Confused: Stem Cell Research (Embryonic vs Adult)

  • Thread starter Thread starter melensdad
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

melensdad

Guest
Ok I am pretty clueless on the SCIENTIFIC advantages of one type of stem cell research versus the other. I know many of the moral issues opposing embryonic stem cell research . . . but I do not understand why it may be “better” than other types of stem cell research.
  • What advancements in medicine have actually come from embryonic stem cell research that cannot be gotten from other types?
  • What medical advantage does embryonic stem cell research provide that cannot be obtained from other types?
    I’m not looking for a moral debate on this issue, I can argue the moral issues already. What I want to know is what the real scientific need is for embryonic stem cell research, or if there actually is a real need?
 
👋 I know! I know! Pick me!!!

Okay, so one of the benefits of adult stem cells (that they take from bone marrow or the blood of an umbilical cord) is that since it can come from the patient themselves, then you don’t have to worry about the body rejecting it as a foreign object. With embryonic stem cells (taken from frozen embryos) the body rejects the implants and cause more problems without solving any.

So far the only one that has actually been tested successfully on humans is…(drum roll)…adult stem cells! They have already been used to save lives! Meanwhile, scientists have not been able to do anything with embryonic stem cells. These scientists have made claims about being able to create organs, but all they did was allow the embryo to naturally develope as it would in the womb until a heart and lungs and such developed.

The sad truth is that there is NO NEED for embryonic stem cells. We have a working product right now with adult stem cells, but people will not accept it. They want to play God and prove that they can make a human from scratch. But even all the money and attention that’s been given to embryonic stem cells, they haven’t achieved squat and adult stem cell research has!

I’ll see if I can find some useful sites for you (I wrote a report about this very topic recently).

❤️
 
MariaGorettiGrl said:
👋 I know! I know! Pick me!!!

. . .

I’ll see if I can find some useful sites for you (I wrote a report about this very topic recently).

❤️
Click to expand...
Well I’ve heard this before but really need some help with some scientific information. I’m a moderator on another website and there are several atheists who have been very critical of the recent veto of the “stem cell” bill by President Bush. Getting into a moral argument with avowed atheists is often pointless, I need some science to back up the morality 👍

BTW, it would be very helpful if the evidence came from scientific, rather than religious sources. Providing religious sources as evidence to atheists usually doesn’t garner much credibility in their minds.
 
Thanks folks, but those are pretty heavy on moral opinion. They make the same claims that I have heard before and what I really need to find is the SOURCE DATA to back up those claims.

On a parallel topic, I have found that the “gun rights” debate is often framed in the same way that “stem cells” are debated. The gun-banning people tend to distort studies, exclude facts, make emotional claims based on distorted information. I see very similar things with the Embryo Researcher supporters. But I also see that the Pro-Life side is pretty short on fact too. The claims made are often repeated but not sourced.

When I am debating an Australian atheist, I need the source data. He is too good at taking threads off topic and getting otherwise rational people onto his side based on missing information. I’m pretty good about slapping the topic back in front of people to keep it aimed the right way, but again, I need FACTUAL INFORMATION.

If it is true that there are 72 advances made by adult stem cell research and ZERO with embryonic research then where do I find that source data?

If it is true that there are alternate motivations for embryonic stem cell research, where do I find this source data?

I really need help, and honestly if we find that information then we all will win when we all can use it to debate those pro-abortion Catholics/pro-embryonic stem cell Catholics who are misguided.
 
One of the things is, if it is by moral principle is wrong, the science really doesn’t matter. You don’t really have people making arguments that slavery is wrong, because economically it’s a bad choice. Slavery with the right construct might actually be beneficial economically, but since it is morally wrong the point is rather moot. So to a point, while those in opposition might feel the need to make a scientific argument, it’s still on shaky ground to really base the whole argument on that.

If anything I’d say that those who oppose stem cell research don’t do so on religious grounds, but moral grounds.

If anything, a more advanced argument would be, yes of course embryonic stem cells haven’t made any practical medical advances, but we are still on the pioneering research, that adult stem cells once was on. It will take some time, but fully research it will help us progress in the field.

