I think it can be a good thing. The cells do not have to be taken from the fetus, you can harvast the same cells in the umbilical cord. I think a lot could be done with Research provided by Stem Cells. It could cure diabetes and other ravaging diseases.
2007-08-21
17:58:33
·
20 answers
·
asked by
Senator D*L*P™
5
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
johnny_100pesos- you didn't read the question properly. I am not for that kind of research, and I would ask you to not paint all scientists with the same brush. Science is a lovely vast field of knowledge.
2007-08-21
18:50:42 ·
update #1
TJTB- Thank You! Most people think that a 16 year old can't have any opinions! The reality is I can probably outwit half the people on this site!
2007-08-21
18:55:51 ·
update #2
jeeper_peeper321- No, Bush vetoed the bill.
2007-08-21
18:57:11 ·
update #3
I'm all for it. I have a paralyzed son. And I think if one of the Bush twins was paralyzed and he had to watch his child struggle every single day to simply go urinate or defecate then I believe Mr. Bush would change his mind on it. There are a lot of diseases that could be helped with stem cell research. And Paralyzed Veterans, like my son, could be helped. But oh no! Let's send them over there and if they come back with legs that don't work, then too bad because we don't believe in stem cell research. It's ridiculous. That's why I support Barack Obama. He's big on stem cell research.
2007-08-21 18:06:46
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
6⤊
0⤋
Why do people act like the federal government doesn't fund Stem cell research ?
The Federal Government has funded Stem Cell research since 2001, when Bush became the first president to ever fund it.
So far, the Federal government has provided over 4 billion dollars in Stem Cell research funding,
Almost a billion dollars in 2007 alone.
The federal government even fund's embroyic stem cell research.
I bet not many knew that.
And to what kind of stem cells are better for research,
Most advances made so far worldwide, have been made with adult stem cells,
Embroyic stem cells have had several major set backs as research subjects the last year.
Stop listening to the hype and political rethoric and do some research online to find out the facts, before going off halfcocked.
2007-08-21 18:51:56
·
answer #2
·
answered by jeeper_peeper321 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
I think stem cell research is not only crucial to the future of medical science, but also crucial to understanding the vast amounts of genetic aberrations that cause problems in human health.
I don't see any problem using emryos from fertility clinics in the research, they produce far more than will ever be needed. the only alternative thing to do with them, is throw them into an autoclave and cook them at over 200 degrees under 15 PSI pressure destroying any benefit they can provide for all human beings.
If a law was created, that fertility clinics could not charge anything but shipping for them, there would be no incentive for creating more than necessary to guarantee a couple a child of their own, and the leftovers used for research.
Chris S, the private sector doesn't do a lot of investment in purely theoretical science in comparison to other programs that have a proven track record. For investors, its a fool's gamble that only larger labs invest very small portions of their budget to. When something positive comes out of it, investors will scramble to it like pigs on slop, but like any new idea, this may take decades, especially when its politicized as much as this is.
whcwarrior_10, what is "long enough"??
Mendel discovered heredity factors, in the late 1800s, and it took 100 years for the importance of his work to evolve into our present day understanding of genetics. Maybe you should research Project Arrow, and realize how many decades we've been throwing billions at a missle shield that they can't even get to work, and even if it did, wouldn't protect against airplanes and boats laden with explosives.
2007-08-21 18:25:03
·
answer #3
·
answered by avail_skillz 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
I think we can benefit alot from stem cell research
Its a shame that it has became a big issue with a lot of people who are against it because of the idea that the stem cells come from an aborted fetus and the idea of cloning.
But like you said aborted fetuses are not the only sources for stem cells, there are other ways of obtaining stem cells
And the benefits of stem cells really outweigh the cons of it too.
2007-08-21 18:21:07
·
answer #4
·
answered by HITMAN 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
If they can find cures for anything using stem cell research I'm all for it. My only complaint is that I have to wonder,if it's so promising why do they need federal funding? If it shows such promise then it seems it should be easy to get investors. I thought everyone wanted to stop all the corporate welfare,I know I do.And that's all giving the money to research is, corporate welfare,in the billions.If it's marketable and promising then let the private sector deal with it.
AD
2007-08-21 22:46:28
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
I'm all for stem cell research. I was for it, even before my dad was diagnosed with Alzheimer's. There are so many people who will benefit from any findings. Not just the afflicted, but all their family members and friends.
Dear DLP,
I also just want to say that you're a really cool girl. I've recently been running into your q's and a's and I looked up your profile and saw that you're only 16! You're smart and mature and have a great head on your shoulders. I'm adding you to my contacts. I hope there are a lot more young ladies like you around. ;o)
*****************
Edit:
Oops, I can't add you, since your account is private, but I will just keep an eye out for you. See you around. ;o)
2007-08-21 18:19:43
·
answer #6
·
answered by TJTB 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
I think that due to politicization it has been both oversold and vilified. I think that the Democrats have sold people a lot of false hope because they want to gain a political advantage. That being said I support stem cell research. I do not believe that you should restrict science and research. If you do then the technology goes overseas.
I like the Presidents compromise on the situation. It allows research to continue but it also gives something to the pro lifers.
2007-08-21 18:17:28
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋
I completely agree! People that are against it don't realize there are ways to research this without killing babies. It could be a lifesaver for millions of people and can also help us discover not only the cure of diseases but the causes and how to prevent it in the first place.
2007-08-21 18:04:34
·
answer #8
·
answered by Giliathriel 4
·
6⤊
0⤋
There are lots of different types of stem cells.
I don't understand why they can't harvest stem cells from Placenta and umbilical cords of newborns instead of trying to harvest embryos which is to controversial.
They are essentially the same thing and could be voluntary from the parents. I guess Embryonic has made to much of a stir. I don't think we should harvest humans but I do think their are other options.
People just aren't informed about many things.
2007-08-21 18:15:32
·
answer #9
·
answered by WCSteel 5
·
2⤊
2⤋
Embryonic stem cells show no promise, and better results have resulted in adult stem cells, which don't result in the death of a human fetus.
As one writer said, theoretically, her toenail clippings might one day cure cancer, but the likelyhood of that is low. Same with embryonic stem cells.
Adult stem cells have resulted in some spectacular treatments.
Scientists don't like being told what not to do, and most don't mind harvesting aborted fetuses, no matter how ghoulish that seems to most thinking people. That is why science needs oversight.
2007-08-21 18:25:53
·
answer #10
·
answered by johnny_100pesos 3
·
0⤊
5⤋