On stem cell research and religion?

Question

Is religion really holding science back in the discovery of cures via stem cell research? Before you jump in and say "yes", think about this: There are other ways to get stem cells, ways that Christianity would be happy to put their support in. Imbilical cord stem cells, adult stem cells and placenta stem cells, all of which do not destroy life and have shown either results or the potential for results. So, why is it if science only focuses on one way, ignoring the other ways that can help humanity, that it's Christianity's fault? Should scientists be exploring these other options, or is it easier to blame religion then to get up and actually do something?

Answer 1

I agree with you even from a practical standpoint. Few people know this, but embryonic stem cell research is a very new idea compared to stem cell research in general, so why spend millions on something that they only think might be better? There actually have been treatments discovered from adult stem cells.

I don't think anyone has publicly addressed the question of how unbilical cord blood cells would not be just as effective for study as embryonic cells. If they have, it sure is hard to find online.

There is definitely an agenda at work here that is not in the best interest of humanity or even economically.

And guess what, Christians are not the only ones who are against ESC research. Other faiths are as well. There are also some very good secular and scientific arguments as well. If I had more time, I would look up the links, but anyone who is really interested can find this information.

Thanks for making this point.

Answer 2

The research I have read (Medical Journals) seems to indicate that there is more success with adult stem cell research that fetus stem cell research. Additionally, it is the cost of abstracting the umbilical cord stem cells which has left this technique out for at least a decade until "We the people" voiced "NO MORE GOVT $$$ to fetus stem cell" research.

Religiously, I'd like to hear more scientists comments on how that French nun was cured from Parkinsens (aka John Paul II's first mirrical).

Answer 3

Nobody is holding back the researches for fetal stem cell research, religious people just don't feel like the Government should be funding this research. There are other successful options with adult stem cell that have been effective. If you have kids, you may want to check out vaccines that were made from aborted babies. Chances are, your kids have received them.

Vaccines Made From Aborted Babies
by Debi Vinnedge

When the article, “Vaccine From Aborted Fetus Cell Lines Judged Morally Acceptable” hit several Catholic publications earlier this year, the reaction of readers was one of shock, anger and utter disbelief that this country has been quietly producing vaccines for the past 20 to 30 years from aborted fetuses. More shock: that we have unknowingly vaccinated our children using this “tainted source,” a more polite way of saying we have used pharmaceutical products from murdered babies. And utterly outrageous is this: There is currently no other source available for three widely used vaccines, namely, hepatitis-A, chicken pox and rubella/MMR.

Letters denouncing both the article and the newspapers poured in from staunch pro-life Catholics across the country who found the act of profiting from abortion unethical, immoral and downright repulsive. One woman wrote, “Please tell me this is a mistake…This is Nazi Germany revisited.” And while editors, ethicists and philosophers scrambled to respond, the dark history of the vaccines began to unfold.
During the 1964 rubella epidemic, scientists were under pressure to develop a treatment for the rapidly spreading virus. The concern was not so much for the children who contracted it—rubella, or “german measles,” is basically a harmless childhood disease. The mild rash and fever last no more than a few days and complications of any sort are rare. It only seriously affects pre-born infants during the first trimester of pregnancy if the mother is exposed and actually passes it on to her child. If this should occur, an estimated 20-25% will contract some form of Congenital Rubella Syndrome. Children infected are at risk for growth retardation, malformations of the heart, eyes or brain, deafness, and liver, spleen and bone marrow problems.

Because of that risk, doctors began to advise their pregnant patients to consider their “options.” Those who chose to abort their babies, we are quite sure, were never told whether or not their child had actually contracted the rubella virus at all. We do know that in the control experiment group, there were 27 abortions performed before the live virus was detected. The first 26 were apparently perfectly healthy babies. This 27th victim became known in the science world as human diploid cell line WI-38. In the real world, this tiny martyr was a female infant at just under three months gestation. Her lung tissue would be used to cultivate the weakened virus strains for this and other future immunizations. In the 1970s, a second cell line derived from a 14-week-old aborted male, dubbed MRC-5, would provide fetal lung tissue for even further medical treatments.

Answer 4

Embryonic stem cells have properties that adult stem cells and cord blood stem cells do not. Mainly because their pluripotency is much better than adult stem cells in addition to their ability to multiply indefinitely.

The main reason embryonic stem cells have not yielded results is because no one has the funding to research them.

And what's the problem with embryonic stem cells anyway? The blastocytes created are a necessary part of in vitro fertilization clinics and will get frozen for "later use" (but usually lasts until they die) or will get destroyed immediately thereafter. No one is arguing against in vitro fertilization, are they? I'd rather use these cells than throw them away.

Answer 5

because of the fact embryonic stem cells regularly come from embryos the two bred noticeably to be harvested for stem cells and then destroyed, or from 'leftover' embryos after an in vitro fertilization technique (see Wikipedia) that could additionally be subsequently destroyed. the two are seen as homicide by using a guy or woman who believes an embryo to be someone. besides the undeniable fact that, there are various the right thank you to get stem cells that don't harm any embryos or human beings - they may well be taken, for example, from placentas and umbilical cords after childbirth. Non-embryonic (grownup) stem cells are additionally contemporary in grownup human beings, even with the certainty that they are perplexing to extract and artwork with.

Answer 6

You know, there is a reason that people want government funding for embryonic stem cell research.
Because companies won't sponsor it.

And there's a reason companies won't sponsor it.
It doesn't make money

And there's a reason it doesn't make money.
It hasn't led to very many cures.

Adult stem cell research has no problem getting funding. Why?
It leads to a LOT of cures.
So it makes money.
So corporations are happy to fund it.

Forget the religious aspects. It just does not make sense.

Answer 7

Amen, sister! I believe there are options available that haven't yet been fully explored; the problem is that the liberal (and incredibly stupid) media and greedy scientists are pushing the envelope on this one.

All we can do is push back. But soon, we'll be taken out of the way and they'll do whatever they want.

Answer 8

I dont know enough about stem cell research and use to comment fully on it
but recently there has been studies done on adult stem cell being used for diabetics
and this is leading to them producing their own insulin
my husband is diabetic and this seems like miracle stuff for us

in my opinion
if we look at this religiously
would God not wish science to progress in such ways to cure people of these ailments ?