Stem Cell Therapy Works

[Nymphalidae]

Here is an instance of stem cell therapy actually working. Korean scientists restored feeling and movement to a paraplegic woman using umbilical stem cells. It was originally published in the journal Cytotherapy.

Here is the link:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46546

As this article points out, one patient does not a treatment make. But it is promising.

 

[BlueWolf35948]

Whether it works or not (and I'm glad it did in this article, way to go Koreans!), I think there's more at stake than whether or not stem cell research works (which it does). Really the question is how much information can we dig out of this field of research before some anti-progress Christian law shuts another facet of discovery down.

My heliocentric world is round, thank you very much.

By the way, thanks for the article

 

[BarbB]

using umbilical stem cells

This is the part of the research that is really exciting!

 

[Nymphalidae]

This is the part of the research that is really exciting!

I was sort of hoping it would be something EVERYBODY could be happy about for a change.

 

[""]

This is the part of the research that is really exciting!

Nice article Nym.

 

[ChristianCenturion]

Here is an instance of stem cell therapy actually working. Korean scientists restored feeling and movement to a paraplegic woman using umbilical stem cells. It was originally published in the journal Cytotherapy.

Here is the link:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46546

As this article points out, one patient does not a treatment make. But it is promising.

Just so others that may not know or understand that there are differences between classifications between stem cells:

Excerpt~
MATTERS OF LIFE AND DEATH
Adult stem cells restore
feeling in paraplegic
Apparent major breakthrough
with patient paralyzed 19 years
...
"In an apparent major breakthrough, scientists in Korea report using umbilical cord blood stem cells to restore feeling and mobility to a spinal-cord injury patient."


The great thing about this is that the cord blood (which is otherwise discarded) is able to be donated. In my wife's and my orientation (we are expecting), the nurse told us it costs about $5,000 for what is involved in the donation and that is covered by organizations and other funds. IOW - it is free for us to donate ours and this is an encouraging article.

 

[Natman]

No problem with "adult", "placental" or "umbilical" stem cells. I would have a problem if they were using "embryonic" stem cells which would required the purposeful destruction of fertilized human fetus'.

Son-cerely,
Nathan Powers

 

[trunks2k]

No problem with "adult", "placental" or "umbilical" stem cells. I would have a problem if they were using "embryonic" stem cells which would required the purposeful destruction of fertilized human fetus'.

Son-cerely,
Nathan Powers

I hate to keep rehashing the same argument, but what about stem cells from embryos that were going to be destroyed anyways?

 

[Yusuf Evans]

Here is an instance of stem cell therapy actually working. Korean scientists restored feeling and movement to a paraplegic woman using umbilical stem cells. It was originally published in the journal Cytotherapy.

Here is the link:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46546

As this article points out, one patient does not a treatment make. But it is promising.

Just another miracle that the Lord has provided through the use of the blessing of the mind of man. I am totally for stem cell research and I do know the benefits that will be reaped because of this. This is exactly the type of thing Christopher Reeve and his wife were fighting for. Who knows, if the government can get over their ethical dilemna, maybe a future paraplegic can become Superman in a movie. I would gladly allow my taxes to be paid for a medical research project that could benefit generations to come.

 

[""]

Just another miracle that the Lord has provided through the use of the blessing of the mind of man. I am totally for stem cell research and I do know the benefits that will be reaped because of this. This is exactly the type of thing Christopher Reeve and his wife were fighting for. Who knows, if the government can get over their ethical dilemna, maybe a future paraplegic can become Superman in a movie. I would gladly allow my taxes to be paid for a medical research project that could benefit generations to come.

Did you bother to read the posts above yours? The government has never had an ethical dilemma over umbilical cord blood stem cells.

 

[Yusuf Evans]

Did you bother to read the posts above yours? The government has never had an ethical dilemma over umbilical cord blood stem cells.

I know this. They have a problem with government funding for embryonic stem cell research, which I disagree with them on. Granted, speaking morally, I cannot disagree with it. Monetarily, it could take decades for the research to bear fruit. I do think though that it would bear fruit, and it might be a good investment. If it's so bad, why not let the American people vote on it?

 

[Natman]

I hate to keep rehashing the same argument, but what about stem cells from embryos that were going to be destroyed anyways?

First, I believe that it is immoral even to create an environment that would propose to purposely destroy human life at any level, even if it is for the purpose of improving or even saving someone elses life.

Therefore I also have a problem with the primary source of embryos that are likely to be destroyed, the practice of in-vitro-fertilization or IVF, in which multiples of human eggs are harvested from a woman and fertilzed, only to have one or two surgically implanted in a womb. The rest must either be stored for later use, stored indefinitely or destroyed.

