What are the promises of Embyronic stem cell research?

  • Thread starter Thread starter SHELYON
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Please read this link to an article written after the last debate by Princeton professor Robert George, a well-respected pro-life advocate. He gave the keynote speech at this year’s Pennsylvanians for Human Life dinner, and was so well-spoken on this very topic!

nationalreview.com/comment/george200410090039.asp
 
40.png
wabrams:
That’s a tough question for me to answer Amy, I’m for adult stem cell research, but I’m divided when it comes to embryonic stem cells. I agree it is morally wrong if they come from aborted fetus, but what about from miscarriages? But if millions or more can be helped, then doesn’t the old saying “The good of the many out way the good of the few” mean anything?
Click to expand...
Maybe the two following things will help.
  1. Embryonic stem cell research is being done on embryos; sperm and an egg are mixed in a petri dish, and the resulting human being is killed after about 8 cell divisions (or as our illustrious trial lawyer Mr. Edwards illustrated when he held up a sheet of paper with a pencil dot on it, something very tiny; as if that made it less human). This isn’t about miscarried or aborted babies. It is about creating life and then destroying it.
    The moral question is, is there ever a time when one can destroy an innocent life intentionally, in order to (theoretically) save or improve another’s life?
  2. Let’s ask the question another way: assume that you have a young child who has a type of cancer (some form of leucemia) which requires the donation of a large amount of bone marrow from a sibling. There are no sibilings, so the parents have another child, and grow that child to the age of two (in order to gather sufficient bone marrow), and then have all of the bone marrow removed from the second child (causing its death).
The only difference between the two scenarios is the age of the child; one is a day after conception old, and the second is two years and 9 monts after conception old. Both children are killed.

It is scientifically proven that upon the first cell division (which occurs almost immediatley after the sperm penetrates the egg), the result is a unique individual with their own DNA traceable to both the father and the mother but uniquely distinguishable, with a DNA that will never change throughout their entire life. One can play all the semantical games one wishes, and not change that truth.

In all the years of research and the millions of dollars that have been spent (if not now billions), there has been only one result; embryonic stem cells cause cancer. And last time I checked, we have more than enough of that to go around.
 
OK OTM,

Help me out here. Why is a round of cell division after fertilization required before the cell is a unique individual? What am I missing?

Immediately upon fertilization the haploid sperm and the haploid egg combine to create a diploid fertilized egg, before the first cell division even occurs (or is my degree in Biochem and my genetics research background so rusty I’m forgetting even the basics?).

Anyways, as I recall it, immediately upon fertilization you have everything it takes to uniquely identify a new individual human life. God has allowed the start of a new person, a new life has begun and we believe that all people are given the inalienable right to life.

Seems like this includes babies, regardless of how young, or how small, or how different they look from an adult human being, or how dependant they are on their mother and her womb. If dependence is what determines our right to life, how “inalienable” is that? Oh yeah, that’s also open to debate, consider euthanasia.

Argh, we’re on the slippery slope here.

And as to the topic of the Thread…

Adult Stem Cell research has born much fruit on the therapeutic front. The same cannot be said of Embryonic Stem Cell, despite the disproportionate amount of money spent on Embryonic Cell line research. The thing about Embryonic Cells is that these cell lines can be patented, hence making them of great interest to the bio-engineering investors desiring to make a buck. Adult cell lines are neither patentable nor have the likely potential of developing into “immortal” cell lines that are theoretically possible with Embryonic Stem Cells.

It looks to me like God is showing us which way to run our research, and yet due to greed, many continue to insist on pursuing the Fetal Cells.

Please read the Catholic Answers Voters Guide and ask that everyone vote against Fetal Stem Cell Research. The Catholic Church is NOT against the advancement of Science. Heck, it is the Catholic Church which has brought us such advances as the University System, and the elementary school system, with students taught on a grade level basis. The Vatican has had an observatory for centuries.

CARose
 
40.png
CARose:
OK OTM,

Help me out here. Why is a round of cell division after fertilization required before the cell is a unique individual? What am I missing?

Immediately upon fertilization the haploid sperm and the haploid egg combine to create a diploid fertilized egg, before the first cell division even occurs (or is my degree in Biochem and my genetics research background so rusty I’m forgetting even the basics?).

Anyways, as I recall it, immediately upon fertilization you have everything it takes to uniquely identify a new individual human life. God has allowed the start of a new person, a new life has begun and we believe that all people are given the inalienable right to life.