I think from a pro-life prospective, if the issue was just embryonic stem cells itself it’d be one thing, but the argument really brings up a philosophy of what is life and what we can do with technology is really getting to a point where we really need this debated. The pro-life prospective really tries to take the subject on a holistic approach.
 
jman507 said:
One of the things is, if it is by moral principle is wrong, the science really doesn’t matter.
Click to expand...
That does not work with atheists.

I am looking for SCIENCE that says “we can use adult/mature stem cells to . . . and it is not necessary to use embryonic stem cells because we achieve the results without killing a human embryo.” That is what we need when we argue with atheists.

We also need that when we argue with others who support embryonic stem cell research because they are NOT INFORMED fully about what it actually is and what it has/has not achieved.

I can argue MORALITY all day long. That is why I believe it embryonic stem cell research is wrong! But that will not sway those who support it on non-moral grounds.
 
melensdad said:
That does not work with atheists.

I am looking for SCIENCE that says “we can use adult/mature stem cells to . . . and it is not necessary to use embryonic stem cells because we achieve the results without killing a human embryo.” That is what we need when we argue with atheists.

We also need that when we argue with others who support embryonic stem cell research because they are NOT INFORMED fully about what it actually is and what it has/has not achieved.

I can argue MORALITY all day long. That is why I believe it embryonic stem cell research is wrong! But that will not sway those who support it on non-moral grounds.
Click to expand...
Yes there is value in the arguement. Though, someone pro-embryonic stem cell research can always argue some great potential benefit once it’s better researched. No one can really prove it right or wrong, until what you perceive as the moral offense is done. It is a sort of a variation of Pascal’s wager.

Sorry I guess my post doesn’t really help you with what you asked. I will say, the two sides of the controversy really won’t go away. So at least, when you argue, do it charitably and keep it as close to critically reason as possible. Then do some praying. People can always be swayed, and often times not even for direct reason of contact.
 
Here’s a source from the National Institute of Health:

stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/

Atheists are playing a game. At the core of this game is a desire to be clever and to avoid answering to the authority of God.

Proveable scientific fact: Atheists and Christians all begin as embryos. There is no such thing as “potential life.” That is a dodge used by Atheists to trick people into thinking, “Oh, this embryo is not yet fully developed, that means it’s not a human being yet.” Wrong. The value of the embryo to scientists is that it is a human being and they are killing it.

The other part of the Atheist game is to repeat their phrase over and over again. It doesn’t matter how often they say the same thing, it’s always wrong.

Don’t deny God’s power through prayer. In the Bible, it is stated that the people living in those days would not believe in God if the dead came back to life. The Atheist wants nothing to do with God or God’s followers. But the power of the Holy Spirit through prayer availeth much.

God bless,
Ed
 
edwest2 said:
Atheists are playing a game. At the core of this game is a desire to be clever and to avoid answering to the authority of God.
Click to expand...
True, but pointing that out holds no weight with them.

That is exactly why I need factual information that is based on science. The information must be specific and it must illustrate that adult stem cells can be used instead of embryonic stem cells.

I’ve actually found a few articles that indicate exactly what I am looking for. I’ve also found that the articles are VERY RECENTLY published, all within the past month or two. One other thing that I have found is that medical schools that do stem cell research are showing information on their websites that is OUT OF DATE. The same is true for the National Institute of Health website, which was last updated in Dec 2006.

I hate to sound like a broken record, but telling atheists to pray is simply not going to work. Suggesting there is a moral argument falls on deaf ears. I’ve actually got SOME scientific evidence, but not very much, and while they are FAR FROM convinced, they have stopped their shrill screams.
 
I’m saying that you should pray. “The effectual, fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.” James 5:16. God is on your side. The power of God is on your side. Ask Him to help you. He will.

The Atheist believes that his mind and the words of learned men are the only tools that anyone should use. He or she elevates man to become like a god. Do not fall into the trap of believing that only the official documents of science are your ally. God is your most important ally.

God bless,
Ed
 
edwest2 said:
Do not fall into the trap of believing that only the official documents of science are your ally. God is your most important ally.
Click to expand...
No argument from me on this point. There are several discussions on the moral issues, but we are attempting to have a scientific discussion that is apart from the moral discussion. So far the only science that I have found to support embryonic stem cell research is the FUTURE PROMISE of benefits.
 
One of your questions was: “What medical advantage does embryonic stem cell research provide that cannot be obtained from other types?”

Have you asked that? If so, what were the responses?