Altough it may take a little longer, I believe it would be far more moral to harvest a reasonable number of eggs, but only fertilize the number that the mother would be willing to carry and deliver, at one time.

Son-cerely,
Nathan Powers

 

[Mr. QWERTY]

Natman, I disagree with you entirely, but have to give you credit for acknowledging the likely source of experimental embryos, and coming up with a solution for the problem as you see it. Most people on this board simply seem to gloss over the fact that embryos are going to be destroyed anyway because of IVF.

 

[trunks2k]

Natman, I disagree with you entirely, but have to give you credit for acknowledging the likely source of experimental embryos, and coming up with a solution for the problem as you see it. Most people on this board simply seem to gloss over the fact that embryos are going to be destroyed anyway because of IVF.

Agreed. I don't mind people at least being consistent with what they believe. Nat's position is something I can respect and understand, even if I disagree with it.

 

[Natman]

MR QWERTY and Trunk2k,

Thanks for your acknowledgements.

I'm not sure what you disagree with me about, but, with the obvious success of adult, placental and umbilical stem-cell therapy, and the apparently dismal success (failure) of embryonic-stem-cell therapy, it makes little sense to me to even venture into an area that produces so many moral issues.

I would say that we should continue working diligently in areas that we know work and offer more than promise, without stepping over the moral line.

Son-cerely,
Nathan Powers

 

[stray bullet]

Here is an instance of stem cell therapy actually working. Korean scientists restored feeling and movement to a paraplegic woman using umbilical stem cells. It was originally published in the journal Cytotherapy.

Here is the link:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46546

As this article points out, one patient does not a treatment make. But it is promising.

Stem cell research has done a lot lately, especially in terms of research... that is, adult human stem cells and embryonic non-human stem cells.

We should never try to lump stem cell research all into one category.

 

[""]

. If it's so bad, why not let the American people vote on it?

Cool. Well, some day when we all are judged for our sins, instead of claiming Jesus blood over yourself, why don't you try that line again.

"If it's so bad, why not let the people vote on it."



I'm just messing with you... in a way. I think if something is wrong, then it's wrong. It's not partly right and party wrong. It's either wrong or it's right. There is no gray when it comes to sin. It's sin or it's not. If aborting babies is a sin (and since we are both Christians, then we know that God will judge that issue) then how is using their aborted bodies for medicine, not a sin?

I don't know the answer to that. If you believe in God, and Jesus is your Savior, then you know that God knows the answers. Perhaps we should seek Him out, instead of opinons from other humans, who wallow in their sin nature, just as we do?

 

[sk8Joyful]

Whether it works or not (and I'm glad it did in this article, way to go Koreans!), I think there's more at stake than whether or not stem cell research works (which it does). Really the question is how much information can we dig out of this field of research before some anti-progress Christian law shuts another facet of discovery down.
My heliocentric world is round, thank you very much.
By the way, thanks for the article

Hello Blue,
My world is roundly, healthy as well, and happily so.

And as a Christian, I oppose this Research *not* only because it's obviously another of satan's poor deceitful ways of genoCIDE. And you're quite right, there's more at stake: *LIFE* that is.

Really, how about we TRUST 100% God's *continual-new creative MIND resources* inside each of us.
Right, wrap your 'heliocentric world' around this 'simple Truth'.
And yes, some of my (formerly-suffering) students have realized this Truth for themselves as well. And ultimately, the question for anyone is: How strong is the *courage of your convictions*?

Enjoy a happy, healthy weekend

 

[Arkanin]

I would have a problem if they were using "embryonic" stem cells which would required the purposeful destruction of fertilized human fetus'.

Actually, embryonic research doesn't require further destruction, because there are dead ones that are going to be destroyed either way.

 

[LienShen]

No problem with "adult", "placental" or "umbilical" stem cells. I would have a problem if they were using "embryonic" stem cells which would required the purposeful destruction of fertilized human fetus'.

Son-cerely,
Nathan Powers

There is a huge difference between a fetus and an embryo.

An embryo is a collection of divided cells which has no coding yet as to what it will become. It is not a child, nor a fetus. It is simply a cluster of dividing cells.

A fetus is formed when a collection of these cells are attached to the wall of the womans uterus and form a system which is programmed by nature to form a child.

An embryo can be recoded at any time for a variety of purposes. So it is not a fetus nor a child.

I personally fully support all types of Stem Cell Research. It pains me to see so much suffering and death in the world some of which could be alleviated or cured by this type of research.