The Pro-Life Case for Stem Cell Treatment

Pajamas Media ^ | July 11, 2010 | Julia Szabo

[Gondring]

Moist well-meaning “pro-lifers” don’t realize that the cells used in “embryonic stem-cell research” aren’t from embryos. The genetics are, but they are no more from embryos than saying, “you have your grandmother’s eyes” means they were plucked out and transplanted.

Secondly, no embryos are killed to continue research. The embryos starting those lines died decades ago.

Both the FDA and “pro-life” scam artists are anti-science, choosing to maintain power by fooling good people.

[Gondring]

uh, most, not moist.

It’s the FDA that’s all wet. :-)

[GeronL]

I don’t oppose stem cell treatments. I oppose getting those stem cells from dead babies.

There are a TON of other sources to get stem cells.

[Agamemnon]

Both the FDA and “pro-life” scam artists are anti-science, choosing to maintain power by fooling good people

Who's a pro-life "scam artist"? Name one.

The only scam artists and anti-scientists out there are atheistic idiots who call themselves scientists who think they can create and have created themselves, and at the same time can't tell us how they supposedly planned their own creation to begin with -- or even why.

Moist well-meaning “pro-lifers” don’t realize that the cells used in “embryonic stem-cell research” aren’t from embryos.... Secondly, no embryos are killed to continue research. The embryos starting those lines died decades ago.

Guess you missed this:

Obama lifts research restrictions on embryonic stem cells

The hundreds of other embryonically-derived cell lines now available for NIH funding include those embryo-originated cell lines obtained after August 9, 2001 -- the date of Bush's original ban on funding of such lines for NIH-sponsored research -- which were derived after that date. So, no, embryonic cell lines used since 2009 are not only from embryos who "died" (i.e., were killed) decades ago.

Furthermore, private funding of embryonic stem cell research has continued all along, using the cell lines of recently killed embryos. Much of the private funding for this research has dried up due to continuing failures with the embryonic lines. Obama's reversal of Bush's ban just infused more tax-payer derived research $ into patently unproductive research, and serves as a sop to the pro-abortion lobby and the Mengele-manics in embryology labs.

I have already cryo-banked my own adult stem cells, because more than 100 published studies have shown great therapeutic benefits in many contexts already. In 20 years when I may need them, and more scientific advances have been realized, I expect that I will be benefitted by having done so.

Embryonic-derived stem cell research is characterized by failure after failure; the strains are "wild types," which are poorly understood, and which, unlike with adult stem cells, have signaling pathways which are simply not at all predictable.

The only way one obtains more varieties of embryonic stem cells is by killing more embryos. Sounds more like the Joesef Mengele school of exploitative medicine than anything else.

Perhaps more telling is that it is yet another manifestation of the failure of an evolutionary world-view put into practice in the study of science.

At the point in earliest life development when evolutionists think they might be able to exercise the most control over the seemingly more "simple" less- differentiated development of the embryonic line -- to be able to manipulate and "create" a tissue type more to their own design and liking -- they find that the reality is quite the opposite and far more complex than they ever imagined.

[wagglebee]

well-meaning “pro-lifers” don’t realize that the cells used in “embryonic stem-cell research” aren’t from embryos.

Actually they are, but don't let the truth get in the way of your pro-death agenda.

Secondly, no embryos are killed to continue research. The embryos starting those lines died decades ago.

No, they were KILLED decades ago.

“pro-life” scam artists are anti-science, choosing to maintain power by fooling good people.

"Pro-life scam artists"? Are you sure you're on the right forum?

[Coleus]

The embryos starting those lines died decades ago. >>>

I’m glad you admit that it’s ok to kill someone years ago only to do research on their cells many years later. “Good People” don’t do that, bad people do.

[metmom]

Moist well-meaning “pro-lifers” don’t realize that the cells used in “embryonic stem-cell research” aren’t from embryos.

OK, then tell us where they're from and why the term *embryonic stem cell* is used.

Both the FDA and “pro-life” scam artists are anti-science, choosing to maintain power by fooling good people.

