The Medical/Pharmaceutical industry is a large for profit business. Any treatment that they provide from this research will most likely come with a very high price tag. I don't understand why we need to supplement medical research with taxpayer money, any thoughts on that? I'm also curious to hear from anyone that is morally against stem cell research. In my opinion, if they only get the embryos from fertility and abortion clinics, I don't really have a serious moral issue with it. Though, I am opposed to research scientists creating embryos specifically for embryonic stem cell research. Admittedly, I don't know that much about stem cell research. That is one reason why I started this thread, to see if I would learn something new. If anyone has any interesting facts or information about stem cell research, your welcome to post it here. Do you agree with taxpayers paying for this research?
It's unnecessary says this scientist, adult stem cells can be used instead. The left is just obsessed with death and corruption.
You're right, I can't get enough abortions, and I love killing babies to harvest their stem cells. And I love war, we should blow up the whole planet.
I'm assuming you're on the right. Are you for war? How about the death penalty? Torture? And how much do you even know about stem cell research? You do realize they're not actually killing babies for their stem cells, right? I'll admit it can be a touchy subject, but saying I have no respect for human life because of it is fucking bullshit.
I'm not right or left, I don't let others think for me. Not for war, the death penalty or torture. I happen to be humanity's best friend despite the fact that I can't stand the majority of them. Call me crazy but I see more than flesh and bones in people.
but the thing is the right don't realize that a fetus/embryo is not a baby it is a group of cells. I'm personally a independant, but I find it hypocritical that the right don't call a war for oil "death and corruption", but will for cells? Funny that the majority of scientists disagree with him about embryonic stem cell research.
That's interesting, I wasn't aware of the adult stem cell research, sounds promising. I Googled it and found,
You should know that Adult Stem Cells do not have the same level of regenerative abilities as embryonic stem cells, is a prime target for and can CAUSE cancer and tumors: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/04/080410101153.htm http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2007/metastasis-tt1031.html http://lib.bioinfo.pl/auth:Heidaran,M http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4465717.stm Embryonic Stems Cells is more regenerative, can and have proven to be able to KILL cancer http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/10/051012084443.htm http://www1.umn.edu/umnnews/Feature...em_cells_to_kill_cancer_cells_in_the_lab.html http://www.physorg.com/news7152.html
Yeah, I can see the doctor telling his patient, "Good news! We cured your condition as a result of stem cell technology. Unfortunately, it gave you cancer. Sorry." Do you think it is the taxpayers responsibility to fund this research, whether adult stem cells or embryonic stem cells?
Adult Stem Cells can mutate into and is a target for cancer, so I can see one reason why majority of scientists would rather use embryonic stem cells. Also like I stated embryonic have a higher level of regenerative abilities, and there is also a more abundance of research about embryonic than adult stem cells. Yes, since there is a benefit to most taxpayers. Stem cells can help find cures to a whole boatload of genetic conditions and diseases such as cancer, tumors, heart attacks, Alzheimer's, immunodeficiency syndrome, bone marrow.. etc. You name it. Heck even simpler things such as blindness, deaf, and even balding can benefit from stem cells.
absolutely! Government funded science/technology research is a huge reason we are at the place we are today technologically. Without Government funded research would there be an internet? Would there be computers like we have today? No. It's important for the government (ie "taxpayers") to fund the research that private corporations often don't (because they don't see an immediate profit to be made.) Socialism is a good thing. It really is. I recommend reading up on history. It's very enlightening.
Many taxpayers will never benefit from stem cell research, but I'm certain that some would. Yet if we use "well, it's in their own benefit isn't it?" as a criteria on whether to use taxpayer money, isn't that kind of a dangerous road to go down? IMO, it should be a consideration always, but not the ultimate deciding factor. If the taxpayers funded every program and charity that would be of benefit to some portion of society, we would be sending 100% of our checks to the government, and our country would still go bankrupt. Here's something I just found that I think is really interesting.... Consumer Watchdog has contacted Obama after learning he will federally fund stem cell research, to see if he will allow taxpayers to share in the profits created from the research.