Good on you Obama.....

**carole** · 03-09-2009, 02:24 PM

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.

**Grace** · 03-09-2009, 02:45 PM

I totally agree with you, Carole.

**cassiesmom** · 03-09-2009, 02:50 PM

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** · 03-09-2009, 03:08 PM

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** · 03-09-2009, 03:13 PM

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** · 03-09-2009, 03:42 PM

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** · 03-09-2009, 03:43 PM

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

**moosmom** · 03-09-2009, 04:51 PM

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!!!

**blue** · 03-10-2009, 12:35 AM

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.

**carole** · 03-10-2009, 05:37 PM

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** · 03-10-2009, 06:23 PM

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.

**Twisterdog** · 03-09-2009, 10:55 PM

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.

**blue** · 03-09-2009, 11:39 PM

The ban on public funding preceded the Bush Regime.

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.