Embryonic Stem Cell Research...

Space, the environment, new discoveries and new uses for old ones
User avatar
ND7
Posts: 3910
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 9:02 am

Re: Embryonic Stem Cell Research...

Post by ND7 » Wed Mar 11, 2009 8:06 pm

Elroy El wrote: So the innocent children killed during the Great Flood were killed with love and compassion?
Who the hell are you to define good or evil? Every soul on the Earth could claim that right.

To answer your question, I believe any innocent life taken in the Flood is in Heaven with the Lord.
"What matters is not that it's true, but that I believe it; or no, not that I believe it, but that I believe it....I trust I make myself obscure."
St. Thomas More, A Man for All Seasons.

User avatar
Fordama
Posts: 18139
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:12 pm

Re: Embryonic Stem Cell Research...

Post by Fordama » Wed Mar 11, 2009 10:33 pm

ND7 wrote:
Deining good and evil is the responsibility of everybody, as it is everybody that has to live with it.

Fordama
This country of the United States was not built by those who waited and rested and wished to look behind them.---JFK

User avatar
SOCTE
Posts: 4033
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 12:32 pm

Re: Embryonic Stem Cell Research...

Post by SOCTE » Wed Mar 11, 2009 10:39 pm

Elroy El wrote: So the innocent children killed during the Great Flood were killed with love and compassion?
It rains on the just and the unjust . . .
Image

User avatar
GOODave
Posts: 26392
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 6:21 pm

Re: Embryonic Stem Cell Research...

Post by GOODave » Thu Mar 12, 2009 4:12 am

Elroy El wrote: So God didn't make it rain during the Great Flood or bring fire and brimstone down on Sodom and Gomorrah? Those were accidents? Or the deaths were unintentional?
Your limited understanding of the Bible is amusing. "accidents" or "unintentional" are but two of the available understandings. You'd have to actually read those accounts to figure out more alternatives.

Keep going ... I'm sure with this chilly weather you don't even miss the Depends.

Elroy El
Posts: 3488
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 12:27 pm

Re: Embryonic Stem Cell Research...

Post by Elroy El » Thu Mar 12, 2009 4:22 am

ND7 wrote:Who the hell are you to define good or evil? Every soul on the Earth could claim that right.
Who is God to claim that right?
ND7 wrote:To answer your question, I believe any innocent life taken in the Flood is in Heaven with the Lord.
Huh? Collateral damage.
Image

Elroy El
Posts: 3488
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 12:27 pm

Re: Embryonic Stem Cell Research...

Post by Elroy El » Thu Mar 12, 2009 4:23 am

GOODave wrote: Keep going ... I'm sure with this chilly weather you don't even miss the Depends.
Since I don't need them, maybe you can tell us what that's like.
Image

User avatar
GOODave
Posts: 26392
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 6:21 pm

Re: Embryonic Stem Cell Research...

Post by GOODave » Thu Mar 12, 2009 4:29 am

Elroy El wrote: Since I don't need them,
OH darn ... and here I was expecting you to acknowledge your dependence on them here in public .

:thumbsup:

Elroy El
Posts: 3488
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 12:27 pm

Re: Embryonic Stem Cell Research...

Post by Elroy El » Thu Mar 12, 2009 4:55 am

GOODave wrote:OH darn ... and here I was expecting you to acknowledge your dependence on them here in public .

:thumbsup:
If I did, I wouldn't be afraid to acknowledge that fact. It's not like you won't need them eventually.
Image

User avatar
GOODave
Posts: 26392
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 6:21 pm

Re: Embryonic Stem Cell Research...

Post by GOODave » Thu Mar 12, 2009 5:13 am

Elroy El wrote: If I did, I wouldn't be afraid to acknowledge that fact. It's not like you won't need them eventually.
Uh huh ... sure but you're DENYING it now, right! 8-[

User avatar
GOODave
Posts: 26392
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 6:21 pm

Re: Embryonic Stem Cell Research...

Post by GOODave » Thu Mar 12, 2009 9:23 am

I saw the following over in tLIBS community and I believe it to be a good, but understandable, explanation of the progress made on ASC research:
Actually, it's the ASC research that has the rejection problem, not the ESC research. In addition, ASC research introduces the theoretical risk of cancer factor.

In the second generation embryonic stem cell technology, they take an adult skin cell, and introduce a small number of genes which direct the "committed" adult skin cell to revert all the way back to an embryonic stem cell.

While ASC can be reprogrammed into ESC by the introduction of four specific genes, direct reprogramming carries a risk of cancer for the recipients of tissue from these cells.

