Are you saying that Frist will be the latest in the long line of people castigated for going against the Bush party line?
Not exactly so. Therapeutic cloning would require the creation of a new embryo, although not one created through fertilization, and the harvesting of stem cells from it.
Where has anyone said anything about "theraputic cloning?" We are talking about stem cell research, research done from embryos that would otherwise simply be discarded.
No, I think you are the one who is misunderstanding. What I meant by "artificially created" is created outside the womb. Unless you are implying that stem cell research is done on children who are inside in their mother.
Jeffster, are you calling yourself an an extremist on this issue?? What I have yet to read in this thread is just what exactly Frist's stand is on federally funded stem cell research. Seeing as how I think Frist is a slick, slimy worm... in other words, a politician without scruples (some have them, believe it or not), this could very likely be, in fact, a publicity stunt to get moderate backing for his presidential run... appearing soon in a fund raiser, TV or radio spot near you. (when it's considered "OK" to begin that sort of thing. any day now, of course.) basso, you said that your stand on federally funded stem cell research was in this thread, which would make it Frist's position as well, as I understood your comment. Perhaps, putting aside your sacred sperm (please!! ), which we do not want to discuss, or get into in any way (where's my umbrella!), you could tell us your stand and Frist's stand on federally funded stem cell research at the same time. Ejaculate at will, basso. We'll duck. Keep D&D Civil!!
I support federally funded research, as it appears frist now does too. however, i think W's position is more, uhmmm, nuanced than he's given credit for, ie, there is no ban on stem cell research, just on federal funding beyond the existing lines. although i'm generally not a frist guy, i think he's right here and it's nice to see him put principle above politics. then again, W is doing the same thing; they just happen to have different principles on this issue.
Awesome... Hopefully, I can get the actual embryonic material, salt it, add spices, let it cure and put in the dehydrator to make embryo jerky!! That's what pro-choice advocates and anyone not devoted to a woman's womb as Moses was to the Israelites thinks about wasted embryos and dead babies--we LOVE it!! Hell, it's the only reason I get out of bed in the morning. Go away troll, please don't contribute your uninformed opinion any longer, *thanks*
are the stem cells in umbilical cords not equally valuable? are they "diluted" or something? just asking. i have no idea. i know that when my wife was pregnant we were inundated with offers from "banks" that store umbilical cord blood after the baby is born...because those stem cells could be used in the future in life-saving procedures for my family. and i'm just thinking...if it's as simple as getting the cords, doesn't it eliminate this whole argument and controversy?
The laugh out loud post of the day. So tell me exactly how Frist is putting principle above politics? I think nearly 80%in recent polls take the position he has switched to.
You have a point, but I bet he has calcualted that the crazies in the GOP will be somewhat in retreat by then and of course, what good is the nomination if he has no chance to win.
The way I understand it (I am not an MD and heard it from my wife's OB/GYN), the stem cells from the umbilical are slightly more differentiated than the ones you get from an embryo. The ones from an embryo can literally become any kind of cell in the human body, whereas the capability of the cells from the umbilical to do this is not as great. IOW, umbilical stem cells are good and useful for research, but major breakthroughs are more likely to happen using embryonic stem cells.
ahhhh..ok. thanks for the information. i figured it had to be something like this, or the controversy would have been quashed a long time ago.
You said "research community" there are many in the research community that are lobbying for allowing therapeutic cloning and to do so you have to create new embryos.
Really? I haven't heard anyone lobbying for theraputic cloning. I have no doubt that there are fringe elements that would be interested in that, but I have only heard people clamoring for stem cell research, not cloning.
Its far more than fringe elements in Spain and other countries they are planning on allowing research in it. http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L11651240.htm Specifically regarding Frist's position some cell researchers including the chairman of the state of CA's stem cell institue who want to pursue therapeutic cloning are worried that Frist's position will ban that closing off a valuable area of research. http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/science/story/13322801p-14164917c.html
Therapeutic cloning is as relevant a field as stem-cell research. It ranges from diabetes research to spinal cord repair. The premise is that you don't grow a living body to harvest organs, rather you skip the step and harvest the organ itself. Therefore, the ethical considerations of cloning would seemingly be removed. "Seemingly" from the pro-choice perspective.
