Euro judges outlaw life-saving embryo stem cell research as immoral

Daily Mail ^ | October 19, 2011 | TAMARA COHEN

[NYer]

The decision follows a case brought by Greenpeace in Germany against Professor Oliver Brüstle (pictured) at the University of Bonn. He filed a patent with the German government in 1997 to convert embryonic stem cells into nerve cells to help patients with Parkinson's disease

[Norman Bates]

I’m stunned.

[NYer]

They believe cutting edge research – and the huge investment behind it - could move to other countries such as the United States and China.

[Dr.Zoidberg]

Who would have thought a bunch of euro-weenie judges could get a morality question right.

[Moonman62]

Scientists in Britain face being barred from developing life-saving treatments

Their headline is misleading. Such treatments don't exist.

[MEGoody]

Professor Brüstle filed a patent with the German government in 1997 to convert embryonic stem cells into nerve cells to help patients with Parkinson’s disease.

So how many Parkinson's patients have you helped, Professor?

::::crickets::::

[Cicero]

Amazing, indeed!

Who’d have thought that a bunch of Euroweenie judges in Brussels would decide this case in favor of human life?

And the lawsuit was brought by Greenpeace!

Greenpeace is saving babies now, as well as whales and seals? I simply can’t imagine it!

[RobbyS]

Yes, indeed. “developing” implies that something already exists. What is banned is performing experiments that entail the killing of human embryos if he they had no more value than an unborn chick.

[Cicero]

ping!

[Eagles6]

Eurotrash and greenpeace? Whod’a thunk it? I’m shocked, in a good way, but shocked, none the less.

[gwilhelm56]

**So how many Parkinson’s patients have you helped, Professor?**

so far, the ONLY SUCCESS with stem cells, have been with ADULT STEM CELLS!!!

Embryonic Stem Cells have only caused TUMORS.. most Cancerous!!

[Notwithstanding]

There are ZERO embryonic stem-cell therapies in use or even close to being in use.

There are no profits.

There is no real hope of profits.

I am stunned that this decision was based on natural law principals.

[lephantom]

When will they start caring about people being murdered all over the world by islamics? They don’t about the living, and they don’t care to save the living, but they will save the few cells that were aborted or could never become a human life. Such fake “caring” and islamic murders are taking us back into the Dark Ages.

[capt. norm]

It's the ADULT stem cells that have rewarded us with RESULTS, and yet the media continues to overlook this fact.

"No bias here...just move along...".

[HiTech RedNeck]

Historically, self stem cell treatments have worked much better than those from heterozygous embryos. Is there any particular reason this Parkinson's treatment must have embryonic cells?

[Tax-chick]

What life-saving embryonic stem stell research? In spite of all the government and private money thrown at this form of human sacrifice, no useful treatment has yet emerged.

[goat granny]

sure do agree with that.....If my life depended on using embryo stem cells or medication derived from them, I would not take it. Adult stem cells have already yielded good results. No one needs embryo stem cells....

[DJ MacWoW]

End Of The Line?

That's Up To You

Donate

[sayuncledave]

If I had to hazard a guess, I’d guess that Herr Brüstle doesn’t appear so smug today. The only manner the author might have used to make this article any more biased would have involved listing the judges’ addresses and strong hints of methods of eradication.

[Mrs. Don-o]

I see everybody's ignoring the troll. Good. Carry on.

Meanwhile, Yes, this is stunning: GreenPeace, prolifers, and a unanimous panel of 13 Euroweenie judges! Wow!

I'm sifting throug hmy neural nets to see where this could have come from. I remember back in about 1980 Jeremy Rifkin (agnotic Jew, environmentalist, futurist)w as arguing strenuously against genetic engineering, partly on the grounds that since (1) the USCC refuses to see that human life begins at the beginning, and (2) it is possible to patent genetically engineered life forms, therefore (3) it would become possible to patent human embryos, which would be (in his view and mine, too) seriously wrong.

I wonder if Rifkin's in on this?