Normally, the four genes are delivered using retroviruses, which integrate their viral DNA into the cells' chromosomes (change the DNA of their host). They circumvented this problem by deliving the genes using adenoviruses instead, which do not insert their viral DNA into a cell's chromosomes (do not change the DNA of their host). The cells become pluripotent stem cells (iPS cells). They can become any type of cell.

Making induced pluripotent stem cells (iPS cells) without using retroviruses (changing the DNA of their host cells, which can trigger cancer) was a safer way to make iPS cells. They go into the nucleus of the host and work directly on the proteins and leave the chromosomes alone.

Then Harvard researchers found a way to use chemicals instead of viruses as a way to introduce the four genes needed to make normal cells into iPS cells. Adding the chemical allowed them to use just two genes instead of four. So, instead of using genes and viruses to reprogram cells, they use chemicals.

Just recently (reported) researchers reprogrammed stem cells using something even safer. A technique called electroporation. It allows the scientists to achieve this process by significantly increasing the electrical conductivity and permeability of the cell plasma membrane caused by an externally applied electrical field. It is another way of introducing a piece of coding DNA. Because the cells can be made from a patient's own skin, they carry the same DNA and could be used without the risk of being rejected by the immune system.
So, now, my question revolves around this guys opening statement about the potential for rejection and for cancer. I understood from the end of his statement that both threats have been essentially rendered moot but I would nevertheless like to know if science currently has any evidence of either rejection or cancer using this most recent process of which he spoke above?

User avatar
GOODave
Posts: 26392
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 6:21 pm

Re: Embryonic Stem Cell Research...

Post by GOODave » Thu Mar 12, 2009 9:43 am

not4u13 wrote:While there may be some clinics that approach the process as you have outlined, most don't. The process for fertalizing embryos is not very precise. You can't take two eggs and fertilize them. You have to harvest many eggs and attempt to fertilize them and you end up with some fertilized and some not. At least that is how I understand the process. If you are aware of more advanced capabilities I would love to hear about them.
No, I don't ...

So the process, itself, lends itself to the creation of "surplus" eggs. More's the pity and we've got a lot of work to do.
One concern about the use of fertilized eggs that will be destroyed, anyway, is will we by allowing the use of "extra" fertilized eggs create a market for those eggs by which women temporarily down on their luck will visit a "blood-bankesque" type of facility and sell their eggs that will subsequently be fertilized and sold to research facilities?
not4u13 wrote:I don't happen to believe that we should make decisions today based on the most wild possibilities of tomorrow.
Not so sure it's a wild possibility. We already sell our blood and oru plasma; and I've heard rumors of a black market for organs (though nothing really credible so forget that one) ... I don't think it's such a great leap to foresee women selling their eggs to be fertilized.
...how does destroying them for research without any promise of ANY return on such destruction make the other destruction onerous but this one "promising" or "virtuous?"
not4u13 wrote:Interesting point here but in this case we are dealing with embroys that WILL be destroyed with no potential for any kind of benefit.
From my vantage point, both destroy embryos ... one has only a potential benefit to others.
If science was in any way concerned about the destruction of life in order to preserve life, they COULD have limited their research to just those ESC's that were available when Bush signed that executive order.
not4u13 wrote:ESCs must be destroyed as part of the research. More are needed to continue the research.
Exactly my point. So clearly, science has no objection to destroying life to prolong life (potentially). That is not surprising, but it is of concern.

dave

not4u13
Posts: 5481
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 9:00 pm

Re: Embryonic Stem Cell Research...

Post by not4u13 » Thu Mar 12, 2009 11:58 am

GOODave wrote: Exactly my point. So clearly, science has no objection to destroying life to prolong life (potentially). That is not surprising, but it is of concern.

dave
I happen to believe that is absolutely true. In the scientific community they are dealing with a "trade off" of sorts. That is what we all deal with. They are saying that these living embryos that a) have not yet evolved into their human state and b) will be destroyed anyway ... have a greater long term value to the human race when used for scientific study ... than to either a) exist forever cryogenic state or b) be destroyed and discarded like so much waste.

I don't really see a problem here. If you want to call it a problem, I guess you would have to say that the real problem is that these "extra" embryos are allowed to exist in the first place.
Thousands of tired, nerve-shaken, over-civilized people are beginning to find out that going to the mountain is going home; that wildness is necessity; John Muir
http://www.quotesdaddy.com

crayegg
Oversight Committee
Posts: 4147
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 7:13 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Embryonic Stem Cell Research...

Post by crayegg » Thu Mar 12, 2009 11:59 am

I think a market for eggs is unlikely due to the fact in IVF treatments, the women must take powerful and expensive drugs to overstimulate the ovaries to produce many eggs. Plus removing the eggs is not like giving blood, it's a painful and expensive surgical procedure. I just don't see it happening with the regular woman in society who naturally only produce one egg a month.

