Skip to comments.
Scientists Backtrack on Embryonic Research Claims: No Hope for Cures for 5 to 10 Years
LifeSiteNews ^
| 8/15/06
| Peter J. Smith
Posted on 08/15/2006 4:44:45 PM PDT by wagglebee
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-30 next last
According to an article in the New York Times, a number of scientists have desired to continue medical research on human embryos, but admit that the idea of ready cures from embryonic stem-cell therapies, if possible in the first place, are years down the road. Yet adult and umbilical cord stem cell breakthroughs are happening TODAY without the murder of innocents.
1
posted on
08/15/2006 4:44:48 PM PDT
by
wagglebee
To: cgk; Coleus; cpforlife.org; Mr. Silverback; 8mmMauser
2
posted on
08/15/2006 4:45:20 PM PDT
by
wagglebee
("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
To: Alexander Rubin; An American In Dairyland; Antoninus; Aquinasfan; BIRDS; Bellflower; BlackElk; ...
Moral Absolutes Ping! Freepmail wagglebee or little jeremiah to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
Embryonic stem cell research has ALWAYS been a tool to protect abortion, it has NEVER been about a cure. If curing diseases through stem cell research was the goal, ALL efforts would be going toward the ALREADY PROVEN research of adult and umbilical cord stem cells.
3
posted on
08/15/2006 4:47:45 PM PDT
by
wagglebee
("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
To: wagglebee
I'm a biomedical engineer and everytime i tell my lib friends this they don't believe me. They think i'm just spewing propoganda and religion.
4
posted on
08/15/2006 4:50:12 PM PDT
by
SDGOP
To: SDGOP
As evidenced by my engineering training, i can't spell.
5
posted on
08/15/2006 4:50:32 PM PDT
by
SDGOP
To: wagglebee
California is trying to limit profits from products found through research in it's state run embrionic research fiasco. Manufacturers are balking at participation. Who'd a thunk it?
I live in a state where clowns run the government.
6
posted on
08/15/2006 4:50:43 PM PDT
by
DoughtyOne
(Bring your press credentials to Qana, for the world's most convincing terrorist street theater.)
To: wagglebee
Surpriiiiiiiiiise, surpriiiiiiiiiiise, surpriiiiiiiiiise!
Scientists must think they've won the fight to get the research funded.
I'm SO glad we can count on science to be unbiased and factual.
Shalom.
7
posted on
08/15/2006 4:51:17 PM PDT
by
ArGee
(The Ring must not be allowed to fall into Hillary's hands!)
To: wagglebee
So is their answer more embryos?
8
posted on
08/15/2006 4:54:27 PM PDT
by
Mike Darancette
(I'll have the duck with mango salsa.)
To: SDGOP
If ECS had any real potential, biotech companies would be pouring money into it and government funding would be irrelevant, the fact that they're not indicates they see no real profitability. They are, however, spending money on adult and umbilical stem cell research and I assume it is paying off.
9
posted on
08/15/2006 4:55:41 PM PDT
by
wagglebee
("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
To: Mike Darancette
The left's answer is ALWAYS more dead babies and more taxpayer money!
10
posted on
08/15/2006 4:56:34 PM PDT
by
wagglebee
("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
To: SDGOP
Susan Boetcher (sp?) the Idiarod gal just died from cancer because her stem cell therapy ATE her good cells....my guess is that it was ESC therapy. I think Christopher Reeve got cancer from his stem cell therapy.
11
posted on
08/15/2006 5:04:43 PM PDT
by
Suzy Quzy
("When Cabals Go Kaboom"....upcoming book on Mary McCarthy's Coup-Plotters.)
To: 2ndMostConservativeBrdMember; afraidfortherepublic; Alas; al_c; american colleen; annalex; ...
12
posted on
08/15/2006 5:05:24 PM PDT
by
Coleus
(Roe v. Wade and Endangered Species Act both passed in 1973, Murder Babies/save trees, birds, algae)
To: All
while adult stem cells continue to prove worthy healing 72 diseases: ethically, effectively and morally without killing a human embryo and with no damage to the patient.
THE SCORE HAS CHANGED !!!
Check the Score
Updated July 16, 2006
Benefits of Stem Cells to Human Patients - Do No Harm
13
posted on
08/15/2006 5:10:03 PM PDT
by
Coleus
(Roe v. Wade and Endangered Species Act both passed in 1973, Murder Babies/save trees, birds, algae)
To: Suzy Quzy
Susan Butcher got stem cells from an adult male.
To: Suzy Quzy
Susan Boetcher (sp?) the Idiarod gal just died from cancer because her stem cell therapy ATE her good cells....my guess is that it was ESC therapy. I think Christopher Reeve got cancer from his stem cell therapy.If you want to oppose ESC, fine, but get the medical facts straight.
Susan Butcher died of leukemia, which is treated with adult stem cells. ESC research is still early; they are not approved for clinical trials yet. The research is nowhere near that mature. Likewise, if you believe Christopher Reeve got cancer from stem cell therapy, it would have to be Adult stem cell therapy.
15
posted on
08/15/2006 5:27:40 PM PDT
by
retMD
To: wagglebee
However, this latest admission validates the conviction of many scientists and bioethicists who have opposed embryonic stem-cell research on the grounds of the dearth of evidence proving any practical possibility of obtaining the promised cures from embryonic stem cells. Instead embryonic stem-cell research is seemingly being exposed as a playground for scientists pushing this new front in human experimentation. Wait. I thought we were simply months away from making people walk and the dead arise. Do you mean to me that isn't true? That President Bush didn't kill people with that VETO? That the people pushing it had another agenda other then saving lives? :gasp:
16
posted on
08/15/2006 5:33:45 PM PDT
by
Soul Seeker
(Kobach: Amnesty is going from an illegal to a legal position, without imposing the original penalty.)
To: wagglebee
Arnold has invested how many Ca taxpayer $s in this?
17
posted on
08/15/2006 5:35:24 PM PDT
by
DManA
To: SDGOP
That's it.
My older daughter must be destined to be a biomedical engineer.
She loves Science and can't spell.
18
posted on
08/15/2006 5:36:06 PM PDT
by
netmilsmom
(To attack one section of Christianity in this day and age, is to waste time.)
To: wagglebee
If ECS had any real potential, biotech companies would be pouring money into it and government funding would be irrelevant, the fact that they're not indicates they see no real profitability. They are, however, spending money on adult and umbilical stem cell research and I assume it is paying off.
That's not consistent with what many pharmaceutical or biotech companies do. They typically don't want to do basic research, unless they can be very sure it will return a profit. That means they want to know it will work, AND that they will retain control of the results through patents. If there's any question as to whether they can patent results, they're not going to do it. The human genome project is a great example - Celera didn't jump in until after the NHGRI project was well under way.
19
posted on
08/15/2006 5:38:32 PM PDT
by
retMD
To: wagglebee
The government should have no place in embryonic stem cell research.
If it was going to be profitable, the private sector would be able to fund it, as they have been doing with adult stemcells.
Adult and cord stemcells is where the future lies, and therefore the private sector is funding it, because it will be profitable.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-30 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson