YIPPEEEE!
Posted on 07/10/2006 1:39:16 PM PDT by Notwithstanding
Are you actually asking me or are you posing the question rhetorically? Hard to tell when it is typed.
Manipulative buzzards around her have convinced her stem cell research could've made the difference.
She has acted based on their false information and her profound sense of loss.
I think Frist has long supported this, btw.
Doctor Raoul!
He's got a few more years in office, Bush might finally find a bill he doesn't like! I'm serious, don't laugh, he might actually veto something!
I understand this thought process behind your argument, but I have always found it disingenuous at best.
The problem is that embryonic stem cells were first isolated in November 1998. That gives adult stem cells a 30+ year head start in research. Naturally adult stem cell research is more advanced and would be more likely to produce results.
When it comes to funding, the business world only seriously invests its own cash when there is a positive expected return. Did we see large business investment in adult stem cell research in the 1960s, or was it largely government funding? Do you expect businesses to fund work that may or may not pay out in 30 years?
In any case, this is a moral argument, and we should keep it as a moral argument. I think Bill Bennett made a similar argument - don't mix economic arguments with moral ones, as you can end up with silly looking assertions...
Now you're just messin' with me. :)
This ISN'T an immigration thread...go away.
Nancy's SON, Ron, is the one egging her on...
MICHAEL..the other "son" is the one that has done the research and read the material..and he is AGAINST Nancy on this..
Frist is screwing up big time...but he is throwing his MD around like THAT should make a difference...
Sorry Frist..not gonna happen.
Good for him. Who knows, maybe he'll decide he likes it:')
Correction: federal money to study the cells of ALREADY dead embryos.
Ask yourself this: How much private funding was there for adult stem cell research when those cells were first isolated back in the 1960s? Embryonic weren't isolated until November of 1998....
Private funding is low whenever corporations cannot capitalize on research in the near-term. 30 and 40 year horizons will almost never get private funding. Because of much research in the past, adult stem cell research now shows the potential to derive therapies in the near future. That's the return horizon corporations want and will fund.
This is entirely a moral argument at this point. There is little sound scientific argument yet against embryonic stemm cell research, and we should focus entirely on the morals. Otherwise it is like saying man should have given up on human flight when Leonardo's flying machines didn't work in the 1400s....
Have any ESCR advocates explained from where these embryos are coming? Scientists don't have the experimentation rights for the IVF "leftovers" on ice. Egg donors get more money from IVF donation, and the egg donation process itself is risky, time-consuming, and expensive.
Haven't got to do this in a while: Diana DeGette = Pat Schroeder Jr.
YIPPEEEE!
if only bush would veto all federal research fundings....
They've been experimenting on mice embryonic stem cells for nearly 30 years now, that is a fact. 1998, I believe was year in which the first actual experiments on human embryonic stem cells took place. Now who is being disengenous with the facts?
They can study them with their own money, if this junk actually worked, the private sector would be pouring money into it (its legal as is) instead of raising the tin cup out to study the "embryonic cells" of unborn (and now deceased) children using taxpayer money.
From HHS website:
"Based on 2002 data, . . . private sector research and development in stem cells was being conducted by approximately 1000 scientists in over 30 firms. Aggregate spending was estimated at $208 million. Geron Corporation alone reported that it spent more than $70 million on stem cell research by September 2003."
Do you want me to go on to show how wrong you are on the other point you made, or do you just want to go on mindlessly baiting people?
You're looking at the issue wrongly.
There are *no* limits, no restrictions whatsoever against using animal stem cells for research.
What the abortionist Left wants, however, is to pretend that only *human* stem cells can be used for experimental research. And that's just not the case.
Use animal stem cells. Prove that animal stem cells lead to a cure for something, and *then* make your case for why human stem cells should be used. That's the correct approach.
Instead, the Left wants research to be done with human-only stem cells, as if human embryos have less moral protection than do animal stem 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.