Embryonic Stem Cell Research: Who is for and against it?

[kfrost06]

Illogical. I don't agree with animal testing but right now it seems like a necessary evil. Stem Cell research could replace that in the future. A cure for Hypothermia was discovered from Nazi scientists submerging jews in tanks of freezing cold water in a bid to gauge how long German pilots could survive in the the sea. Yes it's was wrong, but because of their techniques, hypothermia is treatable today.

Not only are you wrong your reasoning is very disturbing. First there is no cure for hypothermia other then to warm the person back up, second what the Nazis did was to find the limits. i.e. how cold and how long their pilots could survive at certian altitudes by using prisoners to run experiments on. Second you are using the immoral reasoning that the end justifies the means. Perhaps if you or your family were used in such cruel inhuman experiments you would change your mind. Third, you put animals on a higher plane then humans (hanging head in shame).

[Flagg]

Not only are you wrong your reasoning is very disturbing. First there is no cure for hypothermia other then to warm the person back up, second what the Nazis did was to find the limits. i.e. how cold and how long their pilots could survive at certian altitudes by using prisoners to run experiments on. Second you are using the immoral reasoning that the end justifies the means. Perhaps if you or your family were used in such cruel inhuman experiments you would change your mind. Third, you put animals on a higher plane then humans (hanging head in shame).

Firstly I am not wrong. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothermia. Children have been known to be brought back around again after 30 minutes.

Secondly i am not endorsing what the Nazis did in one bit, but your parables to that and Stem Cell Research DISTURBS ME. That you could compare Nazi experimentation to SCR is ridiculous.

Prehaps YOU should go speak to a family that has someone with Parkinsons and tell them "Don't worry, at least you're going to Heaven and I feel better about myself as a human being".

[kfrost06]

A cure for Hypothermia was discovered from Nazi scientists submerging jews in tanks of freezing cold water in a bid to gauge how long German pilots could survive in the the sea. Yes it's was wrong, but because of their techniques, hypothermia is treatable today.

First there is no cure for hypothermia other then to warm the person back up, second what the Nazis did was to find the limits. i.e. how cold and how long their pilots could survive at certian altitudes by using prisoners to run experiments on.

Firstly I am not wrong. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothermia.

I failed to find the part that mentions the Nazis cure for hypothermia?

As for my view on the main issue is using humans to experiment on is immoral, that goes for prisoners, disabled, poor, or even ones to young to speak for themselves, a human is a human. The arguement boils down to, are embryos human? I say yes, the ones that say no often disagree when life begins, when does a life begin in your opinion? is it the magical first breath of air? the ability to survive outside the womb?

[kfrost06]

Double post

[Kärnfysikern]

The arguement boils down to, are embryos human? I say yes, the ones that say no often disagree when life begins, when does a life begin in your opinion? is it the magical first breath of air? the ability to survive outside the womb?

I dont se the moral difference betwen creating a embryo and then killing it or never creating the embryo in the first place. No life is robbed because either way no human beeing will be born.

[kfrost06]

I dont se the moral difference betwen creating a embryo and then killing it or never creating the embryo in the first place. No life is robbed because either way no human beeing will be born.

Let's use your arguement but play it out a little longer. Suppose you create the embryo(creating it from a human egg and human sperm, the same way it's created in the womb mind you) and allow it to grow to say 5 years old then run experiments on the girl/boy. Since you "created" the person you are allowed to destroy him/her because they never would have existed if you didn't "create" them???

[VisceralReaction]

I dont se the moral difference betwen creating a embryo and then killing it or never creating the embryo in the first place. No life is robbed because either way no human beeing will be born.

Im for stem cell research. But there is a difference between the two. Human life exists before it passes out of the womb.

[Kärnfysikern]

Let's use your arguement but play it out a little longer. Suppose you create the embryo(creating it from a human egg and human sperm, the same way it's created in the womb mind you) and allow it to grow to say 5 years old then run experiments on the girl/boy. Since you "created" the person you are allowed to destroy him/her because they never would have existed if you didn't "create" them???

That is not a analogus situation because then you are talking about a self aware, feeling, breathing and conscious human beeing that can feel pain and suffering. By killing that person you are terminating a consiousness and no one has that right.

If we instead created say a fully grown but brain dead human clone then sure go ahead, experiment all you want.

IMO what makes a human life valuable is the ability to be conscious and self aware. Before someone has that ability(i.e a embryo) or after someone has lost that ability(like braindead after a accident) its not a human, just a bunch of meat or cells with human DNA.

[kfrost06]

IMO what makes a human life valuable is the ability to be conscious and self aware. Before someone has that ability(i.e a embryo) or after someone has lost that ability(like braindead after a accident) its not a human, just a bunch of meat or cells with human DNA.

Is a 3 month old self aware? A 3 day old or a 3 minute old? what about the second before they are born, at what point does life begin? or are they all a bunch of meat or cells with human DNA. I understand your arguement but there is a lot of grey area. Some people have come out of comas do they suddenly become human again? You have a typical Aethist view point and I have the typical religous view point.

[Kärnfysikern]

Is a 3 month old self aware? A 3 day old or a 3 minute old? what about the second before they are born, at what point does life begin? or are they all a bunch of meat or cells with human DNA. I understand your arguement but there is a lot of grey area. Some people have come out of comas do they suddenly become human again? You have a typical Aethist view point and I have the typical religous view point.