While I have no use for the FDA and agree that it certainly could fit in the anti-science category, that is NOT true of pro-lifers. Just as evos like to throw around the pejorative of being *anti-science* to non-evos who object to the evo/atheist agendas, you are throwing the accusation around with no basis.

Objecting to immoral action is not *anti-science*. Murder is a moral issue, not a scientific one.

[RnMomof7]

Exactly

[Gondring]

Who's a pro-life "scam artist"? Name one.

You mis-cited my comment by moving the quotes.

I wrote of scam artists who claimed to be "pro-life."

Guess you missed this:

No. As a matter of fact, I commented on it quite extensively at the time. But my point is that it doesn't have to be the way it is now.

Furthermore, private funding of embryonic stem cell research has continued all along, using the cell lines of recently killed embryos.

Yes, and out of the reach of US legislation, too.

The only way one obtains more varieties of embryonic stem cells is by killing more embryos.

I added bold to emphasize the subtlety of your point. You're not implying that embryos need to be killed to continue work with the current lines.

At the point in earliest life development when evolutionists think they might be able to exercise the most control over the seemingly more "simple" less- differentiated development of the embryonic line -- to be able to manipulate and "create" a tissue type more to their own design and liking -- they find that the reality is quite the opposite and far more complex than they ever imagined.

Perhaps, although embryonic stem-cell research is far behind adult stem-cell research, as we don't even have a full complete human trial yet, it's impossible to tell.

I'm not claiming it will be fruitful...I am just saying that many of the arguments against it are based on ignorance.

[Gondring]

I’m glad you admit that it’s ok to kill someone years ago only to do research on their cells many years later. “Good People” don’t do that, bad people do.

I never did any such thing.

Shall I say, "I'm glad you won't use the heart of someone murdered to save a life today because it might encourage further murder?"

[Gondring]

Are you sure you're on the right forum?

Seeing as how you misquoted me, I guess I am. Fairly typical.

I put "pro-life" in quotes as they are not truly pro-life.

The progress of decades of hard work toward overturning Roe v Wade and getting the federal government out of the issue was stabbed in the back by nutbar narcissist Randall Terry. I consider him a "'pro-life"' scam artist" who is really in it for himself, not truly wanting abortion to end as that would mean he would be more of a nobody than he already is.

[Gondring]

OK, then tell us where they're from and why the term *embryonic stem cell* is used.

Of course, some are, but they aren't necessarily. Most are grown in a culture.

Objecting to immoral action is not *anti-science*. Murder is a moral issue, not a scientific one.

Agreed.

But the scam artists aren't interested in morality...they have other agenda. Not all who claim to be "pro-life" actually are. (And BTW, not all who are against abortion are the same, either.)

[wagglebee]

Seeing as how you misquoted me, I guess I am. Fairly typical.

And how is pasting your words "misquoting" you?

Here is your post:

To: Kaslin

Moist well-meaning “pro-lifers” don’t realize that the cells used in “embryonic stem-cell research” aren’t from embryos. The genetics are, but they are no more from embryos than saying, “you have your grandmother’s eyes” means they were plucked out and transplanted.

Secondly, no embryos are killed to continue research. The embryos starting those lines died decades ago.

Both the FDA and “pro-life” scam artists are anti-science, choosing to maintain power by fooling good people.

2 posted on Sunday, July 11, 2010 12:19:45 PM by Gondring (Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)

[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse]

I put "pro-life" in quotes as they are not truly pro-life.

Why are they not pro-life? Because they oppose the destruction of life?

The progress of decades of hard work toward overturning Roe v Wade and getting the federal government out of the issue was stabbed in the back by nutbar narcissist Randall Terry. I consider him a "'pro-life"' scam artist" who is really in it for himself, not truly wanting abortion to end as that would mean he would be more of a nobody than he already is.

So, you condemn the entire pro-life movement because you disagree with the methods of Randall Terry even though he isn't even mentioned in the thread?

Moist well-meaning “pro-lifers” don’t realize that the cells used in “embryonic stem-cell research” aren’t from embryos. The genetics are, but they are no more from embryos than saying, “you have your grandmother’s eyes” means they were plucked out and transplanted.

Secondly, no embryos are killed to continue research. The embryos starting those lines died decades ago.

