But I thought that this research had no promise at all and was a waste of time, and that adult stem cells were the only way to go? Or so said Rush.
Non
This is about embryonic stem cells taken from the amniotic fluid after a baby is born, not fetal stem cells. It doesn't involve the termination of a fetus, so in that respect Rush is still right.
Actually, IIRC Rush said that embryonic stem cell therapies have suffered from the "minor" setback that they tend to result in cancerous growths. To date, there are over 70 (last I checked) effective stem cell therapies, and yet none of the effective therapies have involved embryonic stem cells.
If the umbilical and amniotic stem cells are shown to be as stable as the adult variety, then we will have three sources for therapies. The grail of embryonic (IOW fetus-derived) stem cell treatments remains beyond our scientific reach, though.