Morality of Using Stem-Cell Cure

[Newbie2]

You are correct that they are capable of longer storage. I think there was a case in San Francisco of success after 12 years. And I didn’t mean expiration date like a gallon of milk, which is my fault for not being more clear.

What remains though, is that the typical time frame for storage is usually 2-3 years.

OK, I gotchyer meaning. It’s usually that short because the “parents” decide not to continue to store them.

 

[larsegarots]

When do you suppose that happens?

This really is at the heart of the discussion. If there was a unanimous consensus, for example, that it becomes a human when the heart starts beating, then everyone would agree that embryonic stem cell research is moral.

Likewise, if there was a unanimous consensus, for example, that it becomes human after 25 cells, then everyone would agree that it is immoral.

I think a lot of people here have a black and white perspective and believe it is human after 1 cell.

IMO, I don’t know exactly where I draw the line, but it is closer to when the baby starts taking shape or has organs than when it is only 100 cells. For example, the retina of the eye alone has many millions of cells, so the 100 cell colony isn’t even a fraction of an eye.

 

[KathleenElsie]

OK, I gotchyer meaning. It’s usually that short because the “parents” decide not to continue to store them.

This could be seen as infanticide or abortion depending your your point of view.

 

[wanner47]

This really is at the heart of the discussion. If there was a unanimous consensus, for example, that it becomes a human when the heart starts beating, then everyone would agree that embryonic stem cell research is moral.

Likewise, if there was a unanimous consensus, for example, that it becomes human after 25 cells, then everyone would agree that it is immoral.

I think a lot of people here have a black and white perspective and believe it is human after 1 cell.

IMO, I don’t know exactly where I draw the line, but it is closer to when the baby starts taking shape or has organs than when it is only 100 cells. For example, the retina of the eye alone has many millions of cells, so the 100 cell colony isn’t even a fraction of an eye.

If you can’t draw the line, how do you know when immorality is being committed?

 

[edwest2]

How can something with less than 100 cells, have no brain, no heart, no blood, no organs, etc. be a living being?

God gave us this technology so we can cure things that might not be possible without it.

The scientific fact is that you began life as an embryo. The embryo is an individual with genetic material from both the mother and father. The scientists who study human embryos are called embryologists. They cannot use a pig embryo or a cow embryo, it must be a human embryo. This is science.

I will not allow a human to die so I can live.

God bless,
Ed

 

[larsegarots]

If you can’t draw the line, how do you know when immorality is being committed?

I agree that you do have to draw a line somewhere. People draw black and white lines at both ends of the spectrum, and people draw it somewhere between. Like I said, I draw the line somewhere around when the baby starts taking shape or has organs. If you are asking me for a specific number of cells then that is a nonsensical request.

 

[wanner47]

I agree that you do have to draw a line somewhere. People draw black and white lines at both ends of the spectrum, and people draw it somewhere between. Like I said, I draw the line somewhere around when the baby starts taking shape or has organs. If you are asking me for a specific number of cells then that is a nonsensical request.

Why?

I’m just puzzled how an embryo can magically change from being not human one second and human the next. If this change is so decided and pronounced, why is it so difficult to p(name removed by moderator)oint?

 

[po18guy]

No, we abandon ***embryonic ***stem cell research because it is immoral.

Amen! Just as we condemn the idea of eugenics, since it also is immoral.

 

[po18guy]

Why?

I’m just puzzled how an embryo can magically change from being not human one second and human the next. If this change is so decided and pronounced, why is it so difficult to p(name removed by moderator)oint?

No different from the abortionist’s concept of when life begins: When they say it does.

 

[Ilroy]

I agree that you do have to draw a line somewhere. People draw black and white lines at both ends of the spectrum, and people draw it somewhere between. Like I said, I draw the line somewhere around when the baby starts taking shape or has organs. If you are asking me for a specific number of cells then that is a nonsensical request.

Now you actual sho nuff scientists correct me if I’m wrong on this…
It seems to me that I’ve learned that once the sperm meets the egg and conception occurs, there is one other important thing that also occurs. Is it not true that the newly concieved baby has its own genetic code? And this genetic code is fully human, is it not? Also, this genetic code is not the same as the mother’s genetic code, correct?
So, a human with its own genetic code…it seems quite obvious to me that this is a human baby…not someone I want to kill just so the docs can possibly fix my spinal cord…

 

[buffalo]

This really is at the heart of the discussion. If there was a unanimous consensus, for example, that it becomes a human when the heart starts beating, then everyone would agree that embryonic stem cell research is moral.

