Rev. Falwell decries stem cell research

[celldog]

anyone who does not post full articles several times a day is evil.

Only because you need to be informed.

 

[Mr Sparkle]

Can you read, Sparkie?? they get better results from adult stem cells. So why not work with those instead of the very unstable embryonic ones?

LOL, really?

source please.

 

[St. of Sinners]

Is it biblically correct? Who the **** cares. Not everyone believes in your fantasy and you can't force laws on them that are based on it.

 

[St. of Sinners]

Abortions for everyone!

 

[DBella]

Does anyone know if the Rev supports the death penalty?

 

[celldog]

LOL, really?

source please.

Embryo Stem Cells Genetically Unstable after Long Cultivation
Discovery may end hopes of using embryo stem cells directly in therapeutic applications

BALTIMORE, September 6, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Human embryonic stem cells have long been known to be unstable and difficult to control. In some cases, where they have been used directly in therapeutic trials, the use of embryo stem cells has been disastrous for patients. Now a researcher from Johns Hopkins University, an institution that has backed the use of embryos for research, has found that embryonic stem cells that are cultured in the lab accumulate genetic changes that may be linked to cancer.

Like a genetic game of “telephone” the longer the cells are cultivated, the more the genetic errors grow. Says Dr. Aravinda Chakravarti a geneticist at the Institute of Genetic Medicine of Johns Hopkins University in a report in the journal Nature Genetics, “These mutations we are finding are a much bigger problem.”

Chakravarti’s research team found that as they were cultured, stem cell lines went through 35 cell divisions and found that 90% showed changes in patterns of methylation – the process in which certain genes in a cell are turned on or off – 22% had mutations in mitochondrial DNA and 50% had major deletions or amplifications in the DNA. Moreover, it was the connection between the particular genetic problems the cells developed and the formation of tumours that was most worrying.

“f it turns out these cells really do become unstable over time,” Chakravarti said, “then that would put limits on the practical life spans of the cells and their usefulness for therapeutic purposes.”

Chakravarti told the New Scientist that a possible solution would be to use the cells only when they are new and before extensive cultivation and division. However, the use of embryonic stem cells for disease treatment depends upon a long process of cultivation and differentiation into particular tissue types. Chakravarti’s discovery may end any lingering hopes of using embryo stem cells directly in therapeutic applications.

This discovery of the degradation of the genome of cultured stem cells comes at the same time a member of the UK’s House of Lords has decried the hype surrounding embryonic stem cells. The news media and certain factions in the scientific community have long promised that the use of cells derived from embryos and aborted foetuses will cure diseases, usually naming Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s and diabetes. Meanwhile all the news regarding real cures and treatments for these and other serious diseases from adult stem cells goes largely unreported.

Speaking on the eve of this year's British Association Festival of Science, saying that the business of science is not certainty but uncertainty, one of the UK’s leading fertility experts and a supporter of embryo research, Lord Robert Winston said, “I think we need to be considerably more modest about our science. We do tend to hype up so many activities. The latest one in biology is the issue of embryonic stem cells. I view the current wave of optimism about embryonic stem cells with growing suspicion.”

Lord Winston pointed out, at nearly the same moment as the discovery at Johns Hopkins, that one of the biggest problems with embryonic stem cells was that “cultured stem cells are inherently unstable. When grown in the laboratory, they often produced cells with chromosomal abnormalities.”

Read New Scientist coverage:
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7950

Read Lord Winston’s comments in The Scotsman:
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1890422005

Read related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2003/sep/03091103.html

hw

 

[Mr Sparkle]

Read New Scientist coverage:
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7950

Read Lord Winston’s comments in The Scotsman:
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1890422005

Read related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2003/sep/03091103.html

hw

okay, first.

the article you posted and the articles you linked to are very different.
the article for "lifesite" reads much more differently than the sources they posted for it, guess they, much like yourself never bother reading them long articles and only scan for phrases or headlines that look like they'll help their case.
you called the stem cells "very unstable" however the first lines of the new scientist read

"Stem cells cultured for long periods in the lab develop genetic changes in areas known to be involved in human cancers, researchers are warning."

the lord winston page read something like "But he said it was premature to talk of exciting new cures for diseases such as Parkinson's and diabetes. Lord Winston criticised the scientific establishment for exaggerating the potential of stem cells, and highlighted major obstacles that still had to be overcome."

I'll ask again, do you read the articles you post? infact, the lord wonston article doesn't even talk about using adult stem cells, nor does it talk about stopping research on stem cells at all.

Celldog what the hell is wrong with you?

I'll ask again, why do you think researchers would choose to use embryonic stem cells if adult stem cells where so much better? you DIDN'T answer.

 

[War Lord]

Does anyone know if the Rev supports the death penalty?

There's a difference with putting somebody to death who has been convicted of a crime worthy of death and an embryo who couldn't have done anything wrong.

 

[Anita18]

Can you read, Sparkie?? they get better results from adult stem cells. So why not work with those instead of the very unstable embryonic ones?

Because they are harder or way more expensive to get. Believe me, if it was easier/cheaper/more reliable to use adult stem cells, we wouldn't be having this discussion at all. We are not idiots. We will use whatever is cheaper/more convenient/more reliable for us.

People in a lab that I was working in were trying to use amniotic stem cells to grow neurons so we could maybe eventually cure Parkinson's - it's still in its very VERY early stages and there's going to be a lot more time and money spent before something concrete is developed for humans.

