Success with stem cells

[Si modo]

Funny, I thought this was a stem cell thread.

It is. And insofar as one must kill the embryo in order to harvest embryonic stem cells, it is incumbent upon us to discuss the life and humanity of the embryo we propose to destroy.

When it's cloned, nope.

Are you against fertility clinics disposing of blastocysts when the parents approve?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Funny, I thought this was a stem cell thread.

It is. And insofar as one must kill the embryo in order to harvest embryonic stem cells, it is incumbent upon us to discuss the life and humanity of the embryo we propose to destroy.

When it's cloned, nope.

Are you against fertility clinics disposing of blastocysts when the parents approve?

Yes, of course I am. And no, it matters not a bit to me how a human being is created. Once he exists, it is necessary to discuss the morality of disposing of him like a Kleenex. I'm having trouble figuring out how cloning or fertilizing in a test tube somehow conveys less metaphysical importance and meaning to a life than a fifth of tequila and a one-night stand does.

 

[alan1]

Funny, I thought this was a stem cell thread.

It is. And insofar as one must kill the embryo in order to harvest embryonic stem cells, it is incumbent upon us to discuss the life and humanity of the embryo we propose to destroy.

Or, we could discuss whether or not certain stem cells have contributed to successful medical treatment.

 

[Cecilie1200]

You should keep in mind, Si Modo, when you're blithely assuming that because society winks at the practices of fertility clinics that must mean I do too, that I once worked in a fertility clinic.

When I was in my early twenties and just starting my first career in clerical and admin work, I got a really excellent job in a fertility clinic. Good pay, good benefits, pleasant work and environment; everything I could have wanted in a job, especially at that point in life.

The clinic took on a patient who'd been quite the busy woman in earlier years. Lots of partying with a wide variety of men and not much attention paid to birth control, such that she had had four abortions. I recall actually hearing her tell one of the techs, "Who wanted kids in the way?"

Now that she was a bit older, she had found a man with money to take care of her. The only catch was, he wanted children out of the deal, and Miss Spreadeagle 1990 had programmed her uterus into the ultimate hostile environment for fetuses: she kept spontaneously miscarrying in her second month.

The clinic, of course, had no problem whatsoever in helping this coldhearted slut produce a baby for convenience after killing so many for convenience that her reproductive system didn't work right any more. After all, the amount of money they were going to charge was QUITE healthy. I, on the other hand, decided that fertility clinics were perhaps not the best working environment for a person with any morals or conscience, and I quit.

So no, it's never a safe assumption that I approve of much of anything about how fertility clinics work. Nor do I sign on to the breathtakingly selfish, self-absorbed attitudes that support fetility clinics. Had I not been able to become pregnant on my own, I can assure you that it would never have crossed my mind to spend staggering sums of money on it, in the process throwing away dozens of living embryos, merely because I "had to have my own child". I would have adopted or in some other way devoted my time and attention to caring for children already in existence. I'm not conceited enough to believe my own personal DNA is that essential and holy.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Funny, I thought this was a stem cell thread.

It is. And insofar as one must kill the embryo in order to harvest embryonic stem cells, it is incumbent upon us to discuss the life and humanity of the embryo we propose to destroy.

Or, we could discuss whether or not certain stem cells have contributed to successful medical treatment.

Also an issue of concern. And I think it's remarkably - one might even say suspiciously - short-sighted and blindered of Si Modo to keep stubbornly insisting that there's no connection between abortion and ESCR, simply because the embryos don't come from abortions, as though that was ever the question at all.

It is obvious to me that if ESCR was any other field of medical research, it would have been abandoned long since as unproductive and unprofitable. Science does not normally make a practice of beating its brains out against a line of inquiry that shows absolutely no results or progress whatsoever, as ESCR has done so far. The only possible reason there could be for continuing to throw money and time at this is if there's another agenda at work besides pure bioscience. And the most likely culprit is abortion.

It is absolutely imperative for abortion supporters to keep the public thinking of embryos as merely disposable commodities rather than living organisms with an intrinsic value. And since medical science has been so unkind as to debunk all the arguments they used to use for that purpose, they need to cling to the dwindling possibility that killing unborn children will cure Alzheimer's or whatever.

 

[Si modo]

It is. And insofar as one must kill the embryo in order to harvest embryonic stem cells, it is incumbent upon us to discuss the life and humanity of the embryo we propose to destroy.

