other lives touched with diabetes, Parkinson's, spinal cord injuries - rather than toss them out with the trash.

Another alternative - there was a wonderful article in a recent Good Housekeeping magazine about a couple in Minnesota or Wisconsin. They had fertility problems and went the frozen embryo route. After having twins they decided that was enough for them. Rather than trash what was left, they passed them on to a couple in Virginia. That couple had twins, also, and then the two women passed the remaining ones on to a couple in California. This last couple also had twins.

Of course, one could go the way of octomom and have all remaining inserted at once.

More than one option is available for the unused embryos - we should be open to the possibilities.

I'm in the allow them to use the embryos that are going to be discarded camp. I am against purposely cloning embryos; if they can figure out a way to fish out stem cells from non-embryonic sources (which they have had some success with!) such as cord blood, etc.

I hope there is a way to monitor HOW THE MONEY IS BEING SPENT.

I too have a few 'things' that I have to worry about as I get older, But giving money, willy nilly to research and lifting some of the regulations and bans without any oversight as to what is being looked at makes me a bit nervous.

Having the government step in and throw money at a problem without having any rules on how the money is spent is a recipe for disaster.

---------

I think that money should be spent on finding cures for illnesses, but their should be some acountability.

I am also in agreement, and this is long overdue!

I've always been an advocate for stem cell research. After the baby is born, the uterine lining is checked and the umbilical cord is thrown out.
Those the the two things RICH in the cells needed to create cures, etc. It's about time!!!

FWIW, there was no ban on stem cell research. Just a ban on government funding of it. And we all know what happens when the government gets its fingers into stuff....

If there is such promise in this research, I wonder why private companies were not all over it? I honestly ask because I am sure there is more to it than what I know.

Yes you are correct, sorry i mean't to clarify myself better,you may well have a point, but who really know's eh?

Recently there seem to be more and more reports about getting stem cells from non-embryonic sources. Hopefully this will become the main supply at some time.

Simply because embryonic stem cell use can be very controversial.

Here's hoping for some medical miracles ahead. :)

Yes it is indeed a great day. Obama did a brave and wise thing.
Umblical cords are usually thrown in an incenorator(sic) anyway.

Exactly, if they are going to be thrown away, why not put them to good use, and save millions of people suffering,and cure some very nasty horrible diseases, I am 100 per cent behind Obama, and without the government funding, i seriously doubt the research would go very far.

Im gonna be the downer here, shocking I know.

Using embryonic stem cells is riskier then using adult stem cells (ASC), this includes stem cells from cordal fluids. The risk of rejection from ASCs is much less likely to happen, less risk to the patient, and much less questionable ethicly.

I do not consider this a brave or even an insiteful move in anyway shape or form.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blue

Using embryonic stem cells is riskier then using adult stem cells (ASC), this includes stem cells from cordal fluids. The risk of rejection from ASCs is much less likely to happen, less risk to the patient, and much less questionable ethicly.

---

LINK to an NIH site with info about stem cells - both embryonic and adult.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grace

LINK to an NIH site with info about stem cells - both embryonic and adult.

---

From your link.

Quote:

---

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.

---

Also from my link -

Quote:

---

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.

---

6 of one; half a dozen of the other. Both of us can come up with facts to back up each of our view points. Neither of us is wrong - we simply have differing thoughts on this subject.

From March 4th 2009.

Quote:

---

Even as the future of embryonic stem cells has dimmed, adult stem cell research has scored major wins evident just in the past few months. 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. Though this is a more difficult task, scientists have learned to coax them to mature into many cell types, like brain and heart cells, in the laboratory. (Such stem cells can be removed almost as easily as drawing a unit of blood, and they have been used successfully for years in bone marrow transplants.)

---

Source.

And I repeat again -


6 of one; half a dozen of the other. Both of us can come up with facts to back up each of our view points. Neither of us is wrong - we simply have differing thoughts on this subject.

Some facts are more outdated then others, half a dozen of one, six of another.

ETA: Found this.

Quote:

---

Mr. Obama has put the proposed Clinton policy into effect, but Congressional restrictions remain. Researchers are still forbidden to use federal financing to derive new human embryonic stem cell lines. They will, however, be allowed to do research on new stem cell lines grown in a privately financed lab.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by carole

Now i know this is a very controversial subject,however i wanted to say that I am thrilled with the latest announcement that Obama is over-ruling the Bush Regime, with the decision to allow stem cell research to go ahead. ... However i just want to say THANK YOU Obama,your are tops in my books.

---

Agreed.

The ban on public funding preceded the Bush Regime.

Quote:

---

The work was ineligible for public funding because of a ban placed by Congress on NIH-funded human embryo research. In 1995, Congress attached the ban to the bill appropriating funds for NIH. It has been retained in each successive appropriations bill (appropriations bills are passed annually), and until 2001, no public funding was ever provided for hESC research in the United States. The following is the text of the ban, originally authored in 1995 by then-Rep. Jay Dickey (R-AR), as it appeared in NIH's fiscal year 2006 appropriations bill (H.R. 3010, Sec. 509):

(a) None of the funds made available in this Act may be used for—
(1) the creation of a human embryo or embryos for research purposes; or
(2) research in which a human embryo or embryos are destroyed, discarded, or knowingly subjected to risk of injury or death greater than that allowed for research on fetuses in utero under 45 CFR 46.204(b) and section 498(b) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 289g(b)).
(b) For purposes of this section, the term 'human embryo or embryos' includes any organism, not protected as a human subject under 45 CFR 46 as of the date of the enactment of this Act, that is derived by fertilization, parthenogenesis, cloning, or any other means from one or more human gametes or human diploid cells.

---

Source.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grace

Another alternative - there was a wonderful article in a recent Good Housekeeping magazine about a couple in Minnesota or Wisconsin. They had fertility problems and went the frozen embryo route. After having twins they decided that was enough for them. Rather than trash what was left, they passed them on to a couple in Virginia. That couple had twins, also, and then the two women passed the remaining ones on to a couple in California. This last couple also had twins.

---

Grace, sorry I didnt quote this earlier. I agree with this practice.

Blue forgive me if I am not quite on top of it all with your politics, gee it takes me long enough to understand my own, let alone that of America,ok so it was before the Bush Regime, my error, apologies, but that is the one I am aware of , and really does it matter.?

I am all for it 100 per cent either way adult or embryonic !!! for me personally there is nothing un-ethical about it either way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by carole

Blue forgive me if I am not quite on top of it all with your politics, gee it takes me long enough to understand my own, let alone that of America,ok so it was before the Bush Regime, my error, apologies, but that is the one I am aware of , and really does it matter.?

I am all for it 100 per cent either way adult or embryonic !!! for me personally there is nothing un-ethical about it either way.

---

I have no problem with the ethics of it. What I have a problem with is it being financed by the government -- Any government. I love my country, but our government has given us $2000+ toilet seats for NASA.

I would rather see the private sector fund the research. I feel that it would far more likely to be productive than to have yet another wasteful government agency overseeing something as important as this.

Lisa please inform me,as i would like a better understanding of it all, has not the private sector being doing just that up until now,? would not the research be of more value and go further if it were government funded though, please fill me in, thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by carole

Lisa please inform me,as i would like a better understanding of it all, has not the private sector being doing just that up until now,? would not the research be of more value and go further if it were government funded though, please fill me in, thanks.

---

I feel that the private sector has more qualified scientists to do this research. If the government pays for the research, it will go slower as committee after committee is formed to "study" the problem.

Research will come to a screeching halt every few years when Congress runs for office. As new administrations come in, the direction will change.

If the private sector does the research, they will own the product. They will be accountable to their stock holders who will fire their "a$$es" if they don't deliver. If several companies are competing, we will get results faster. They will be working as quickly as possible, because research costs money.

They don't have time to waste because time is money. Our Congress has wasted so much time and money passing stuff like "National Doughnut Day" and "National Underwear Day". :(

I really believe if we had waited for a Government to develop computers for personal use, we would still be waiting for them to hold yet another meeting on defining what exactly a "personal" computer was. I am a big proponent of entrepreneurship.

I don't want the Government dictating what research can be done. If they are footing the bill (or contributing), that will give them more say. Maybe I'm cynical, but I've never seen timely results from a Government Agency.

Thank you Lisa, that explained it well, I can understand where you are coming from now, cheers.

Much of the money would be grant money - not spent by government scientist but by grants to universities and other institutions to do the research.

He is certainly a savior. :D 100% in agreement with Carole!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Edwina's Secretary

Much of the money would be grant money - not spent by government scientist but by grants to universities and other institutions to do the research.

---

Yeah.... THAT makes all the difference. You are so cute when on the ropes. I certainly admire you dedication. You would have been a GREAT Soviet.

;)

Even you should know all government handouts come with those nasty strings. Imagine the power government gets over us once they own our health care?

No Big Macs for you.
No Beer for you.
No FREEDOM for you. Its too expensive.


Lemmings....

