Stem Cell Research Fact vs Fiction

  1. http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/...ell_resea.html
    fiction: certain opponents of stem cell research point out that further advances have been made in adult stem cell therapy than embryonic or other forms.
    fact: "it's tricky because opponents of [embryonic] stem cell research like to point out that alternatives exist and the therapies are much further along," said reyolds. "that is something along the lines of what is called a red herring." adult stem cells are used in procedures such as bone marrow transplants which have been done since 1968. the first stem cell line was created and patented in 1998 by james thompson, a professor at the university of wisconsin. "all born humans have stem cells in them that are less ethically problematic but are also less powerful," said reyolds.
    --caroline dobuzinskis
    •  
  2. 10 Comments

  3. by   kidznurse
    I'm not an opponent of stem cell research . i've worked in paed oncology and reinsfused stem cells and infused cord blood marrow transplants etc. I hate chemotherapy and hope for something to be eveloped that is less aggressive .It is like attacking a pin with a sledge hammer but until better treatments come along its all we've got.
    However I cannot help but wonder at the inequity of treatments . A single person in the Western world can be given multi millions of $ treatment to try to save their single life, whilst millions die world wide from lack of basic necessities of life like food shelter water. Why does one wealthy person need to have life prolonged even when they are in a vegetative state or are otherwise destroyed by the treatment when others don't matter a jot.? I think i will consider my options wvery carefully if put in a position of being asked to decide on a treatment . There are those from the West travelling to china to avail themselves of stem cell treatment when there are still major issues with Chinese poverty in that country . the revenue will not be trickling down to them .
  4. by   Shamira Aizza
    Rather irrelevant.

    It actually wouldn't matter if Embryonic Stem Cells cured everything from Acne to Zollinger syndrome.

    It's that people are reasonably opposed to the idea of their tax dollars being used to destroy embryo's, no matter the purpose. The real crime is the way this story is twisted to make it look like ESCR is banned, when such is not the case; it is simply not subsidized by our tax dollars. If Pfizer or Ely Lilly asked for a few million dollars to develop a drug for Alzheimers, you'd accuse the gov't of lining the pockets of big pharma.

    The truth is that if Embryonic Stem Cells were so successful at relieving human suffering, it wouldn't need federal tax support, because people would be pouring their money in voluntarily to promote ESCR. ESCR isn't struggling because of a lack of funding, it's struggling because of a lack of a product.
  5. by   kidznurse
    Sorry went off the point a bit .To be a little clearer.People from NZ and i assume USA and Europe are travelling to countries like China for stem cell treatment now .People don't generally consider the ethics of getting what they want. They are looking for a solution and any cost .Consider OECD women going to Russia to get ovum from poor Russian women. These women undergo potentially dangerous fertility treatment to allow (sometimes elderly post menopausal) women to cheat nature. In the next 20 years it will be found that fertility treatment significantly affects donors health outcomes. South American and Asian families selling children for organ transplants for those who can afford it. Few people check on the legality of the organs they are offered.
    Embryos are just one more example of the exploitation of one vulnerable individual (or potential individual) to meet the needs of a wealthier individual . You can bet that your average Ethipian doesn't have organ transplant fertility treatment or embryonic stem cell treatment
  6. by   SuesquatchRN
    Quote from kidznurse
    You can bet that your average Ethipian doesn't have organ transplant fertility treatment or embryonic stem cell treatment
    They don't have clean water, either. That doesn't mean science and medical exploration should halt until there is equity in health care.
  7. by   Simplepleasures
    If the embryos are discarded anyway, wouldnt it be better to use them for a positive purpose,rather than just being thrown away like garbage?
  8. by   Spidey's mom
    Quote from Shamira Aizza
    Rather irrelevant.

    It actually wouldn't matter if Embryonic Stem Cells cured everything from Acne to Zollinger syndrome.

    It's that people are reasonably opposed to the idea of their tax dollars being used to destroy embryo's, no matter the purpose. The real crime is the way this story is twisted to make it look like ESCR is banned, when such is not the case; it is simply not subsidized by our tax dollars. If Pfizer or Ely Lilly asked for a few million dollars to develop a drug for Alzheimers, you'd accuse the gov't of lining the pockets of big pharma.

    The truth is that if Embryonic Stem Cells were so successful at relieving human suffering, it wouldn't need federal tax support, because people would be pouring their money in voluntarily to promote ESCR. ESCR isn't struggling because of a lack of funding, it's struggling because of a lack of a product.
    This is exactly the point - federal tax support.

    Also, there are many studies that show adult stem cells DO show more promise and has nothing to do with timing.

    steph
  9. by   kidznurse
    Are embryos being manufactured to specifically provide for medical science if so whose ovum are being harvested?
  10. by   Shamira Aizza
    Quote from ingelein
    If the embryos are discarded anyway, wouldnt it be better to use them for a positive purpose,rather than just being thrown away like garbage?
    Once again, a completely different argument. You can rationalize anything you want about what should be done with these embryo's, but don't force people to pony up cash for it when they are morally (and reasonably so) opposed to the destruction of these embryos.

    And the people traveling overseas to get unproven treatment with ESC's are not doing so on my dime.
  11. by   pickledpepperRN
    It's not all about money but somehow It hurts my soul to pay taxes for abortion and preemptive war.

    I understand not wanting to pay for something if you think it is immoral.
  12. by   cardiacRN2006
    Quote from kidznurse
    In the next 20 years it will be found that fertility treatment significantly affects donors health outcomes.

    LOL, and just how is that? I'd love to know the answer to this...




    Women in this country have many choices with their embryos (when being created by IVF). Keep them on ice for later use or forever, donate them to science, or adopt them out. Lots are on ice as we speak in suspended animation, just waiting.

    Is the fear that we are going to hit up low income people and start offering them IVF to obtain stem cells?
    Because that will never happen, lol.

    There's plenty to go around for now, but I'm with the group that still believes in adult stem cells over embryonic.

close