Likewise, if there was a unanimous consensus, for example, that it becomes human after 25 cells, then everyone would agree that it is immoral.

I think a lot of people here have a black and white perspective and believe it is human after 1 cell.

IMO, I don’t know exactly where I draw the line, but it is closer to when the baby starts taking shape or has organs than when it is only 100 cells. For example, the retina of the eye alone has many millions of cells, so the 100 cell colony isn’t even a fraction of an eye.

When us potentiality at zero?

 

[rwoehmke]

I would agree with you 100% if adult cells could do what embryonic cells could do. They are more limited, and thus, don’t have all the promise.

Cite for me some refereed scientific papers that show embryonic stem cells capable, without complications, of anything adult stem cells have accomplished. In human subjects please. This so called broad promise is still a matter of conjecture

 

[YADA]

My arguments are based on reason. Human’s ability to reason is what gives us intelligence. If we can use cells, that are about to be destroyed, to instead save lives - then it immoral to waste them… IMHO.

So the inmate on death row … they are going to die anyway, their organs should be harvested to save lives …

those individuals who are damaged mentally and cannot reason … we should be able to use their bodes to harvest organs or other bodily tissies or medical research … after all they cannot “reason” … or those with non measurable intelligence or diminishe capacity … all are far game in your world …

That my dear frind is not “reasoned” thinking …and you have never answered the quesiton … how many cells soes it take ot be human and the ‘embryo’ is it a pine tree?

 

[YADA]

I believe it is an embryo. It becomes human as it develops into a human and when God gives it a soul.

And when exactly does it "develop into a human - and how d yout determine this occurance?

When does God give it a soul and how f=do you determin this has occurred?

Please provide documentation and measurable criteria for these events …

 

[larsegarots]

This so called broad promise is still a matter of conjecture

Conjecture would mean that I have interpreted this to be the case, but I did not. That’s what scientists themselves say.

But that is not relevant. This topic is not “The effectiveness of embryonic stem cells” - it is “Morality of Using Stem-Cell Cure” - which I maintain is moral.

As I’ve already mentioned, when making a decision between throwing embryos into the garbage can, or using them to improve lives, God would prefer the latter IMO.

 

[larsegarots]

So the inmate on death row

Not even close to the same ballpark. You are talking about something is 100 cells versus an adult human with a brain, heartbeat, and a soul.

That my dear frind is not “reasoned” thinking

It is exactly the reasoning God gave to humans that directs me to take my position.

How many cells soes it take ot be human and the ‘embryo’?

I don’t have enough background in genetics to answer this question on a number of cells basis, but I don’t think 0.0000005% of an eyeball is a human or has a soul.

 

[larsegarots]

When does God give it a soul and how f=do you determin this has occurred?

Please provide documentation and measurable criteria for these events …

Why are you asking a faith based question like this when you know it is a pointless endeavor.

Question for you:

Does the human even have a soul? In your answer, please provide documentation and measurable criteria for these events.

 

[buffalo]

Why are you asking a faith based question like this when you know it is a pointless endeavor.

Question for you:

Does the human even have a soul? In your answer, please provide documentation and measurable criteria for these events.

When is potentiality at zero?

 

[rwoehmke]

Conjecture would mean that I have interpreted this to be the case, but I did not. That’s what scientists themselves say.
.

Well, I am a scientist. I am retired, but have known many other scientists looking for research grants. They are not always known to accurately evaluate the success of what they propose. Yes they will investigate and there will be results, whether the proposed benefits will come to pass is another matter. Can you imagine any grant seeker saying in his proposal that to date results are not promising, particularly when as you say the technology is relatively young?

I agree with the others who see the use of embryonic stem cells as being at best an abuse of science and technology. Reasoning does not always lead to the correct conclusion, because reason depends very highly on one’s starting point in the process. Among other things, an invalid starting point or a single invalid syllogism raises cain with any conclusion. Maybe you and the others who oppose your views can work on the reasoning process you all are using to arrive at your opposing stands.

 

[larsegarots]

When is potentiality at zero?

Can you rephrase this question?