Posted on 06/20/2006 2:31:24 PM PDT by Junior
Michael Savage was talking about this a few months ago. Like myself, he preferred his rats dead. :)
I want some new stem cells. I want to feel young again. We have 'found" Pnce de Leons "Fountain of Youth" and I am sure their are no sideaffects /moralissues /fearofgeneticharm /unintendedconsequences /somethingdreadfulwecanteventhinkof /wrathofGodformessingaroundwiththingsweshouldnt /doriangrayissues
Good news for democRats.
Still no reason for the State of California to take my money and have me help pay for this research.
"There have to have been some experiments that went wrong and some horrible after effects that we never hear about."
Such as the super-intelligent Uber Rats that have taken control of the basement of the lab...
Do you think the government should pay for any research? Or should it only pay for research of which you approve?
I think I should have veto authority on all government expenditures. We would all be better for it.
;)
Stem cells from a different species cured nerve damage ?
Why did the experiment not use "rat stem cells" to cure rat nerve damage ?
Why not use the rat's own stem cells so that the DNA of living cells is fully compatible with the animal's immune system ?
California is dominated by a democrat legislature and has passed a referendum obligating us to pay for questionable research. I think that is a misuse of state funds, based on liberal dogma and feelings.
If private funds want to support this research, then fine, but not state. I am also oppossed to federal funds being spent on this research, but feel that there are better checks and balances in place on the national level then there are on the local state level.
Narf!
How is this "questionable" research? The results most definitely indicate otherwise.
again, my objections are not on the research itself, but on the use of government funds for this research. There are or should be plenty of private funds available for this research.
Damaged may not mean severed hence the re-growth seen. Needs to be reproduced.
The chief concern with the use of embryonic stem cells is the development of cancer cells.
The report of this study seems to be incomplete. It does not present the long term effects of the use of embryonic stem cells in these rats. Nor does it note whether or not adult stem cells can accomplish the same nerve damage repair.
Always question the motives of Reuters. The information that is missing from a Reuters article is just as important as what is presented.
A controversial source of the stem cells comes from days-old embryos. These stem cells have the ability to change into any type of cell or tissue in the body.
The author of the article either accidentally or purposely conflates the types of stem cells ... the stem cells that 'can be found circulating in the blood and tissue' are not embryonic stem cells, but the author dissembles the text in such a way as to imply they are. ONLY at embryo age in the human lifetime are the 'body's master cells' called embryonic stem cells (totipotent, meaning able to trun into all the organs and tissues of the body); in older humans, the stem cells are no longer totipotent, rather they have differentiated into pluripotency, then multipotency, to become the master cells building specific tissues and organs. The 'master cells circulating in blood and tissue' are sometimes called MAPCs, for multipotent adult progenitor cells.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.