Good on you Obama.....

[cassiesmom]

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."

[Grace]

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.

[smokey the elder]

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.

[RICHARD]

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.

[pomtzu]

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

[moosmom]

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!!!

[Puckstop31]

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.

[carole]

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

[blue]

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.

[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.

[kuhio98]

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.

[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.

[kuhio98]

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.