Both the FDA and “pro-life” scam artists are anti-science, choosing to maintain power by fooling good people.

2 posted on Sunday, July 11, 2010 12:19:45 PM by Gondring (Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)

[EternalVigilance]

...no embryos are killed to continue research. The embryos starting those lines died decades ago.

So, I suppose you would have no problem with using the skin of Jews killed in a concentration camp for lamp shades. After all, the Jews are dead anyway, and just think how much light will be shed for those who are sitting in darkness!

/s

[metmom]

Cultures of what?

If a sperm fertilizes an egg, you have a human being.

Whether it grows to resemble a human embryo or is somehow just grown as a lump of tissue, it’s still human.

[Gondring]

And how is pasting your words "misquoting" you?

Changing punctuation in a manner that changes meaning is misquotation.

Why are they not pro-life? Because they oppose the destruction of life?

No...because they would allow suffering and death if it furthered their agenda.

So, you condemn the entire pro-life movement because you disagree with the methods of Randall Terry even though he isn't even mentioned in the thread

Many times, you have twisted my words and meaning. I try hard to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you do it out of ignorance rather than maliciousness. But it keeps happening, habitually(?).

I have no time to give you English lessons, but let me try again, in case you're being honest...

If I wrote something like the following:

"Conservative" Democrats might vote for that bill.

...would you claim that I had just written that all Democrats are conservative? No. In fact, wouldn't it seem that I'm questioning whether these voters are even really "conservative." Yet in a parallel construction, you twist my words and try to imply that I am claiming something I am not.

Perhaps Randall Terry has never spoken on embryonic stem cells, but I was asked to provide an example of a "'pro-life' scam artist" and he is perhaps the best well known. And I think that it's clear that there are people whose M.O. includes obfuscation, not honest discussion and solutions. Are you defending them? I hope not.

[Gondring]

From "What are embryonic stem cells?" at http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/basics3.asp:

How are embryonic stem cells grown in the laboratory?
Growing cells in the laboratory is known as cell culture. Human embryonic stem cells are isolated by transferring the inner cell mass into a plastic laboratory culture dish that contains a nutrient broth known as culture medium. The cells divide and spread over the surface of the dish. The inner surface of the culture dish is typically coated with mouse embryonic skin cells that have been treated so they will not divide. This coating layer of cells is called a feeder layer. The mouse cells in the bottom of the culture dish provide the inner cell mass cells a sticky surface to which they can attach. Also, the feeder cells release nutrients into the culture medium. Researchers have devised ways to grow embryonic stem cells without mouse feeder cells. This is a significant scientific advance because of the risk that viruses or other macromolecules in the mouse cells may be transmitted to the human cells.

The process of generating an embryonic stem cell line is somewhat inefficient, so lines are not produced each time an inner cell mass is placed into a culture dish. However, if the plated inner cell mass cells survive, divide and multiply enough to crowd the dish, they are removed gently and plated into several fresh culture dishes. The process of re-plating or subculturing the cells is repeated many times and for many months. Each cycle of subculturing the cells is referred to as a passage. Once the cell line is established, the original cells yield millions of embryonic stem cells. Embryonic stem cells that have proliferated in cell culture for six or more months without differentiating, are pluripotent, and appear genetically normal are referred to as an embryonic stem cell line. At any stage in the process, batches of cells can be frozen and shipped to other laboratories for further culture and experimentation.

But you already knew that, didn't you?

[Gondring]

You bring up an excellent point.

Note a subtle difference...I am arguing for honesty and clarity so people can make an informed decision on the issue rather than a decision based on misinformation.

If people were claiming that the lampshades were from Jews being killed out back right then, then that's not true. Whether old skins should be used or not is a different question, and I'm sure that you see that the use you mention (horrid!) is rather different from the transplanted use of an organ from someone who has already died (not horrid, in MY view).

[Salvation]

**After Nightline did a story on Vet-Stem, many of the comments on the ABC Web site were from people who were frustrated that pets could get stem cells and they could not. I believe our data are helping people understand that adult stem cells from fat tissue really work. **

Adult stem cells are the answer!