SRL Archive - Discussions & Debates

In the news with the american president lifting the ban on state-funded stem cell research, so now america can try to catch up the 8 years its lost compared to other countries.


i was just doing research about what other semi-theocracies think of stem cell research, and it turns out iran is in the forefront!
saudi arabia also uses stem cell research

i get the feeling I'm giving bullets to the christian fundamentalists, picture this logic.
1. saudi arabia and iran do stem cell research
2. saudi arabia and iran are anti-american
3. therefore stem cell research is anti-american!




A little scientific background now…
Stem cells are found in all multi-celled organisms, the cells themselves can do nothing except they have the ability to change into any type of other cell.
They are normally only found in embryos when the body is first being formed in the uterus.

When you break your spine, its likely that you'll never walk again because the nerves have been broken, and they never repair themselves.

Because of the ability of stem cells to change into anything, there is the possibility that they could be used to make someone walk again, you could make the stem cell change into nerve cells, and put them in the spine.

through similar techniques, other conditions such as cancer, Parkinson's disease, Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and multiple sclerosis.


they are contraversial in some parts of the world because to get stem cells you have to destroy the embryo, which some people consider murder.





As a left-wing secularist, my view is that stem cell research is good and should be pursued.

It seems to me the obvious discrepancy is with IVF treatment.
in IVF treatment, a woman is injected with around 20 fertalised eggs, and normally only 2 or 3 survive to birth, yet people who are against stem cell research are normally content with IVF treatment.

Also, some fertalised eggs spontanious abort anyway, you could call it nature's quality control.

I am from America and I support stem cell research.

Although in certain ways, it is somewhat tragic to kill an embryo I find it a very small price for what could come of the research.

Sure would suck to be one of those embryo's though :/

Its not a good situation and will always be highly controversial but I believe that the results will be worth it.

It's worth noting that stem cell research is an active and successful research field in the US and there are many kinds of stem cell treatments currently in use here.

The debate isn't around stem cells themselves, but the pluri-potent embryonic stem cells that have yet to differentiate into specific tissues. Nearly all the cases where stem cell-based treatments have been developed into actual useful techniques are based on adult stem cells (which can be extracted from the tissue of adults without harming them).

One of the more pragmatic objections to funding embryonic stem cell research is that doing so takes away funding from adult stem cell efforts. This is a problem because adult stem cell research has produced useful and effective treatments for 10-20 ailments whereas embryonic stem cell research has produced none. Moving funding will potentially mean that it will take longer to produce new treatments.

FWIW, I don't see any ethical issues with using embryos for this kind of research. They have not yet differentiated and have no tissues, no nerves, nothing that can suffer or experience. Lacking the ability to experience, they also lack standing for ethical consideration, IMO.

With a limited amount of funds available for scientific research, you have to pick winners and losers. You can't fund everything at 100% all the time, and scientists themselves realize this reality. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) provides most of the government funding for this type of research.

8 years ago, many scientists were clamoring for federal funding for human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research. Bush decided that he would fund the research for the first time (Clinton never funded it, for example), but restricted federal funding to those cell lines that were currently available at the time.

Over $125 million has been spent by NIH on hESC research since then, so I dispute that America has "lost ground" to anyone. We just spent our money working on a different flavor of research in the same field.

As a result of this funding "ban" (not really a ban as I explained), scientists have since developed iPS cells. These cells are created by transforming skin cells with three important regulatory proteins found in ESC. There are no ethical problems with using these cells at all, and they have been hailed as a major breakthrough.

Obama just reversed Bush's non-ban on hESC research, and he made a nice speech about letting scientists decide, rather than politicians. That's all well and good, but what he didn't tell you is that scientists already have decided, and they are now saying that more iPS research is their top priority at this point. NIH just published a list of the top 8 priorities in stem cell research, and iPS cells were a major part of 6 of them. One other used adult stem cells, and the other used any type, including iPS. None specifically mentioned creating new hESC lines at all.

1. Induced Pluripotent Stem (iPS) Cells for Aging and Neurodegeneration Research.

2. Delineate Factors That Control The Differentiation Of Pluripotent Stem Cells In The Skin And Musculoskeletal
System Into Different Lineages.

3. Precise Reprogramming of Cells from Oral and Craniofacial Tissues: Recent advances in reprogramming
of somatic cells into induced pluripotent stem cells (iPS) cells constitute an important breakthrough...

4. Induced pluripotent stem cells--cellular and humanized mouse models of disease.

5. Development of stem cell treatment for degenerative diseases of the eye.

6. Develop molecular signatures for heart, vascular, lung, and blood diseases by profiling reprogrammed
induced pluripotent stem cells (iPS) derived from affected individuals of defined genotype.

7. Developing iPS cells for mental disorders.

8. Reverse engineering human neurological disease. ... There will be an emphasis on appropriate
validation of iPS cells and their derivatives, evaluating the hetero/homogeneity of any cell populations
to be screened and use of cellular assays relevant to normal development, organ function and disease.

You can see the full list here.

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/challenge_award/High_Priority_Topics.pdf#topic_14

Furthermore, the scientists at NIH recently announced that they would not fund any new grants this year. They have plenty of money, due to the stimulus package, but have decided to fund old grants that have already been submitted, or to increase funding for existing grants.

http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/55438/

That means they have indirectly rejected funding any new hESC research this year, by their own choice. That's not exactly what I would expect if they thought this stuff was a high priority.

I think instead of ending the politicization of hESC research, Obama has actually increased it. He has repeatedly cited public opinion polls when discussing this subject, which is a political argument rather than a scientific one. And the big signing ceremony and propaganda about making up lost ground, and about Bush's 'War on Science" is further proof of the same.

gonna keep this short,
i'm pro choice. i recently dislocated my shoulder and the muslce in my should split in-two. if stemcell research was legal in england, i would be injected with some stem cells and within a few hours ild be healed. but instead i have to wear a huge cast for a month.

