Posted on 11/11/2006 11:04:13 PM PST by batter
And not only to have this kind of treatment but to develop it - who's going to pay for the expensive r&d the safety trials and efficacy studies etc if the use of the patients own cells isnt somehow remunerative to those underwriting the research?
What will be required to take adult stem cell 'cures' from academic to practical application? Surely good cures if they are on the horizon should be encouraged to come ASAP but how can we make sure they will? I can't imagine anyone really would want to have to use embryonic stem cells if there is a better alternative using adult stem cells from the patients themselves?
Or is that too naive?
Hmmmm...well if not a mass market paradigm then what paradigm IS this "emerging industry and technique [that] is coming" going to use instead???
Since I have my own concerns about the future of the conventional mass market paradigm, as you know, I'd be interested in what paradigm shift you anticipate in this case.
Your preaching to the choir :-) I am a catholic, in any event religious beliefs or not, I would never be able to reconcile my conscience with the immoral harvesting of stem cells from fetal donors. Any potential benefit would not be worth the loss of human life.
Concerning the utilization of fetal stem cells? A significant dollar spend on R&D has been made by many investors and private as well as public companies. Making a positive ROI on that investment is the main cause of the push with fetal stem cell research. In other cases scientists believe their particular application requires fetal stem cells. From what I have read, each case can only be judged on a case by case basis, or on the merits of the empirical data supporting one or the other white paper in this domain. There is no "blanket statement" that promotes fetal stem cells, adult stem cells or synthesized stem cells (see research in India and Taiwan in August 2005 NEJM for that one)over one another. Much as I would like that to be the case. It is important to look at the overview objectively without emotive or cognitive bias. it's hard to do that when science is murdering unborn children, however the battle will be won by reasoning in peer review, sadly it's doubtful that any ethical oversight will prevent utilization of human fetal stem cells in the future.
I am glad you ask, but I must clarify this point, and create a common definition as there is a danger of miscommunication.
"mass market" in my opinion refers to applications that are able to be positioned to a larger target user group, or consumers. It also implies a market landscape that is broad perhaps horizontal rather than vertical, yes? This would be the opposite of niche or specialist market positioning, Yes?
It does not in my opinion, also imply a "one size fits all" product segmentation. It could contain also entry level, mid range and high end segments. In the case of our discussion, mass market in pharmaceutical applications is certainly a single product position targeting a large or largest possible target consumer group.
However stem cell research is not only going to produce pharma applications, far from it.
Stem cell research will provide applications such as organ synthesis, bone marrow, tissue and platelet farms. these are applications that will be largely prohibitive in cost to the consumer because, of the requirement to customize his product for HIM. There is a mass market appeal for the kind of service or product, as everyone will want it or desire it. There is no small or niche market community or target user group interested in such a product. However there is no generic protocol for it's production it cannot be "mass produced" NOT "mass market" the wrong term is being bandied about in this debate in my opinion.
Mass production however is a constraint that will be overcome not via production efficiency or any other technological development. However it will be overcome by financial services innovations. At the moment startups are recruiting even at my university to compel doctoral and graduate students to join companies at the forefront of this research. It is happening with a higher and higher frequency. The sales spiel is very good they are very slick. The revenue model will be based on an "insurance" premium payed by a client, that provides organ repositories / banks, or platelet farms or whatever the application, to be prepared in advance to the paying customer, should he need to avail himself of the services he is subscribing to. It's going to lead to ethical dilemmas in the future, some of which have been portrayed in visionary science fiction novels and movies.
The term "Stem Cell" should be banned unless prefaced by either "Adult" or "Embryonic"!
It's as meaningless as saying "pole" without specifiying North or South.
Yes it is wonderful to know that all my children have realized their need for a Savior.
In addition to our 12 yr old diabetic, we also have a 6 yr old and are in the process of adopting a 13 yr old.
The attacks by the enemy have increased in the last months. Zach has had the ruff time with his blood/sugar control (A1C in the 9's). Adam the 6 yr old has been hospitalized twice last month for dehydration. We appearantly are finding out that when he vomits, he can not stop. He looses any liquids he tries to take almost immediatly. Shantel, our new adoptee has just become a believer since living in our house. She was sexually and physically abused by her previous adoptive parents since the age of nine. She had been up and down emotionally. Counciling has helped. But mostly I see her reading the Scriptures and afterwards she is peaceful.
We have been doing a home discipleship program recently and doing devotions every night. Appearantly we've made somebody mad.
Please pray that we will come out victorious in our trials and testing.
Well imo stem cell research originated organ synthesis would certainly be preferable to a Niven-esque 'organlegging' dystopia where social 'undesirables' are 'harvested' for their organs [hmmm isn't that what is happening to Falun Gong in China right now :-(] if that is the kind of sci-fi dilemmas you are speaking of but isnt an insurance model to pay for it predicated on a premise that there is an actuarial probability that not everyone who pays in will need to be paid out for? It would seem to me that the utility of organ synthesis would be so wide that eventually everyone would want/need to tap into the organ banks which would then make an insurance model fail once there is no one NOT using them? Which would seem inevitable especially as the population 'greys'?
Have I missed something?
stem cells harvested from carcinomas???
Most of the presentations I have seen, mention a subscription service, with segmentation for various levels of investment from the consumer. i doubt the premiums are on a parity with insurance models. More likely they are similar in nature to an amortized subscription service based on estimated or projected future demand. With the subscription offering affordability on a quarterly pay plan and a discount over time. rather than paying on demand for instance, which i assume would be the luxury of the high end customer.
teratocarcinomas, still immoral IMO, but you can do a google and you will find a lot of white papers on the subject. :-)
That does sound more workable to me :-)
It will be interesting to see how it works out in countries with 'social[ist]ized medicine' like Canada...the new biotechnology revolution is going to really challenge our present system based on the old paradigms methinks.
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.