What is wrong with supporting Adult Stem Cell Research?

Question

From what I have read, it seems like it is a good alternative that will cause a lot less strife between the political factions that have squared off, why not try to support something that will help others and not tick so many people off?

If you don't mind, please site your sources, I am interested in this topic and I would like to read where you are all getting your information.

Answer 1

It doesn't involve killing, the left, and the democratic party can not stand it if a innocent child does not die for their wants. Its the modern day version of a blood sacrifice to their god of liberalism.

Answer 2

There is nothing wrong with it. The only people opposing the research are the religious wackos and the Bush cult members who just do what they're told.

To the people suggesting Stem Cell Research doesn't work and it's a waste of time: WE DON'T KNOW THAT. Why not fund the research. There is no suffering occurring. Why not err on the side of caution and let's find out if we can help some people. I would rather see us invest billions in this then dumping money into foreign wars.

Anyone who disagrees with this research has no idea what they're talking about. It's way too early to count out this therapy, especially considering the potential cures to so many deadly diseases.

Answer 3

Nothing... For those attacking Christians, I would like to point out that Christians in general oppose the use of embryonic stem cells NOT embryonic germ cells, umbilical cord stem cells, and adult stem cells.
The federal government has funded more than 600 studies the private sector more than that and twenty years later, not even a mouse has been cured of disease using embryonic stem cells but they often end up full of tumors. When compared to treatments already occurring with adult stem cells, it’s obvious that adult stem cell research is the more promising lead to follow.
Laura Dominguez was paralyzed from the neck down with a C6 vertebrae burst fracture.She received olfactory mucosa transplantation, involves transplantation of stem cells found in the nasal region into the injured area .After an MRI was conducted, physicians informed her that her spinal cord had begun healing and that 70 percent of the lesion had recovered into normal spinal tissue. Within six months she had acquired sensation down to her abdominal region. By 2004, she had gained upper body agility and the ability to stand for extended periods of time with the aid of a walker. She reported improved motor skills, including the ability to stand on her toes and contract her quadriceps and hamstring muscles. She had walked more than 1400 feet with the use of braces and outside help. The stem cells used were Adult....
Adult Stem Cell use have showed success in Spinal Cord Injuries,Heart Tissue Regeneration,Corneal Reconstruction,Autoimmune Disease Treatment: Diabetes, Lupus, Crohn's, Multiple Sclerosis,Parkinson's Disease,Anemias, Cancers, and Immune Deficiencies and the list continues...

Answer 4

Because if there's any possibilty of saving lives, I don't really care who gets "ticked off" about pursuing research on stem cells that would otherwise be destroyed by fertility clinics anyway. I don't care what the odds are, which avenue of research seems more promising, less controversial, etc. Explore them ALL. Exhaust every possibility available to us when it comes to fighting disease.

If you are opposed to abortion on the grounds that it takes away life, you have a point. I personally feel there's much more to the debate, but you have a sincere moral position which I understand and respect. A fetus is at least a potential life. But to argue against embryonic stem cell research on tissue which is on its way to the incinerator, to let it burn there rather than possibly aid in curing Parkinson's, or Alzheimer's, or cancer, or even freaking sniffles, is an untenable position built on blind dogma, ignorant of fact, and reeking of FALSE morality.

I do not feel that one who opposes embryonic stem cell research can honestly continue to label him/herself as PRO-LIFE.

Answer 5

Because they do not regenerate at the same rate of embryonic. The Aging Process. However, they now have the technology to stimulate embryonic growth without paternal DNA (sperm). This will be a very interesting debate. See BBC or Harvard Business Review.

Answer 6

yes it is a good alternative to using stem cells from dead aborted fetuses that were paid for with tax payer dollars who again pay for the research from the dead baby they/we paid for.
no doubt stem cells provide a great opportunity to cure or lessen the severity of various diseases. nobody can argue that point. in some cases i've read that stem cells from the person being treated can work. the argument is whether or not tax payers should foot the bill twice and use stem cells from abortions.

"some European countries including, Germany, Austria, and Ireland, ban altogether the destruction of human embryos to create stem cell lines" http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2004pres/20040714b.html

In contrast to embryonic stem cells, adult stem cells are more specialized and give rise to the cells that do the everyday work of life. In contrast what their name implies, adult stem cells are not only found in adults, but in everyone from the youngest child to the eldest senior. When first isolated, it was believed that adult stem cells could not change to be different types of cells and tissues. However, adult stem cells have been found to be very malleable. They have been able to change from brain cells to blood cells, and from blood cells to muscle, nerve, or liver cells. In addition, adult stem cells have proven much more effective for medical treatment than embryonic cells. Several adult stem cell therapies are in clinical trials in the United States, while no clinical trials using embryonic cells have been introduced.

One of the primary arguments for doing research on embryonic cells is that adult stem cells have not been isolated in every type of tissue. If adult cells cannot be identified in all types of tissue, it would seem necessary to use embryonic cells that theoretically have the capacity to become any type of tissue. This argument seems premature at best given that research is continually identifying new adult stem cell types (one of the latest being in fat) and discovering new ways to manipulate the cells. In addition, PPL Therapeutics, the firm that produced the sheep clone Dolly, has indicated a breakthrough in the stem cell research field--the ability to turn ordinary cells into adult stem cells. Many in the research community are waiting in anticipation for PPL's release of data, which will likely happen once they receive a patent on their discovery. Kevin Fitzgerald, a cancer researcher with Georgetown University in Washington, DC, says that if true, this discovery alone could end the need to pursue embryonic stem cells altogether.
http://www.cbhd.org/resources/stemcells/mcconchie_2001-06-29.htm

Answer 7

Because everything I have read indicates Adult stem cells do not have near the potential for treatments as fetal stem cells.

So you would be pouring money into research that would be better utilized elsewhere to placate a minority of people in this country because of their religious views.

Answer 8

there is nothing at all wrong with it, in fact, it is much more likely to find a breakthrough in that arena than in embryonic stem cell research. the problems come from both liberals and religious zealots who cannot advance their agendas based on adult stem cell research.

Answer 9

Nothing.

Answer 10

Nothing. Religious people are dumb and mean.