Every stem cell line mutates as it's grown, and it can even depend on the DNA in each cell line. That's why you can't grow any cell line forever. HeLa cells, which are the easiest-growing human cells that were originally from a woman with cervical cancer, resemble stem cells, but they've been grown for so long (about 50 years) that they've mutated to something that scientists don't want to call a cancer cell OR a stem cell. That's why we have to get them from somewhere to insure that mutations are kept to a minimum. This would be the same for any cell that we use.

The fact is, you cannot put limitations on research if you want results sooner. Maybe adult stem cells work better for some things, but not for other things. Stuff that happens in a lab is always notorious fickle - it takes years to figure out how to develop protocols that will yield results. It's just the way it is.

I'm not going to touch the embryo=grown human thing. It's your belief, but I believe that the people who are alive now take priority above an embryo which most likely will never see life (ie, the extra embryos in fertility clinics slated to be thrown away).

 

[rdh007]

I decry Rev. Falwell.

 

[SoulManX]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falwell

 

[Zephyr Alexian]

The only thing Reverend's decry are troubled married couples as they move in to sleep w/ the poor husband's confused/irrational spouse.

 

[Mentok]

Falwell, founder of Virginia's Liberty University and the Moral Majority, said he sympathized with those whose conditions could possibly be helped by stem cell research.

In other words... "God gave you that disease, he wants you dead".

However, he said Tuesday that any medical research must pass a three-part test: "Is it ethically correct? Is it biblically correct? Is it morally correct?"

Since when the **** does anything outside of the christian religion have to be 'Biblically correct'

 

[Edd Extraordinaire]

Radical Christians like the Reverand and people like in that movie Saved! make me sick. They're all closed-minded a**holes with an agenda to control everything.

 

[Tangled Web]

No one has answered my question. If they are using aborted fetus' for this then the fetus is dead. If it's already dead, why not use it for research?

Celldog when you say no one get's hurt that makes it sound like women are getting pregnant on purpose just to contribute to stem cell research.

Look, I loathe abortion but I like to think that the aborted fetus who never had a chance might be able to help the world.

That's just what I think. Does anyone see where I'm coming from?

 

[Edd Extraordinaire]

No one has answered my question. If they are using aborted fetus' for this then the fetus is dead. If it's already dead, why not use it for research?

Celldog when you say no one get's hurt that makes it sound like women are getting pregnant on purpose just to contribute to stem cell research.

Look, I loathe abortion but I like to think that the aborted fetus who never had a chance might be able to help the world.

That's just what I think. Does anyone see where I'm coming from?

I definitley see where you're coming from. I think it should be up to the mother, much like abortion.

 

[The Overlord]

There's a difference with putting somebody to death who has been convicted of a crime worthy of death and an embryo who couldn't have done anything wrong.

But that assumes that that the justice system is perfect and that sometimes innocent people are not secentenced to death by mistake. Are you saying the justice is perfect?

Anyway as noted before: "Complications, medical emergencies, risk of the mother's life all can lead to the death/abortion of a fetus." So since fetuses will be aborted anyway even if outlaw abortion due to random circumstance, why not use those aborted fetuses to help some kid in a wheel chair?

 

[Edd Extraordinaire]

But that assumes that that the justice system is perfect and that sometimes innocent people are not secentenced to death by mistake. Are you saying the justice is perfect?

Anyway as noted before: "Complications, medical emergencies, risk of the mother's life all can lead to the death/abortion of a fetus." So since fetuses will be aborted anyway even if outlaw abortion due to random circumstance, why not use those aborted fetuses to help some kid in a wheel chair?

This government stinks, so why should our Justice System be any better? Innocent people get convicted everyday, and I know from personal experience. On another note, the embryos are dead, why not use them for good instead of doing nothing with them? Like how people give up their body for medical research?

 

[War Lord]

But that assumes that that the justice system is perfect and that sometimes innocent people are not secentenced to death by mistake. Are you saying the justice is perfect?

Anyway as noted before: "Complications, medical emergencies, risk of the mother's life all can lead to the death/abortion of a fetus." So since fetuses will be aborted anyway even if outlaw abortion due to random circumstance, why not use those aborted fetuses to help some kid in a wheel chair?

Nothing is perfect, but there is 100% chance that the embryo is totally innocent and you support its death.

 

[St. of Sinners]

Nothing is perfect, but there is 100% chance that the embryo is totally innocent and you support its death.

It's already dead when they use it for research. It's not like they farm them and then murder them for stem cell research. Also, how do you know that the embryo isn't an *******? The Hitler of the embryonic community? That's right, you don't and neither do I because we do not, in fact, speak embryo. This is mostly due to the fact that Embryo is a primitive language consisting mostly of series' of squishes and squirting sounds that are very difficult to interpret by full-grown humans. The only living things that could translate Embryo into english for us would potentialy be sperm and we kill them by the millions all the time (really, my girlfriend has swallowed generations).

 

[Mr Sparkle]

The Hitler of the embryonic community?

you're on a roll today

 

[lordofthenerds]

Nothing is perfect, but there is 100% chance that the embryo is totally innocent and you support its death.

Yes, you must save the innocent yet doomed to be thrown in cash can stemcell. Save the stemcell that doesn't have a chance to not be innocent so that the human being dies.

 

[Cyclops]

Abortions for everyone!

Boo!

No more abortions!

Boo!

No abortions for some, abortions for others!

 

[The Overlord]

Nothing is perfect, but there is 100% chance that the embryo is totally innocent and you support its death.

Were you not paying attention, it has already been noted that many fetuses die from natural causes, like medical complications. Why can't we use those for medical research?

 

[Edd Extraordinaire]

Boo!

No more abortions!

Boo!

No abortions for some, abortions for others!

Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others!