Planned Parenthood caught trafficking in human body parts

[sakinago]

Are you saying that the "socio-political aims and beliefs" of the Nazis was to save babies?
Are you defending the Nazis as the saviours of babies now?
I've heard some excellent attempts at historical revision in my time but that might just take the cake.

You seem to think you have a lock on this subject, how about an intelligence test?

The tissue being sold by planned parenthood falls into which category "embryonic" or "tissue specific"??

It is important to the remainder of your schooling so please be sure and answer, not dodge the question.

Hurry up, I don't have time to wait for you to self teach through Google.

Neither.
You can't trick me that easily you tricky guy.

Sure you are clueless, no tricks you just too stupid to intelligently discuss the subject retard boy.

It is tissue specific, now tissue specific means it develops into a specific organ which would be termed by all legal definitions a body part.

Take your stupid Bull Shit else where, was no trick, just a simple means to prove how ******* stupid you are.

Selling of body parts is illegal, ******* moron.

And that's how you tried to trick me because the correct answer is that PP aren't selling body parts.

Not that what you've written has any relevance to the topic at all anyway.
You've obviously been Googling and were just dying to bring to class something you've learnt.
Clever boy...we should put that on the fridge.

They're selling or "donating" functioning livers. That's is a body part

 

[Asclepias]

Are you saying that the "socio-political aims and beliefs" of the Nazis was to save babies?
Are you defending the Nazis as the saviours of babies now?
I've heard some excellent attempts at historical revision in my time but that might just take the cake.

You seem to think you have a lock on this subject, how about an intelligence test?

The tissue being sold by planned parenthood falls into which category "embryonic" or "tissue specific"??

It is important to the remainder of your schooling so please be sure and answer, not dodge the question.

Hurry up, I don't have time to wait for you to self teach through Google.

Neither.
You can't trick me that easily you tricky guy.

Sure you are clueless, no tricks you just too stupid to intelligently discuss the subject retard boy.

It is tissue specific, now tissue specific means it develops into a specific organ which would be termed by all legal definitions a body part.

Take your stupid Bull Shit else where, was no trick, just a simple means to prove how ******* stupid you are.

Selling of body parts is illegal, ******* moron.

And that's how you tried to trick me because the correct answer is that PP aren't selling body parts.

Not that what you've written has any relevance to the topic at all anyway.
You've obviously been Googling and were just dying to bring to class something you've learnt.
Clever boy...we should put that on the fridge.

They're selling or "donating" functioning livers. That's is a body part

So why is no one in jail? You guys are not making sense.

 

[paddymurphy]

I'm not going to rehash the scientific and medical facts yet again in this post (or maybe it was another post, but who cares) when it is clear /you/ made up your mind on how it "should be" based upon /your personal/ beliefs. Go hunt out my previous many many posts on this subject if you want to evidence any curiosity about what I base my beliefs on.

Bottom line is that my beliefs differ from yours and you are not automatically right because you say so. Neither am I, which is why I said, change the law, don't lie about it.

The court happens to believe /my/ opinion is right at this time. If they change that opinion then so be it, but they're sure as **** not going to do so based on videos that they've already ruled were /lies/ - that would be why they ******* banned putting anymore out.

Welcome to America, where the majority and law rule, not /your/ feelings alone. Yes?

Lying baby killer....the majority despises PP and the abortion game, and the courts did not "rule" that the videos were lies.

Lying to protect the sacred right of infanticide and abuse of women. You are a stellar person indeed....

Further more, you aren't going to *rehash* the science and the fact because the science and the facts don't support the disgusting practice. Science and facts work against you, so I can understand your reluctance to *rehash* what never existed in the first place. At least not on your side.

Whoooa! I directed you to my post which clearly refutes this "baby killer for profit horseshit" and you responded to me that you are not interested enough to look. THEN...you post this! There is something wrong with this picture! What is wrong with you?!!

I don't see a post of yours in the quote you posted.

I will be glad to let you tell my your lies about why planned parenthood is not selling fetal organ tissue.

Where is that defense??