When it's cloned, nope.

Are you against fertility clinics disposing of blastocysts when the parents approve?

Yes, of course I am. And no, it matters not a bit to me how a human being is created. Once he exists, it is necessary to discuss the morality of disposing of him like a Kleenex. I'm having trouble figuring out how cloning or fertilizing in a test tube somehow conveys less metaphysical importance and meaning to a life than a fifth of tequila and a one-night stand does.

And, what if the fertility clinic goes out of business? Or, they can no longer afford cryogens?

 

[Si modo]

You should keep in mind, Si Modo, when you're blithely assuming that because society winks at the practices of fertility clinics that must mean I do too, that I once worked in a fertility clinic.

When I was in my early twenties and just starting my first career in clerical and admin work, I got a really excellent job in a fertility clinic. Good pay, good benefits, pleasant work and environment; everything I could have wanted in a job, especially at that point in life.

The clinic took on a patient who'd been quite the busy woman in earlier years. Lots of partying with a wide variety of men and not much attention paid to birth control, such that she had had four abortions. I recall actually hearing her tell one of the techs, "Who wanted kids in the way?"

Now that she was a bit older, she had found a man with money to take care of her. The only catch was, he wanted children out of the deal, and Miss Spreadeagle 1990 had programmed her uterus into the ultimate hostile environment for fetuses: she kept spontaneously miscarrying in her second month.

The clinic, of course, had no problem whatsoever in helping this coldhearted slut produce a baby for convenience after killing so many for convenience that her reproductive system didn't work right any more. After all, the amount of money they were going to charge was QUITE healthy. I, on the other hand, decided that fertility clinics were perhaps not the best working environment for a person with any morals or conscience, and I quit.

So no, it's never a safe assumption that I approve of much of anything about how fertility clinics work. Nor do I sign on to the breathtakingly selfish, self-absorbed attitudes that support fetility clinics. Had I not been able to become pregnant on my own, I can assure you that it would never have crossed my mind to spend staggering sums of money on it, in the process throwing away dozens of living embryos, merely because I "had to have my own child". I would have adopted or in some other way devoted my time and attention to caring for children already in existence. I'm not conceited enough to believe my own personal DNA is that essential and holy.

So, that woman didn't deserve to have a baby.

Damn, please don't ever run for any elected office, nor become a judge.

Alright, now that I know that you cannot discuss research on stem cells without getting stuck here, that's fine.

 

[Cecilie1200]

When it's cloned, nope.

Are you against fertility clinics disposing of blastocysts when the parents approve?

Yes, of course I am. And no, it matters not a bit to me how a human being is created. Once he exists, it is necessary to discuss the morality of disposing of him like a Kleenex. I'm having trouble figuring out how cloning or fertilizing in a test tube somehow conveys less metaphysical importance and meaning to a life than a fifth of tequila and a one-night stand does.

And, what if the fertility clinic goes out of business? Or, they can no longer afford cryogens?

You totally lost me on any sort of continuity between what I said and what you responded. I think you're still assuming an approval of fertility clinics and their techniques that I don't have.

 

[Cecilie1200]

You should keep in mind, Si Modo, when you're blithely assuming that because society winks at the practices of fertility clinics that must mean I do too, that I once worked in a fertility clinic.

When I was in my early twenties and just starting my first career in clerical and admin work, I got a really excellent job in a fertility clinic. Good pay, good benefits, pleasant work and environment; everything I could have wanted in a job, especially at that point in life.

The clinic took on a patient who'd been quite the busy woman in earlier years. Lots of partying with a wide variety of men and not much attention paid to birth control, such that she had had four abortions. I recall actually hearing her tell one of the techs, "Who wanted kids in the way?"

Now that she was a bit older, she had found a man with money to take care of her. The only catch was, he wanted children out of the deal, and Miss Spreadeagle 1990 had programmed her uterus into the ultimate hostile environment for fetuses: she kept spontaneously miscarrying in her second month.

The clinic, of course, had no problem whatsoever in helping this coldhearted slut produce a baby for convenience after killing so many for convenience that her reproductive system didn't work right any more. After all, the amount of money they were going to charge was QUITE healthy. I, on the other hand, decided that fertility clinics were perhaps not the best working environment for a person with any morals or conscience, and I quit.

