The recent bill which was passed in the house, but is set for veto by GWB,(http://www.yahoo.com/s/608546), aimed to ease restrictions on federal funding for stem cell research. It also outlined a policy for which stem cells could be obtained, stored, and usage....whereas, they would have to be harvested from embryo's that would have been otherwise discarded anyway, and with the donor's consent. This is where I do not understand the argument against stem cell harvesting. Procedures such as invetro-fertilization, which is very common, produces hundreds of embryo's which are subsequently destroyed. These are the very embryo's that scientists want to use.
My question is.....if they are going to be destroyed in the bio-medical waste container anyway....why shouldn't they be used to help find cures for diseases and possibly save thousands of lives ?
Where is George W. Bush's logic on this ? We all get that he is pro-life, but I have yet to hear a valid argument on stem cell issues.
2007-06-20 01:42:14 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Embryonic stem cells have shown very LITTLE promise. There is MORE promise in adult stem lines. And there are several lines being used for research right now. The problem with using embronic stem cells (aside from their dim hope) is that the potential for abuse is too great. Many believe it would not be unthinkable to use exisiting embryos which would otherwise be discarded. The problem comes when, if this were legalized is unauthorized use of the zygotes, women being offered $ to sell their eggs to "create only to destroy", and on and on.
EMBRYONIC stem cells and stem cells are two totally different creatures. You can obtain stem cells without destroying embryos. However there is the argument that if they're going to be destroyed anyway...........yeah, that would be fine, but the potential for abuse is too great.
Another 'debate' on stem cell issue is funding. Most people are unaware that there are BILLIONS (yes that is with a "B") in private funds to support the research. With that kind of private funding, I believe my tax dollars would be better spent in other UNDERFUNDED areas of research.
2007-06-21 05:55:52 · answer #1 · answered by Cherie 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Ok brother - a 7 year old question... I found your posted question when searching for a thought that "popped" into my mind. In regard to your Chimp question - I have yet to find any information to suggest that it is not possible. I'll start with this reality - to clone a mammoth we would have to use an elephant egg as a donor - and they are different species. The human chimp relationship is similar. I haven't found anything to suggest that the cell membrane, or other sub cellular structure characteristics vary between us and them. So this brings up the idea you have - why not just remove the nucleus of a chimp embryonic cell and insert a human nucleus? I will be using some free time in the next couple days to find out more specifics on this - it is an interesting idea, and I wonder if anyone else in this field has already tried - but again I haven't discovered any published research on this specific subject. Have you found anything? Keep on processing!
2016-05-20 06:59:46 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ye said the right thing ! any way the surplus embryos in invitro fertilizations and other similar researches are being being dumped. why not allow research on that !
Yep you are right ! Don't bother about deficit budget. Because it was through trial and error that most researches came to fruition !
2007-06-20 02:00:31 · answer #3 · answered by Olga 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Problem is, stem cell research has been going on in Europe for quite some time with no results. Why waste time and money? We already have a big enough deficit. . .
2007-06-20 01:46:46 · answer #4 · answered by Chick-a-Dee 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Im with you, when and if they need guinea pigs I want to be the first in Australia.I have nerve damage and drugs are not an option.ChickaDee I do not know where your info came from but its wrong,there have been many cases where it has worked.IndeXed they can actually remove stem cell from the patient that needs the treatment.
2007-06-20 01:58:07 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Now I'm not saying that ol' idiot bush is right but.......the logic comes from the fact that the embryos that are being addressed in this veto are being made just for research ..... they are not talking about ones on stock or wherever they are kept
so its kinda like masturbation .....its a religious veto ....hows that for separation of church and state?
2007-06-20 01:52:53 · answer #6 · answered by IndeXed 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Asking for logic from Bush and his supporters is like asking a two year old to drive your car.
2007-06-20 01:47:52 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