Scientifically one would have to be able to rule out that the embryonic stem cells can produce any useful results, which is hard to do without doing research.
 
jman507 said:
One of your questions was: “What medical advantage does embryonic stem cell research provide that cannot be obtained from other types?”

Have you asked that? If so, what were the responses?

Scientifically one would have to be able to rule out that the embryonic stem cells can produce any useful results, which is hard to do without doing research.
Click to expand...
Yes I did ask that.

The answer I received, several times, was that RESEARCH IS NEEDED TO GET RESULTS AND SINCE WE DON’T KNOW HOW MUCH GOOD CAN COME FROM THE RESEARCH, IT IS OBVIOUS THAT WE NEED TO CONTINUE THE RESEARCH.

The fact that NO RESULTS have actually been achieved is minimalized by all the respondents, they each suggest that since embryonic stem cell research is much newer than adult stem cell research, then it will just be a matter of time before the results are seen.

It is easy to say that no therapies have come from embryonic stem cell research, but it is harder to argue against the POTENTIAL therapies that are not yet developed.
 
jman507 said:
Scientifically one would have to be able to rule out that the embryonic stem cells can produce any useful results, which is hard to do without doing research.
Click to expand...
In the real world, management is often faced with the challenge of knowing when NOT to throw good money after bad. One could always say of a failing / failed program - “But we just need more time, more money, more research, more public support, more political support, more encouragement…”

In the real world, you need to show some progress, or the project is canned. Adult stem cells have shown real benefits, and have no moral downside. On the other hand, the killing of embryos for research has led to nothing other than dead embryos and the across the board devaluation of human dignity.

The idea that research MUST ABSOLUTELY continue until we find something useful to do with dead embryos is actually a slave to the abortion on demand agenda, attempting to tag abortion as a humanitarian gesture, instead of the murder that it is.

The larger point is actually that it makes no difference whatsoever whether killing embryos somehow cures diseases. If it were suddenly discovered that the heart tissue of e.g. Jews was a miracle cure for every malady, would that mean that it is acceptable to kill them for their hearts [Note: the answer is NO, in case someone out there isn’t sure.]
 
You are arguing from an untenable position. There is no guarantee that human stem cells will provide as many benefits as embryonic. When you allow them to start with the premise that it SHOULD be done if it shows benefits, you have already lost the argument.

Athiests aren’t necessarily sociopaths. Get them to admit that there ARE basic human rights that must be defended. Then argue about the nature of the human embryo instead of the benefits. If benefits were all that mattered, then we ought to be taking criminals convicted of capital crimes and chopping them up for spare parts! Organ donor crisis solved! Or is it? Show them that morality (say ethics if it makes them feel better) DO play a major part and that it is NOT all just about the benefit.

We are fools to argue against embryonic stem cell research on the grounds of no benefit. Benefit likley COULD eventually be found. It is the inhumanity of DOING it that is why it must be opposed. Argue based on natural law, but don’t be manuevered into basing your position on something that a single discovery would demonlish!
 
Everyone’s always competing for scarce research dollars. Whoever is funding embryonic stem cell research has got to be convinced of its potential. And then, as time passes, decide whether or not to continue funding research. There is no way to know in advance how long that will be.

Looking at it from the Atheist viewpoint: a human being that is an embryo is not a human being.
A human being that is not born but is experiencing neural activity may be considered a human being.
But, from embryo stage to being within inches of exiting the birth canal, that human being can be killed.

They can’t accept that. Any of it. Yet all of it is provable scientific fact. The baby is certainly “viable” when it’s inches away from being born.

God bless,
Ed
 
I would say that if you’re not looking for a moral debate – only scientific information – you’re hitting your head against a wall and would be doing yourself and others more good by praying for them and yourself. Medicine is not an exacting science – was told this by an obstetrician when I wanted to know answers that only had unknowns ! There are so many unknowns regarding human life and disease and we had better start praying that research is not taken over by mad men who do not believe in God. In China they are already selling body parts and making MONEY. There would be big MONEY in embronic stem cell research also vs adult stem cells.Planned Parenthood makes big MONEY. Pharmaceutical companys’ make big MONEY. I am a retired RN and a nursing intructor of student nurses told me that her students were going into nursing for the wrong reason – for the MONEY. Where is our GOD ? AD JESUM PER MARIAM
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top