So no, it's never a safe assumption that I approve of much of anything about how fertility clinics work. Nor do I sign on to the breathtakingly selfish, self-absorbed attitudes that support fetility clinics. Had I not been able to become pregnant on my own, I can assure you that it would never have crossed my mind to spend staggering sums of money on it, in the process throwing away dozens of living embryos, merely because I "had to have my own child". I would have adopted or in some other way devoted my time and attention to caring for children already in existence. I'm not conceited enough to believe my own personal DNA is that essential and holy.

So, that woman didn't deserve to have a baby.

Damn, please don't ever run for any elected office, nor become a judge.

Alright, now that I know that you cannot discuss research on stem cells without getting stuck here, that's fine.

One does not "deserve" to have a baby. They aren't property, and they aren't commodities. They're human beings. It was immoral for anyone to say, "Oh, you killed four children because they were inconvenient, but now you need to have one in order to keep your meal ticket? All righty, just give us $100,000." If you expect me to say any different, you're delusional.

And just so we're very clear on my opinion of fertility clinics, it is sick and immoral for ANYONE to treat living human beings as commodities, or to aid others in treating them as though they're accessories.

Insofar as anyone can "deserve" to create and become responsible for an innocent, helpless human being, no. She didn't deserve to have a baby, any more than that woman who drowned her children in the bathtub "deserved" to have any more children.

All right, now that I know you can't deal with any worldview other than your own, that's fine. Well, actually, it's not.

 

[konradv]

There have been numerous medical success's using adult stem cells for treatment.
Can anybody provide a link to show successful medical treatments that used embryonic or fetal stem cells?
I'm starting to think science should focus on what works.

How do find out what works, if you don't study ESCs?

 

[Si modo]

You should keep in mind, Si Modo, when you're blithely assuming that because society winks at the practices of fertility clinics that must mean I do too, that I once worked in a fertility clinic.

When I was in my early twenties and just starting my first career in clerical and admin work, I got a really excellent job in a fertility clinic. Good pay, good benefits, pleasant work and environment; everything I could have wanted in a job, especially at that point in life.

The clinic took on a patient who'd been quite the busy woman in earlier years. Lots of partying with a wide variety of men and not much attention paid to birth control, such that she had had four abortions. I recall actually hearing her tell one of the techs, "Who wanted kids in the way?"

Now that she was a bit older, she had found a man with money to take care of her. The only catch was, he wanted children out of the deal, and Miss Spreadeagle 1990 had programmed her uterus into the ultimate hostile environment for fetuses: she kept spontaneously miscarrying in her second month.

The clinic, of course, had no problem whatsoever in helping this coldhearted slut produce a baby for convenience after killing so many for convenience that her reproductive system didn't work right any more. After all, the amount of money they were going to charge was QUITE healthy. I, on the other hand, decided that fertility clinics were perhaps not the best working environment for a person with any morals or conscience, and I quit.

So no, it's never a safe assumption that I approve of much of anything about how fertility clinics work. Nor do I sign on to the breathtakingly selfish, self-absorbed attitudes that support fetility clinics. Had I not been able to become pregnant on my own, I can assure you that it would never have crossed my mind to spend staggering sums of money on it, in the process throwing away dozens of living embryos, merely because I "had to have my own child". I would have adopted or in some other way devoted my time and attention to caring for children already in existence. I'm not conceited enough to believe my own personal DNA is that essential and holy.

So, that woman didn't deserve to have a baby.

Damn, please don't ever run for any elected office, nor become a judge.

Alright, now that I know that you cannot discuss research on stem cells without getting stuck here, that's fine.

One does not "deserve" to have a baby. They aren't property, and they aren't commodities. They're human beings. It was immoral for anyone to say, "Oh, you killed four children because they were inconvenient, but now you need to have one in order to keep your meal ticket? All righty, just give us $100,000." If you expect me to say any different, you're delusional.

And just so we're very clear on my opinion of fertility clinics, it is sick and immoral for ANYONE to treat living human beings as commodities, or to aid others in treating them as though they're accessories.

Insofar as anyone can "deserve" to create and become responsible for an innocent, helpless human being, no. She didn't deserve to have a baby, any more than that woman who drowned her children in the bathtub "deserved" to have any more children.

