Stupid boycott

[Incariol]

Pepsi’s Bizarro World: Boycotted Over Embryonic Cells Linked to Lo-Cal Soda | BNET

Of Pepsi. I mean, the pro-life movement has never been known for its intellectual honesty, but really?

This is totally noncontroversial, ethical research using embryonic stem cells to investigate agonists for human taste receptors, funded by Pepsi to formulate healthier (read: less high fructose corn syrup) soda, and of course some fundie read about it and decided that the best thing to do would be to boycott a company actually interested in doing something somewhat altruistic (making their product healthier) and distort the entire thing to make it look like Semonyx is dissecting fetuses in their labs.

I recommend everyone emailing Pepsi to tell them you support them through this ridiculous boycott, Contact Pepsi

Contacting Campbell's to tell them how disappointed you are in their pandering to the pro-life crowd by severing relations with Semonyx, Campbell Soup Company - Contact Us

And you can also contact Semonyx Inc. to tell them how much you appreciate their work in making our world a better place.

Senomyx: Contact

 

[NvxiaLee]

I was boycotting Pepsi long before this. But, it is kind of sick for a drink company to get mixed up in embryonic stem cells.

 

[Incariol]

I was boycotting Pepsi long before this. But, it is kind of sick for a drink company to get mixed up in embryonic stem cells.

Why? They are a very useful tool in biological research.

 

[Incariol]

The petition to support stem cell research for healthier beverages is now live.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/support-stem-cell-research-for-healthier-beverages/

 

[Cabal]

Oh, it's a cell line.

Yeah....the detractors really need schooling in basic biological technique.

Cells do, er, divide, y'know.

 

[Incariol]

Oh, it's a cell line.

Yeah....the detractors really need schooling in basic biological technique.

Cells do, er, divide, y'know.

But it sounds much more dramatic to say that they are ripping apart poor little fetuses in their lab then to say they are using a commonly used cell line begun in the 70's.

 

[Martingale]

But it sounds much more dramatic to say that they are ripping apart poor little fetuses in their lab then to say they are using a commonly used cell line begun in the 70's. :kss:

my position is subtle: I don't care that much about stem cell research although I'm leaning towards their use with some reservations.

that said, I don't like strawman arguments, which are not only unconvincing, but make the observer wonder about what weakness in your own argument you're masking.

a strawman is an intentional mischaracterization of the opposition's position. so, do you really understand why there are moral reservations about using cell lines even after 40 years and do you really think a strawman addresses them adequately?

for anyone else, this might give an insight on ethical reservations on the use of what some people consider morally tainted data: The Ethics Of Using Medical Data From Nazi Experiments. the arguments for and against bathing with a bar of human soap from Auschwitz (a peripheral point) are interesting to say the least.

but surely the entire issue calls for more than strawman parodies.

 

[sandwiches]

my position is subtle: I don't care that much about stem cell research although I'm leaning towards their use with some reservations.

that said, I don't like strawman arguments, which are not only unconvincing, but make the observer wonder about what weakness in your own argument you're masking.

a strawman is an intentional mischaracterization of the opposition's position. so, do you really understand why there are moral reservations about using cell lines even after 40 years and do you really think a strawman addresses them adequately?

for anyone else, this might give an insight on ethical reservations on the use of what some people consider morally tainted data: The Ethics Of Using Medical Data From Nazi Experiments. the arguments for and against bathing with a bar of human soap from Auschwitz (a peripheral point) are interesting to say the least.

but surely the entire issue calls for more than strawman parodies.

That is an excellent article, Martingale. And while I disagree with your view of embryonic stem cell research, I definitely understand a bit better where you're coming from and it's a tricky problem whether we should benefit from research we find unethical.

 

[Martingale]

That is an excellent article, Martingale. And while I disagree with your view of embryonic stem cell research, I definitely understand a bit better where you're coming from and it's a tricky problem whether we should benefit from research we find unethical.

I should really say I haven't yet a fully formed conscience. this really has to be more than a means-ends analysis

 

[Wiccan_Child]

That is an excellent article, Martingale. And while I disagree with your view of embryonic stem cell research, I definitely understand a bit better where you're coming from and it's a tricky problem whether we should benefit from research we find unethical.

I think we should. We benefit from the appalling research done by the Nazis: if memory serves, most knowledge about hypothermia and the body's reaction to cold is from Nazi experiments. But I feel it's equally barbaric to let someone succumb to frostbite, if our excuse it "Oh, but to heal you, I'd have to use Nazi knowledge!"

Is there any way to 'reclaim' knowledge? Do we have to repeat the experiments with animals before it's ethically sanctioned? We shouldn't let those 6,000,000 Jewish deaths be in vain.

 

[Incariol]

This research is done using a cell line established in the 1970's. Whatever people think of elective abortion, fact is, there is a cell line now that is useful. So when pro-life groups start screaming about "aborted baby tissue", it pains me.

 

[chilehed]

...This is totally noncontroversial, ethical research using embryonic stem cells to investigate agonists for human taste receptors,...

Would it be ethical and noncontroversial to rip apart any other human being for his cells, in order do do such research?

That's what happens in embryonic stem cell research: a distinct human person is killed in order to harvest his cells for experimentation. It's not ethical, it's utterly evil.

And it doesn't matter that the lines have already been created. It's the fruit of a poisoned tree.

 

[sandwiches]

Would it be ethical and noncontroversial to rip apart any other human being for his cells, in order do do such research?

That's what happens in embryonic stem cell research: a distinct human person is killed in order to harvest his cells for experimentation. It's not ethical, it's utterly evil.

And it doesn't matter that the lines have already been created. It's the fruit of a poisoned tree.

Well, I was thinking about this problem and something occurred to me. We know how the brain reacts to bullet wounds by studying the bodies of murder victims, among other ways. Is it unethical to use the knowledge we gain from murders, rapes, and other unethical crimes?

 

[Incariol]

Would it be ethical and noncontroversial to rip apart any other human being for his cells, in order do do such research?

That's what happens in embryonic stem cell research: a distinct human person is killed in order to harvest his cells for experimentation. It's not ethical, it's utterly evil.

And it doesn't matter that the lines have already been created. It's the fruit of a poisoned tree.

Ignoring the fact that you have no evidence whatsoever that the HEK 293 line was created via abortion considering it was started from a single cell, so what? You are not the arbiter of scientific ethics.

I don't even understand the "fruit of a poisoned tree" remark, it has nothing to do with science. The cell lines exist, so they are used.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Would it be ethical and noncontroversial to rip apart any other human being for his cells, in order do do such research?

That's what happens in embryonic stem cell research: a distinct human person is killed in order to harvest his cells for experimentation. It's not ethical, it's utterly evil.

Your premise is that an embryo is a distinct human that can be 'killed'. I daresay not everyone agrees with that assessment.

And it doesn't matter that the lines have already been created. It's the fruit of a poisoned tree.

Actually, it does matter. If you got hypothermia, the medical knowledge used to treat you would be derived from unethical Nazi experiments. Something tells me you'd be happy to receive treatment, though. So, what difference does it make if the cell line exists? Even if it came from unethical means, it exists now, and we'd be negligent to give up that opportunity.