[Prodn2000]

I looked at post #80, saw a different perspective, but my opinion remains unchanged. We are not talking about general therapies. We are talking about specific restorative treatments. Working on pigs is not going to get us any closer to a reversing cure for Alzheimer's.

[ohioWfan]

What about umbilical cord stem cells? As I understand it, there has been more productive human research there than in dead babies.

Why not support that? Why support death?

[jwalsh07]

Working on pigs is not going to get us any closer to a reversing cure for Alzheimer's.

Working on pigs has just a good chance of reversing Alzheimers as embryonic stem cell research. Very little in both cases.

All of the practical advances thus far have come from adult stem cells. Human embryos are by definition humans. Could you explain to me why you think the federal government has the power to take my money and spend it on something that I see as the unlawful taking of human life?

[Southack]

"I looked at post #80, saw a different perspective, but my opinion remains unchanged. We are not talking about general therapies. We are talking about specific restorative treatments. Working on pigs is not going to get us any closer to a reversing cure for Alzheimer's."

Thanks for looking at the post. We disagree.

Surely some animal out there would help us with an Alzheimer's cure...use their stem cells...not humans.

...And if no such animal exists, then pursue the research along a different front (e.g. DNA codon by codon programming from scratch, or using stem cells from humans who have died naturally and recently).

Harvesting *human* embryos for research is as unacceptible as cloning humans in order to take their organs from them to give to their original.

Harvest animal embyros; fine. Clone animals; fine.

Program DNA from scratch; fine. Use stem cells from naturally deceased adult humans; fine.

But harvest human embryos for research?! Crops of humans?!

No way. You'd start a shooting war if you pushed that concept too far.