All right, now that I know you can't deal with any worldview other than your own, that's fine. Well, actually, it's not.

I'm not changing my mind on this and I'm pretty sure you're not. So, we can agree to disagree and actually get to the topic of stem cell research or you can stay stuck there.

I choose not to stay stuck there. I came in the thread expecting to discuss stem cell research.

 

[Montrovant]

Here's an article about artificial blood that researchers believe could be used as a safer supply for transfusions. The article brings up the possibility that embryonic stem cells could be used to make it in sufficient quantity to make it viable :

Artificial blood made from stem cells could be used in transfusions in just two years | Mail Online

It isn't a successful use of ESC's, but if they are actually much easier to replicate in large numbers, it's a potentially good use of them.

 

[Katzndogz]

So, that woman didn't deserve to have a baby.

Damn, please don't ever run for any elected office, nor become a judge.

Alright, now that I know that you cannot discuss research on stem cells without getting stuck here, that's fine.

One does not "deserve" to have a baby. They aren't property, and they aren't commodities. They're human beings. It was immoral for anyone to say, "Oh, you killed four children because they were inconvenient, but now you need to have one in order to keep your meal ticket? All righty, just give us $100,000." If you expect me to say any different, you're delusional.

And just so we're very clear on my opinion of fertility clinics, it is sick and immoral for ANYONE to treat living human beings as commodities, or to aid others in treating them as though they're accessories.

Insofar as anyone can "deserve" to create and become responsible for an innocent, helpless human being, no. She didn't deserve to have a baby, any more than that woman who drowned her children in the bathtub "deserved" to have any more children.

All right, now that I know you can't deal with any worldview other than your own, that's fine. Well, actually, it's not.

I'm not changing my mind on this and I'm pretty sure you're not. So, we can agree to disagree and actually get to the topic of stem cell research or you can stay stuck there.

I choose not to stay stuck there. I came in the thread expecting to discuss stem cell research.

You have discovered what I already knew. The topic of the faillure of embryonic stem cell research cannot be discussed without it becoming mired in the right to abortion. The ONLY reason why money is being wasted on embryonic stem cell research insead of on what has a proven record of success is because it support abortion.

 

[Cecilie1200]

There have been numerous medical success's using adult stem cells for treatment.
Can anybody provide a link to show successful medical treatments that used embryonic or fetal stem cells?
I'm starting to think science should focus on what works.

How do find out what works, if you don't study ESCs?

Exactly how long does one waste time and funds on a line of inquiry, "to find out it doesn't work", before one concedes that it doesn't? And why is that span of time so much longer with ESCR than with virtually anything else in science?

 

[Cecilie1200]

So, that woman didn't deserve to have a baby.

Damn, please don't ever run for any elected office, nor become a judge.

Alright, now that I know that you cannot discuss research on stem cells without getting stuck here, that's fine.

One does not "deserve" to have a baby. They aren't property, and they aren't commodities. They're human beings. It was immoral for anyone to say, "Oh, you killed four children because they were inconvenient, but now you need to have one in order to keep your meal ticket? All righty, just give us $100,000." If you expect me to say any different, you're delusional.

And just so we're very clear on my opinion of fertility clinics, it is sick and immoral for ANYONE to treat living human beings as commodities, or to aid others in treating them as though they're accessories.

Insofar as anyone can "deserve" to create and become responsible for an innocent, helpless human being, no. She didn't deserve to have a baby, any more than that woman who drowned her children in the bathtub "deserved" to have any more children.

All right, now that I know you can't deal with any worldview other than your own, that's fine. Well, actually, it's not.

I'm not changing my mind on this and I'm pretty sure you're not. So, we can agree to disagree and actually get to the topic of stem cell research or you can stay stuck there.

I choose not to stay stuck there. I came in the thread expecting to discuss stem cell research.

Why don't you tell me what you think is left to talk about beyond the fact that ESC are virtually useless, and only still being studied at all to advance other agendas?

I guess we could talk about advances in adult stem cells, but THEY aren't controversial. Pretty much anyone with a teaspoon of brains recognizes how useful THEY are. Although there again, you run up against the fact that they don't get the attention and federal funding they deserve because of people pushing ESCR. Thank God for the private sector.