Seems like this includes babies, regardless of how young, or how small, or how different they look from an adult human being, or how dependant they are on their mother and her womb. If dependence is what determines our right to life, how “inalienable” is that? Oh yeah, that’s also open to debate, consider euthanasia.

Argh, we’re on the slippery slope here.

And as to the topic of the Thread…

Adult Stem Cell research has born much fruit on the therapeutic front. The same cannot be said of Embryonic Stem Cell, despite the disproportionate amount of money spent on Embryonic Cell line research. The thing about Embryonic Cells is that these cell lines can be patented, hence making them of great interest to the bio-engineering investors desiring to make a buck. Adult cell lines are neither patentable nor have the likely potential of developing into “immortal” cell lines that are theoretically possible with Embryonic Stem Cells.

It looks to me like God is showing us which way to run our research, and yet due to greed, many continue to insist on pursuing the Fetal Cells.

Please read the Catholic Answers Voters Guide and ask that everyone vote against Fetal Stem Cell Research. The Catholic Church is NOT against the advancement of Science. Heck, it is the Catholic Church which has brought us such advances as the University System, and the elementary school system, with students taught on a grade level basis. The Vatican has had an observatory for centuries.

CARose
Click to expand...
Great post! :clapping:
 
40.png
wabrams:
There are no gaurantees in science and medicine. There is a chance more diseases will be cured through stem cell research, but there’s also a chance that very little could be accomplished. So how do we find out? Either abandon the research and wonder “what if?” or move forward to see what will happen. I personally believe we should expand the research, one step at a time.
Click to expand...
Code: 
I would not like to be stuck into liquid-nitrogen just in case I might be a cure for some decease.** Science is not exact and that includes social science. **I do not believe Jesus would approve of this social science experiment. Remeber you are the guinea pig. To except the pratice, that a scientist is always corrrect, is to make that scientist **God**. **This is a lie.**

**Education does not produce Gods. This is a lie.
Remeber Jesus is the TRUTH.
**
 
40.png
CARose:
OK OTM,

Help me out here. Why is a round of cell division after fertilization required before the cell is a unique individual? What am I missing?

Immediately upon fertilization the haploid sperm and the haploid egg combine to create a diploid fertilized egg, before the first cell division even occurs (or is my degree in Biochem and my genetics research background so rusty I’m forgetting even the basics?).

Anyways, as I recall it, immediately upon fertilization you have everything it takes to uniquely identify a new individual human life. God has allowed the start of a new person, a new life has begun and we believe that all people are given the inalienable right to life.

Seems like this includes babies, regardless of how young, or how small, or how different they look from an adult human being, or how dependant they are on their mother and her womb. If dependence is what determines our right to life, how “inalienable” is that? Oh yeah, that’s also open to debate, consider euthanasia.

Argh, we’re on the slippery slope here.

And as to the topic of the Thread…

Adult Stem Cell research has born much fruit on the therapeutic front. The same cannot be said of Embryonic Stem Cell, despite the disproportionate amount of money spent on Embryonic Cell line research. The thing about Embryonic Cells is that these cell lines can be patented, hence making them of great interest to the bio-engineering investors desiring to make a buck. Adult cell lines are neither patentable nor have the likely potential of developing into “immortal” cell lines that are theoretically possible with Embryonic Stem Cells.

It looks to me like God is showing us which way to run our research, and yet due to greed, many continue to insist on pursuing the Fetal Cells.

Please read the Catholic Answers Voters Guide and ask that everyone vote against Fetal Stem Cell Research. The Catholic Church is NOT against the advancement of Science. Heck, it is the Catholic Church which has brought us such advances as the University System, and the elementary school system, with students taught on a grade level basis. The Vatican has had an observatory for centuries.

CARose
Click to expand...
I suspect you are not missing anything. I took biology so long ago, its just possible that I for got a thing or two. And given that I was taught by a monk who’s background was in forestry, and who was mighty nervous when it came to something beyond plant biology, it’s entirely possible I wasn’t even taught what I espoused, but picked up some misinformation along the way.

I stand corrected.

By the way, how many other 'ploids are there?
 
Seems to me that the article show the promise of adult stem cells, if we give it more time.
 
I have yet to dive into all the research articles that were referenced regarding embryonic stem cell research, however, so far, the time spent reading the responses to my original question has assurred me that the question AND the answers are necessary dialogue among all human beings. I thank all you who responded. You all have been most helpful. This type of dialogue must continue… 👍
she-lyon
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top