Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: aruanan

I'm afraid that you don't understand the definition of "embryonic stem cells." These are the cells that are harvested from embryos that are approximately 5 days old, before the differentiation that makes them "fetal" or, subsequently, "adult" stem cells.

There are no embryonic stem cells in cord blood.

If there were, then the thousands of patients who have received cord blood transplants would be growing embryos or tumors in their bodies.


15 posted on 08/10/2004 7:46:48 PM PDT by hocndoc (Choice is the # 1 killer in the US)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]


To: hocndoc
My bad. I misread. From a Michael Fumento review of a somewhat misleading book by Ann. B. Parson:
By the 1950s doctors had turned this horror into hope, transfusing marrow stem cells into humans to treat various blood diseases. By the 1980s stem-cell transplants with marrow and umbilical cord blood were routinely curing leukemias. ASCs now treat about 80 different diseases.

And ESCs? "An inescapable truth is that the adult versions are the only human stem cells so far employed for therapy in humans," writes Parson. She also admits it appears the only advantage of ESCs is potential; that it's widely believed they can differentiate into any type cell while differentiation of ASCs (at least 14 types have been discovered) is more limited. Yet she also concedes this belief may not be true; that one laboratory seemingly showed an ASC to be as pliable as an ESC.

20 posted on 08/10/2004 9:06:16 PM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson