http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?rn=3906861&cl=5115540&ch=4226723&src=news
I mean if we can get the same cells from our skin why did we need to abort unborn children to get the stem cells?
2007-11-20 13:04:42 · 10 answers · asked by netjr 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
It's amazing what the American scientific community can come up with when properly motivated.
Next stop, Bio Diesel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9Nf5qOi-Ys
2007-11-20 13:12:48 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
I'm sure you were aware that these embryos were of the eight to twelve cell stage, not resembling in any way shape or form even a fish embryo. I mean, think the period at the end of this sentence and you get the idea.
How do we know how big? They were in a tube or petri dish, flash frozen, and they would stay that way until discarded. Quite a few steps away from unborn children.
This is an experimental thing, and anyway the ban has had its effect years ago, while we were looking for another way to make what was already available, the best scientists went overseas to work. All we can do now is maybe play catch up.
And those embryos can just be discarded again, or remain frozen, useless.
2007-11-20 13:17:52 · answer #2 · answered by justa 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
NO! i could kill one hundred one 365 days previous human infants with my undergo palms if it meant that shall we come across a medical shelter maximum cancers or spinal twine injuries! Ovum that are under no circumstances GOING TO BE babies might desire to one hundred% be used to greater medical analyze in to Stem Cells. And once you think approximately that there are literally hundreds of fertilized ovum sitting in the deep freeze of Fertility Clinics which will finally end up in an Incinerator simply by fact the couple does not want the "greater" ovum whilst they have a efficient being pregnant... there is not any doubt in my suggestions the place those ovum might desire to circulate... think of roughly it... Burned as biohazardous waste or Used to doubtlessly help medical care maximum cancers and heal spinal twine injuries each and each month a woman does not have a new child, she is KILLING AN EGG... Is THAT evil? the actuality that she 'helps' an egg to be flushed from her physique? Then why is it incorrect to apply eggs that ought to have purely died and been flushed anyhow? Eggs do no longer = people! Eggs are purely yet another form of tissue that gets flushed from a woman's physique each and each month... what's the cope with people screaming that each and every EGG is a existence as quickly as we 'kill' 12 a 365 days if we don't get pregnant? I say use um simply by fact it relatively is a call between a flush or an test!
2016-09-29 22:10:45 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the are able to retrain the cell however the cell itself cannot be changed and is sucesptaibly to mutations, such as excessive overgrowth.
This research is in it's infantcy and right now highly imperfect. I would not be getting too excited yet.
As a side note unborn children are not aborted fort he purposes of stem cell research. Wherever you got your information from you were horribly mislead. Stem cell come from empryo's not fetuses. These are the fist few days post fertilization. The emptryos used in current stem cells are left over from IVF treatments. They would otherwise be destroyed for moral and ethical reasons. Another source of stem cells is cord blood, placental blood an amniotic fluid. All of which can be obtained wtihout harming a the child.
2007-11-20 13:08:30 · answer #4 · answered by smedrik 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Abortions were not performed for the purpose of acquiring the stem cells. Stem cells were taken from aborted fetuses, but the abortions were not performed for that reason.
Now that they can take stem cells from skin, they can go ahead and throw the aborted fetuses in the trash instead of using them to save lives, as the Republicans want.
Happy now?
2007-11-20 13:10:36 · answer #5 · answered by CaesarLives 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Even this little bit is propaganda.... *Embryonic* stem cells have *never* actually been used in anything that cured any one of anything at all. Other stem cells have been and are being used in cures... Notice that this "new" gathering of stem cells came from skin... *not* an Embryo....
2007-11-20 13:20:14 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
umm no one was getting aborted to get the embryos. they were left overs at fertility clinics after a successful implantation. the left-overs are sent to the autoclave to be steam cooked at about 230 degrees 20PSI.
are you that misinformed, or just trying to misinform others?
Could those cells possibly be the cells that are known to differentiate into skin, on an embryo?
2007-11-20 13:11:54 · answer #7 · answered by avail_skillz 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
as I understood it... no one was aborting anyone for the stem cell embryos...
they were merely embryos that weren't going to be used, and were destroyed, since they weren't used for testing...
so... I don't really get how Bush was right?
2007-11-20 13:09:28 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
It's so much better to destroy them in an autoclave. Clearly, you have the moral high ground.
2007-11-20 13:07:54 · answer #9 · answered by Holy Cow! 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Bush is wrong was wrong will be wrong
2007-11-20 13:08:05 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 5⤋