Of course, if the price is right, who knows? Even if it were to happen, I don't have a huge moral problem with it. After all, people do give blood for money, and undergo medical experimentation for money, so it's not a huge leap for me.

User avatar
GOODave
Posts: 26392
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 6:21 pm

Re: Embryonic Stem Cell Research...

Post by GOODave » Thu Mar 12, 2009 12:08 pm

not4u13 wrote:
I happen to believe that is absolutely true. In the scientific community they are dealing with a "trade off" of sorts. That is what we all deal with. They are saying that these living embryos that a) have not yet evolved into their human state and b) will be destroyed anyway ... have a greater long term value to the human race when used for scientific study ... than to either a) exist forever cryogenic state or b) be destroyed and discarded like so much waste.

I don't really see a problem here. If you want to call it a problem, I guess you would have to say that the real problem is that these "extra" embryos are allowed to exist in the first place.
I do understand your perspective here, crayegg: It is a good restatement of others who have expressed it.

To your last statement, though, I expressed that end of my concern in my original response to not4u so I affirm that, from my perspective, the existence of "surplus" embryos is, indeed, a problem.
crayegg wrote:I think a market for eggs is unlikely due to the fact in IVF treatments, the women must take powerful and expensive drugs to overstimulate the ovaries to produce many eggs. Plus removing the eggs is not like giving blood, it's a painful and expensive surgical procedure. I just don't see it happening with the regular woman in society who naturally only produce one egg a month...
O.K., that is good information ... and new to me so it does somewhat mitigate my concern about creating a market for the eggs (fertilized or unfertelized).

Thanks!

Elroy El
Posts: 3488
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 12:27 pm

Re: Embryonic Stem Cell Research...

Post by Elroy El » Thu Mar 12, 2009 2:01 pm

I will be interested to see if the religiously insane fight to stop research on stem cells, should they be allowed to use the cures that science finds? Or will they refuse those cures?
Image

User avatar
GOODave
Posts: 26392
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 6:21 pm

Re: Embryonic Stem Cell Research...

Post by GOODave » Thu Mar 12, 2009 2:06 pm

Elroy El wrote:I will be interested to see if the religiously insane fight to stop research on stem cells, should they be allowed to use the cures that science finds? Or will they refuse those cures?
I don't think you'd be interested in seeing ANYTHING that doesn't directly impact you.

In other words, I think you're a liar, here.

crayegg
Oversight Committee
Posts: 4147
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 7:13 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Embryonic Stem Cell Research...

Post by crayegg » Thu Mar 12, 2009 2:09 pm

GOODave wrote:I do understand your perspective here, crayegg: It is a good restatement of others who have expressed it.

To your last statement, though, I expressed that end of my concern in my original response to not4u so I affirm that, from my perspective, the existence of "surplus" embryos is, indeed, a problem.

O.K., that is good information ... and new to me so it does somewhat mitigate my concern about creating a market for the eggs (fertilized or unfertelized).

Thanks!
And I think it's true. After thinking about it, I'm not certain ovaries only produces one egg a month natrually, maybe somebody with more biology than me can confirm. I'm fairly confident about the rest of my post 'tho.

User avatar
GOODave
Posts: 26392
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 6:21 pm

Re: Embryonic Stem Cell Research...

Post by GOODave » Thu Mar 12, 2009 5:14 pm

crayegg wrote:
And I think it's true. After thinking about it, I'm not certain ovaries only produces one egg a month natrually, maybe somebody with more biology than me can confirm. I'm fairly confident about the rest of my post 'tho.
Cool... good of you to acknowledge. I'll look it up.

User avatar
Fordama
Posts: 18139
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:12 pm

Re: Embryonic Stem Cell Research...

Post by Fordama » Sun Mar 15, 2009 8:00 am

crayegg wrote:
And I think it's true. After thinking about it, I'm not certain ovaries only produces one egg a month natrually, maybe somebody with more biology than me can confirm. I'm fairly confident about the rest of my post 'tho.
http://www.healthology.com/focus_articl ... rugs#Intro
duction

It states that "Women are born with a finite number of eggs. At birth, a
woman has around 1 to 2 million eggs. However, throughout her life, a
woman loses eggs through a destructive process called atresia. At
puberty, only around 400,000 eggs remain. Throughout the reproductive
life span, from puberty until menopause, women lose about 1,000 eggs each
month. Of these thousand eggs, only one is released. Once released, it is
picked up by the fallopian tube. If a couple has sexual intercourse around
this time, fertilization (the joining of the egg and sperm) may take place."
This country of the United States was not built by those who waited and rested and wished to look behind them.---JFK

Post Reply