 

[Si modo]

One does not "deserve" to have a baby. They aren't property, and they aren't commodities. They're human beings. It was immoral for anyone to say, "Oh, you killed four children because they were inconvenient, but now you need to have one in order to keep your meal ticket? All righty, just give us $100,000." If you expect me to say any different, you're delusional.

And just so we're very clear on my opinion of fertility clinics, it is sick and immoral for ANYONE to treat living human beings as commodities, or to aid others in treating them as though they're accessories.

Insofar as anyone can "deserve" to create and become responsible for an innocent, helpless human being, no. She didn't deserve to have a baby, any more than that woman who drowned her children in the bathtub "deserved" to have any more children.

All right, now that I know you can't deal with any worldview other than your own, that's fine. Well, actually, it's not.

I'm not changing my mind on this and I'm pretty sure you're not. So, we can agree to disagree and actually get to the topic of stem cell research or you can stay stuck there.

I choose not to stay stuck there. I came in the thread expecting to discuss stem cell research.

Why don't you tell me what you think is left to talk about beyond the fact that ESC are virtually useless, and only still being studied at all to advance other agendas?

....

But, as I said before, hESC research is being studied for the advancement of knowledge. Basic research in the pure sciences rarely has any immediate applications. We don't stop doing it because of that. If we did, we wouldn't be very advanced technologically.

So, if one were to say there was a sole reason for doing this research in hESC or not, a more accurate statement would be the ONLY reason we are doing basic research is for the advancement of knowledge with the hope that like most basic research, eventually it can be applied.

So, your phrase that I bolded is terribly mistaken.

 

[konradv]

There have been numerous medical success's using adult stem cells for treatment.
Can anybody provide a link to show successful medical treatments that used embryonic or fetal stem cells?
I'm starting to think science should focus on what works.

How do find out what works, if you don't study ESCs?

Exactly how long does one waste time and funds on a line of inquiry, "to find out it doesn't work", before one concedes that it doesn't? And why is that span of time so much longer with ESCR than with virtually anything else in science?

What does time have to do with it? You're not qualified to make that kind of decision. It needs to be left to the people doing the work. They're the ones that know, if there's any there there.

 

[Cecilie1200]

How do find out what works, if you don't study ESCs?

Exactly how long does one waste time and funds on a line of inquiry, "to find out it doesn't work", before one concedes that it doesn't? And why is that span of time so much longer with ESCR than with virtually anything else in science?

What does time have to do with it? You're not qualified to make that kind of decision. It needs to be left to the people doing the work. They're the ones that know, if there's any there there.

Actually, if it's MY tax money being used for it, I have every right to demand answers to that question, and no intention of "just leaving it up to" the idiots who want to collect more and more of my money.

 

[Cowman]

Exactly how long does one waste time and funds on a line of inquiry, "to find out it doesn't work", before one concedes that it doesn't? And why is that span of time so much longer with ESCR than with virtually anything else in science?

What does time have to do with it? You're not qualified to make that kind of decision. It needs to be left to the people doing the work. They're the ones that know, if there's any there there.

Actually, if it's MY tax money being used for it, I have every right to demand answers to that question, and no intention of "just leaving it up to" the idiots who want to collect more and more of my money.

Have fun working with your elected representative, because that's your only option.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I didn't move any goalposts. I wasn't discussing whether a fetus is a human being rather than a person. My first comment here was in response to Cecilie's post, in which she mentioned the idea of being a person and connected it to appearance.

Yes, she brought the subject up since this continually repeated debate keeps covering the same terrain, and the person vrs hman being argument is a common defense for dehumanizing unborn babies and is a 'moving the goalposts' fallacy. The unborn baby is obviously a human being, so pro-abortionists want to change the topic to one of what a person is.

Your response affirmed that fallacy, whether you first brought the subject up or not.

Also, since I do not believe in a soul, I cannot believe that the presence of a soul is what determines whether something is a person or not.

The concept of the soul ties into the idea of that distinctiveness between people and animals, whatever yo uwant to attribute it to, metaphysical or natural cognitive ability as secular philosophers have long done. You dont have to believe in a spiritual realm to have some belief that this distinctiveness is valid.

And wow, that's quite a rant to go on based on my post which you didn't even really pay attention to based on your moving goalposts comment!

It is interesting that you think you have provided a rebutal to my 'rant' simply because you think I had gone off topic blaming you for something you think you didnt do.

Is that what passes for reason in your world?