Yes there is are huge gray areas no doubt, no objection from me there. But there is no doubt whatsoever that a embryo has no brain, no emotions, no feelings etc. Abortion is a whole different thing because there the child can be very developed. I havent really made up my mind about what I think about abortion yet. But when it comes to embryo I se no gray areas. But of course as you say, its a atheistic viewpoint.

At the end of the day though I think the best question to ask is this.

If you had a child that was dying and a embryonic stem cell treatment could save her, would you turn it down?

[kfrost06]

If you had a child that was dying and a embryonic stem cell treatment could save her, would you turn it down?

I think thats an unfair question. If I had a child and I needed to murder a nun to save her I would but that doesn't make it right. Similar things are going on right now with organ transplants.

[Kärnfysikern]

I think thats an unfair question. If I had a child and I needed to murder a nun to save her I would but that doesn't make it right. Similar things are going on right now with organ transplants.

It is a fair question in a way, because if you oppose stem cell research you are in a way making that chooise for others.

By the way, just to clarify a bit. Do you want to outright ban research on embryonic stem cells, or are you just opposed to federal funding of such research?

[MuscleScience]

Thanks MuscleScience. The reason ive been pretty clued up on this is I just finished a 10 week module at college on Bio Technology, which has covered DNA, RNA, Transcription, Meiosis, etc...as well as Stem Cells. I'm going on to University this year to study Environmental Science, but I tell ya, if id done this module first instead of last, id have been sorely tempted to pursue something like this as i've found it a really interesting subject. Are you training to be a Genetisist by any chance?

No I have done a hodge podge of stuff in science for the last 5 or 6 years now I guess. I am interested in all things physiology so I have some experience in various research labs one of which included bacterial genetics and cloning and molecular cell biology.

[Flagg]

Embryonic stem cell research is a bit of a misnomer, as it's the blastocyte the cells are extracted from. The embryo is what the blastocyte will become after 7 days. Before that, it is just a ball of 100 - 150 cells. Those cells cannot feel, they cannot percieve, no instinct..they have no consiousness. If not for the conditions that those cells live in, they would continue to divide forever. Is that a life form? Yes if you take the stem cells from the blastocyte, it can no longer develop further. Do you consider that ball of cells a human being, KFrost?

[green22]

Im for it!!!!!!!!!!!

[kfrost06]

Embryonic stem cell research is a bit of a misnomer, as it's the blastocyte the cells are extracted from. The embryo is what the blastocyte will become after 7 days. Before that, it is just a ball of 100 - 150 cells. Those cells cannot feel, they cannot percieve, no instinct..they have no consiousness. If not for the conditions that those cells live in, they would continue to divide forever. Is that a life form? Yes if you take the stem cells from the blastocyte, it can no longer develop further. Do you consider that ball of cells a human being, KFrost?

yes, I do. Now let me ask you when do you define the ball of cells a life? At some point it does by all definitions become a life.

It's like asking is Schrödinger's cat alive or dead? well both is the answer, kinda

[Flagg]

yes, I do. Now let me ask you when do you define the ball of cells a life? At some point it does by all definitions become a life.

It's like asking is Schrödinger's cat alive or dead? well both is the answer, kinda

I understand what you are saying, it's a slippery slope indeed. Personally, I do not consider that Blastocyte a lifeform. But debates like this are often without end, I mean what IS life. As funny as it may be to some, is masturbation an obliteration of life, millions of sperm cells with nowhere to go? A coarse analorgy, but you see my point?

[spywizard]

Nope, anything that cheapens the value of life i'm not for..

Let me ask you.. are you an organ donor?? do you feel that if you are in an accident, and you match on a national request list, they may just wait til enough damage is done, and you qualify as a donor??

just a question..

I don't want children pre-birth (that's when the cells are the most desirable) It makes abortion that much more desirable and profitable, and that's not the direction we as a society need to go..

but then again, there are times in our not too distant past that humans are tested on for the advancement of science.. so if you are good with that, then i can see how you could support stem cell development..

sorry i didn't read the thread, just my opinion listed..

[MuscleScience]

Nope, anything that cheapens the value of life i'm not for..

Let me ask you.. are you an organ donor?? do you feel that if you are in an accident, and you match on a national request list, they may just wait til enough damage is done, and you qualify as a donor??

just a question..

I don't want children pre-birth (that's when the cells are the most desirable) It makes abortion that much more desirable and profitable, and that's not the direction we as a society need to go..

but then again, there are times in our not too distant past that humans are tested on for the advancement of science.. so if you are good with that, then i can see how you could support stem cell development..

sorry i didn't read the thread, just my opinion listed..

multipotent stem cells do not have to be harvested from fetuses anymore. They can be created in much the same way as in-vitro fertilization is performed today, but are not given the same growth factors that those used for implantation are give. This in effect causes the proto-embryo to divide and produced exact genetic copies of itself without organization and capacity to differentiate into other tissues or specialized cell types. Whether this is considered life or not I will not debate either way, how it actually works I dont know either or if they are as effective for treating disease.

[BJJ]

for it

[cubnlynx]

I don't really care if they do research my question is if they start fixing everyone and they eventually figure out how to stop or slow aging then people never die we gonna have some space issues in the future