Anybody familiar with polio? Worried every summer in particular about your kids catching polio? Hanging garlic around your neck to ward off polio? Know anyone under 50 with polio?

If not, you can thank that evil, wasteful, incompetent government - National Institutes of Health and vaious research universities which....with help from the evil, wasteful incompetent government came up with the vaccine that virtually eliminated polio in this country.

I remember as a kid when the vaccine first came out -- going with my family and neighbors to the local grade school where we were given a sugar cube with the vaccine -- all done and coordinated and paid for by that evil, wasteful, incompetent government.

Now some might see it as interferring with freedom - freedom to die or be crippled by polio.

I see it as government doing its job - protecting its people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Edwina's Secretary

Anybody familiar with polio? Worried every summer in particular about your kids catching polio? Hanging garlic around your neck to ward off polio? Know anyone under 50 with polio?

If not, you can thank that evil, wasteful, incompetent government - National Institutes of Health and vaious research universities which....with help from the evil, wasteful incompetent government came up with the vaccine that virtually eliminated polio in this country.

I remember as a kid when the vaccine first came out -- going with my family and neighbors to the local grade school where we were given a sugar cube with the vaccine -- all done and coordinated and paid for by that evil, wasteful, incompetent government.

Now some might see it as interferring with freedom - freedom to die or be crippled by polio.

I see it as government doing its job - protecting its people.

---

I, too, remember that time very well.

[COUGH]March of Dimes[/COUGH]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blue

[COUGH]March of Dimes[/COUGH]

---

Better get some water for that cough Blue. Water that you can safely drink thanks to that evil, wasteful, incompetent government!

Better check your history, it wasnt big gov that cured polio.

Im on a well, big gov dosent supply my water.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blue

Better check your history, it wasnt big gov that cured polio.

Im on a well, big gov dosent supply my water.

---

Ditto at ya! Once again...I did not say the government cured polio. But the government contributed to finding a cure for it. You see...the National Institutes of Health is part of the Federal Government. And grants to universities to enable them to do research - yup that nasty ole government!

So you never drink water away from home?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Edwina's Secretary

Anybody familiar with polio? Worried every summer in particular about your kids catching polio? Hanging garlic around your neck to ward off polio? Know anyone under 50 with polio?

If not, you can thank that evil, wasteful, incompetent government - National Institutes of Health and vaious research universities which....with help from the evil, wasteful incompetent government came up with the vaccine that virtually eliminated polio in this country.

I remember as a kid when the vaccine first came out -- going with my family and neighbors to the local grade school where we were given a sugar cube with the vaccine -- all done and coordinated and paid for by that evil, wasteful, incompetent government.

Now some might see it as interferring with freedom - freedom to die or be crippled by polio.

I see it as government doing its job - protecting its people.

---

First post of the ES/Puck peace accord... I hope. :)


A, sadly, rare success story of government intervention. Even a broken clock is right twice a day. Government is wasteful and generally incompetent, but I don't think evil is a word I would use, at least not yet.

But to the bold part. This is where you are I are miles apart. I do not believe government's job is to protect us. Protecting you is YOUR job. You have to see that with the government's "protection" comes dependance upon that very government. I see it as much akin to the Mob and how they use "protection" schemes. Dependance is not liberty and liberty is what sets us apart from all the other nations of the Earth. We were founded on the principal of individual liberty and that with such freedom, man can truly excel. And you know what? We DID. Of course there were bumps along the way, there always will be. Now, as our nation ages the people look more and more to the government to help them when things go bad... Look what it is getting us...

Think about it from your personal perspective. You are a smart person. Do you want some dimwit government employee dictating to you what procedue you can have done? How far you can drive you car? What you can or cannot eat? The more we depend on the government for these things, the more enslaved we become.

Now, back to your orginal point here... Yes, government can do good things. But I am not willing to pay, because when you say government pays, WE are the ones paying, for the very poor success to failure ratio government produces.

I comes down to this... Do you want to be free, or do you want guaranteed food, jobs, housing, 'safety', etc?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Edwina's Secretary

Ditto at ya! Once again...I did not say the government cured polio. But the government contributed to finding a cure for it. You see...the National Institutes of Health is part of the Federal Government. And grants to universities to enable them to do research - yup that nasty ole government!

So you never drink water away from home?

---

March of Dimes did the majority of the work, and without Gov funding could have done it all. Big Gov infected citizens rather then immunizing them by not using Salk's vaccine.

Big Gov does not supply Costco with my bottled water. City water, Anchorage and Chicago in particular, I cant stand the smell of the chlorine.