Stem Cell Therapy Works

[Natman]

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.

Where do you get your definition of "fetus"?

Nathan Powers

 

[CCGirl]

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.

Excellent post. I wonder how many people who are opposed to certain types of stem-cell research would jump at the chance to have a life saving procedure done brought about by this research!

Also, in Canada anyway, people are actively encouraged to donate the umbilical cord blood, has been so for many years! And yes, it is a free procedure!

 

[Natman]

I am sorry. I missed my own misnomer, referiing to a fertilized "fetus". I meant to say "embryo", but it doesn't really matter.

Webster's dictionary

Main Entry: em·bryo
Pronunciation: 'em-brE-"O
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural em·bry·os
Etymology: Medieval Latin embryon-, embryo, from Greek embryon, from en- + bryein to swell; akin to Greek bryon catkin
1 a archaic : a vertebrate at any stage of development prior to birth or hatching b : an animal in the early stages of growth and differentiation that are characterized by cleavage, the laying down of fundamental tissues, and the formation of primitive organs and organ systems; especially : the developing human individual from the time of implantation to the end of the eighth week after conception...

As a Christian, I believe that human life begins at conception, regardless of whether or not a ferilized human egg (embryo) is implanted. Even as an embryo, ALL the information for an individual human life is present and hopefully in the process of development.

Even if I had a child with a "curable" disease, I would not utilize a practice that I believe to be immoral to save his/her life.

Mark 8:35-36
"35 For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake and the gospel’s will save it. 36 For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?"
​

I have several children. They are more precious to me than anything else on this Earth. However, I will not jeopardize their sould or mine for a few extra moments together here, especially when we can share an eternity in the presence of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

If I could have a cure through moral means, I would not hesitate. Otherwise, it is not worth it in the long run.

Son-cerely,
Nathan Powers

 

[Mr. QWERTY]

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

I disagree with you in that you object to using embryos for experimental purposes, and I have no problem with it whatsoever.

I also disagree with you in your conclusions that embryonic stem cell therapy is a dismal failure. Can you provide proof that compares the success of adult stem cells with the failure of embryonic? One problem is that the entire field is very, very new. To give up on embryonic stem cell research now would be like giving up on flight before the birth of the Wright brothers.

 

[Natman]

I disagree with you in that you object to using embryos for experimental purposes, and I have no problem with it whatsoever.

Why not?

I also disagree with you in your conclusions that embryonic stem cell therapy is a dismal failure. Can you provide proof that compares the success of adult stem cells with the failure of embryonic?

I just posted this on a thread on IVF.

Here is a list of successes (58 in all) from "adult" stem cell therapy while none (0) are listed for "embryonic". Check it out for yourself.

From http://www.lifeissues.org/cloningst.../treatments.htm

Brain Cancer, Retinoblastoma , Ovarian Cancer , Merkel Cell Cancer , Testicular Cancer , Lymphoma , Acute Lymphobolastic Leukemia , Acute Myelogenous Leukemia , Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia , Juvenile Myelomonocytic Leukemia , Angioimmunoblastic Lymphadenopathy with Dysproteinemia , Multiple Myeloma , Myelodysplasia , Breast Cancer , Neuroblastoma , Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma , Hodgkin's Lymphoma , Renal Cell Carcinoma , Various Solid Tumors , Soft Tissue Sarcoma , Scleromyxedema , Multiple Sclerosis , Crohn's Disease , Rheumatoid Arthritis , Juvenile Arthritis , Systemic Lupus , Polychondritis , Systemic Vasculitis , Sjogren's Syndrome , Behcet's Disease , Myasthenia , Red Cell Aplasia , Autoimmune Cytopenia , X-Linked Lymphoproliferative Syndrome , X-Linked Hyperimmunoglobuline-M Syndrome , Severe Combined Immunodeficiency Syndrome-X1 Sickle Cell Anemia , Sideroblastic Anemia , Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia , Aplastic Anemia , Amegakaryocytic Thrombocytopenia , Chronic Epstein-Barr Infection , Fanconi's Anemia , Diamond Blackfan Anemia , Thalassemia , Stroke , Osteogenesis Imperfecta , Sandhoff Disease , Corneal Regeneration , Hemophagocytic Lymphohistiocytosis , Primary Amyloidosis , Limb Gangrene , Surface Wound Healing , Heart Damage , Parkinson's Disease , Spinal Cord Injury , Scleroderma , Hurler's Syndrome

One problem is that the entire field is very, very new. To give up on embryonic stem cell research now would be like giving up on flight before the birth of the Wright brothers.[/QUOTE]

The study of embryonic stem cells appears to go as far back as the mid 1950's. That should be plenty of time to find at least one good application.

SON-cerely,
Nathan Powers

 

[Mr. QWERTY]

Why not?



I just posted this on a thread on IVF.

Here is a list of successes (58 in all) from "adult" stem cell therapy while none (0) are listed for "embryonic". Check it out for yourself.



The study of embryonic stem cells appears to go as far back as the mid 1950's. That should be plenty of time to find at least one good application.

SON-cerely,
Nathan Powers

As for why I am not against embryonic stem cell research, it basically has to do with the fact that I have a very different view of the world from yours. I am an atheist, do not believe in god, and view the soul as a myth. As a result, destroying, or even creating specifically so that they can be destroyed, embryos, which are simple blobs of tissue is no big deal. The potential upside is huge.

Thanks for posting the link. The NIH site has more info to support your position as well. This site does contradict your assertion that ESC research goes back to the 1950's though, and states that the research only goes back to 1998

The 1998 date seems credible to me, and 7 years is not a long period of time in biological research. Besides, our knowledge of biology has progressed tremendously since 1950. Before 1950 biology was a little bit hit and miss. It is vastly more sophisticated now, so research that was not even possible back then can take place now.