From: jakeyboy29
gonna keep this short,
i'm pro choice. i recently dislocated my shoulder and the muslce in my should split in-two. if stemcell research was legal in england, i would be injected with some stem cells and within a few hours ild be healed. but instead i have to wear a huge cast for a month.

I wouldn't recommend that you volunteer yourself as a Guinea Pig for this stuff.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090218/ap_on_he_me/med_stem_cells_tumor

It's deadly serious stuff.

I think that research should be continued, on uhm "nature's conditions",

It seems to me the obvious discrepancy is with IVF treatment.
in IVF treatment, a woman is injected with around 20 fertalised eggs, and normally only 2 or 3 survive to birth,

Like that, the ones that would die would be used…

http://www.donjoy.co.uk/en_UK/detail_UpperExtremity2_13775_16099.html

i think wearing this for 3 weeks is worth the risk of dying.

From: N C D S
Its not a good situation and will always be highly controversial

i disagree with this,
lets take an extream example, in 5000 years stem cell research will be highly advanced and will probably be used routinely to cure many illnesses. That would make people forget (because human nature is like that)

also, it only seems to be contraversial in america. I remember there were debates about it in the UK when it first started, but they were settled and it is no longer a contraversial topic here.
so jakeyboy29, it is legal in england

From: Grippy
It's worth noting that stem cell research is an active and successful research field in the US and there are many kinds of stem cell treatments currently in use here.

The debate isn't around stem cells themselves, but the pluri-potent embryonic stem cells that have yet to differentiate into specific tissues. Nearly all the cases where stem cell-based treatments have been developed into actual useful techniques are based on adult stem cells (which can be extracted from the tissue of adults without harming them).

One of the more pragmatic objections to funding embryonic stem cell research is that doing so takes away funding from adult stem cell efforts. This is a problem because adult stem cell research has produced useful and effective treatments for 10-20 ailments whereas embryonic stem cell research has produced none. Moving funding will potentially mean that it will take longer to produce new treatments.

all new research will take money from other research, why explicitly pick on embryonic stem cell research?

i could say "Funding LHC/particle physics/NASA/polymers takes money away from adult stem cell research, therefore we shouldnt do it because it will take longer to produce new treatments"


of course embryonic stem cell is behind everything else, since it was banned for the last 8 years.

Tarajunky's argument that allowing adult stem cell research means embryonic stem cell research is not really banned is flawed.

how can you reverse a ban on something thats not banned?

Im neutral. It depends whether you think the embryo is life from when it is concieved or not.

Yakman; Isnt it behind because there is no way of telling what specialised tissue the stem cell will turn into?

it all depends were life starts, conseption [sex]; or at birth? or some were down the line of pregnancy

I completely support stem cell research in the fullest. I think that our civilization depends on all the science and research we can possibly have.

People may call me inhumane, but I think that people put themselves and their close others before the majority way too much.

I say let everyone do what they want. Don't force them to do anything, nor force them to not do anything.

I am the same way with abortion. People believe in multitudes of things. Example: Oh this religion thinks abortion or stem cell research is wrong. So they think everyone who thinks it is right is inhuman and a killer because they think everybody has to think what they think. People are way to self centered and they need to see that everyone has there own views of these things, and I see that anything we can do to advance and help our civilization is something we need to invest in. We have hurt ourselves enough as it is, making it worse that we don't invest in something that could make us better.

Say no to conformity. Be yourself. Don't fall into something just because others say its right or wrong. Chose what you want and try to work for the good of the people.

My ideas/thoughts.

Bush allowed human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research to be funded by the federal government for the first time. As I said, over $125 million was spent on human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research over the last 8 years.

For example…

http://www.bootstrike.com/Genetics/StemCells/survey_research.html

"Currently, the National Institutes of Health has 399 funding opportunities for researchers interested in hESC. In 2005 the NIH funded $607 million worth of stem cell research, of which $39 million was specifically used for hESC."

Bush's ban was a relatively minor one, actually. The "ban" was on funding for creating or using NEW hESC cell lines, since that required the destruction of new embryos. But we could and did use the lines that already existed.

Dems blew it up into this huge ideological debate about politicians imposing morality on scientists, when it was a minor ban that had a minimal effect on the progress of science in the US over the last 8 years.

Dems blew it up into this huge ideological debate about politicians imposing morality on scientists, when it was a minor ban that had a minimal effect on the progress of science in the US over the last 8 years.

We'll see in 8 years whether or not the 8 year loss was worth it. Regardless of it it was worth it, the principle of the matter alone was enough to fight for it. But thats another topic, lol

And scientists have already decided on hESC? I see. Why the big push for embryonic stem cell research? Obviously it has advantages over everything else, otherwise im sure the scientists would be happy to continue without them. The fact that its been debated so much for so long shows that the scientists have decided - they decided to go for embryonic stem cell research.

Also, I did some searching and couldnt find a date on that priority list, but I'd bet anything it was made before the ban on embyonic stem cell research was lifted - thus making it not possible at all let alone a priority. All your stats and figures are from before the ban was lifted, too, thus making them invalid for now, as in the next few years they will be offset incredibly by this unban.

This is doing research without harming the origional.

This is similar to embrionic stem cells.

Its only a controversial topic when its using embryos and you're killing them.

Saudi Arabia, isn't anti-american.
Many countries have a right to be anti american.

Tbh, I seriously doubt that they'll be getting stem cells from embryos for very long. They're a smart lot, they will find another way.