Tuesday, December 4, 2007

Embyonic Stem Cells

Recently scientists found a way of using adult stem cells for research normally using embryonic stem cells. I mentioned how the scientists destroying human embryos are unfazed by this development ("we are not going to slow down to do that, not at this point").

Rallying cries have started to come out in favor of the destruction of human embryos.

What are the stunning, logical arguments made?
"It's important to remember, though, that we're at square one, uncertain at this early stage whether souped-up skin cells hold the same promise as their embryonic cousins do."
Remind me, again, where we are in the application of embryonic to treating human diseases? Oh yea, there are no treatments of any kind, at any stage. Some scientists have managed to form some heart cells which resemble adult heart cells. Others have used human cells to repair damaged mice skulls.

What noble causes! How our lives are being improved and science advanced!

What other arguments can be made?
"At a time when nearly 60 percent of Americans support human embryonic stem cell research, U.S. stem cell policy runs counter to both scientific and public opinion."
Well! Popular opinion must surely make it right! Well said!

Surely you can say something logical about such a vital line of research!
"Discomfort with the notion of extracting stem cells from embryos is understandable. But many of the life-changing medical advances of recent history, including heart transplantation, have provoked discomfort. Struggling with bioethical questions remains a critical step in any scientific advancement."
Discomfort? I am not uncomfortable. I am outraged that people believe murdering other people for their own good is acceptable. I am outraged that people would accept the murder of the smallest, least able to defend themselves, least spoken for members of our species.

That people would harden their hearts, and deny science and logic, not even for a real cure - for a "promise" of a cure.

3 comments:

GCT said...

It will never become a cure without the research. And, we are still a long ways away. No scientist is pretending otherwise. The fact remains that the new stem cell methods are not proven out and we don't know if they will be as effective as embryonic stem cells.

Also, if you want to attack for the lack of progress, you might note that progress has been severely hindered by the stem cell policies. We'd be much further along if we didn't have restrictive policies. It seems a bit unfair to support the restrictive policies and then criticize the state of the science for being negatively affected by the policies that you support.

nedbrek said...

But we don't know how effective ESC will be, so the new technique isn't much different. And the only ban has been on public funds. Private research has no barrier. Yet private money is going into adult stem cells at a much higher rate (and ASC is already yielding human trial treatments).

ESC is purely speculative. One can't help but think that some of the support is driven by a desire to desensitize people to the destruction of human life...

GCT said...

"But we don't know how effective ESC will be, so the new technique isn't much different."

How will we know if we don't study it? Of course, other countries are studying it and putting us at a distinct disadvantage of losing our scientific edge. Further, we know that ESC are utile in certain ways, and that they can become any cells we wish. Also, we know we can study certain genetic traits with ESC that we probably can't with other methodologies.

"And the only ban has been on public funds. Private research has no barrier."

Because with a fledgling science like this, most private research will not support it as much. The public ban is huge in this regard.

"Yet private money is going into adult stem cells at a much higher rate (and ASC is already yielding human trial treatments)."

Which misses the point though. We need to investigate both avenues in order to have a complete understanding of the science. Pushing forward with human trial treatments while only knowing half the story is dangerous.

"ESC is purely speculative."

Ah, no it isn't. In fact, we wouldn't have ASC or the new technique if not for ESC.

"One can't help but think that some of the support is driven by a desire to desensitize people to the destruction of human life..."

Do you have any support for this statement? These embryos are thrown out instead of used for potentially life-saving treatment research. If anyone is exhibiting a desensitivity to human life, it is those opposed to ESC.