Let's get the party started, I will not repeat anything and the first to sling an ad hominem is the looser.

Whenever you get ready ball is in your court.

When asked a question, ignoring or refusing to answer that question will be a point against you.

Clean and fair if you are intelligent enough to make your points and refute mine.

No weasling, no hiding, first lie you are caught bold face in, you loose.

How big are your balls *****??

And who the **** are you to declare that these are what the rules will be, not to mention changing the subject and ignoring the actual issue which is, whatever they are doing with tissue IS NOT ILLEGAL or unethical and that the witch hunt against them is harming women and impeding research. Refute that *****!

Look more baby killing lies.

Ben Carson Once Did Research On Fetal Brain Tissue - BuzzFeed News

 

[sakinago]

Haha The Nuremberg ethic laws are also impeding research. Let's get rid of those too!

 

[sakinago]

You seem to think you have a lock on this subject, how about an intelligence test?

The tissue being sold by planned parenthood falls into which category "embryonic" or "tissue specific"??

It is important to the remainder of your schooling so please be sure and answer, not dodge the question.

Hurry up, I don't have time to wait for you to self teach through Google.

Neither.
You can't trick me that easily you tricky guy.

Sure you are clueless, no tricks you just too stupid to intelligently discuss the subject retard boy.

It is tissue specific, now tissue specific means it develops into a specific organ which would be termed by all legal definitions a body part.

Take your stupid Bull Shit else where, was no trick, just a simple means to prove how ******* stupid you are.

Selling of body parts is illegal, ******* moron.

And that's how you tried to trick me because the correct answer is that PP aren't selling body parts.

Not that what you've written has any relevance to the topic at all anyway.
You've obviously been Googling and were just dying to bring to class something you've learnt.
Clever boy...we should put that on the fridge.

They're selling or "donating" functioning livers. That's is a body part

So why is no one in jail? You guys are not making sense.

Same reason Hilary is not in jail. Gen. Petreus got tried and convicted for leaking classified material, which is the lowest classification of secret material. Hilary has done so with TOP SECRET information, which is the highest, but I guess she's above the law.

 

[Asclepias]

Neither.
You can't trick me that easily you tricky guy.

Sure you are clueless, no tricks you just too stupid to intelligently discuss the subject retard boy.

It is tissue specific, now tissue specific means it develops into a specific organ which would be termed by all legal definitions a body part.

Take your stupid Bull Shit else where, was no trick, just a simple means to prove how ******* stupid you are.

Selling of body parts is illegal, ******* moron.

And that's how you tried to trick me because the correct answer is that PP aren't selling body parts.

Not that what you've written has any relevance to the topic at all anyway.
You've obviously been Googling and were just dying to bring to class something you've learnt.
Clever boy...we should put that on the fridge.

They're selling or "donating" functioning livers. That's is a body part

So why is no one in jail? You guys are not making sense.

Same reason Hilary is not in jail. Gen. Petreus got tried and convicted for leaking classified material, which is the lowest classification of secret material. Hilary has done so with TOP SECRET information, which is the highest, but I guess she's above the law.

What reason is that if its the same?

 

[koshergrl]

Haha it became 80% when you started asking the viability of a 27 week embryo, which I've stated numerous times that I am talking about carrying the baby to term. And I've also said 3 months was just a number I threw out, would you prefer I said six months. Either way 80% or 98%, 3 months or six months it doesn't matter. The point of the analogy was to demonstrate your inconsistency was when you said It's not morally right to take Sherri off life support, but it's ok to do it to a baby.

I'm sorry this provides an internal conflict with your views, but it may not be just as simple as it's just a clump of cells, go ahed and kill it.

There is no conflict. I think you're crazy. With 6 months to go to delivery, the chances of a live birth are far less than 80%. Your 98% figure remains delusional. And there is no inconsistency. Both get to choose. The woman gets to choose for her pregnancy and people get to choose for their spouse.

An expecting mother in the second trimester has only a 4% percent chance of a miscarriage. And you said it was not ok to choose to take Sherri off of life support. So I guess you are changing your opinion. Since you are changing opinions, if the doctor told the husband of Sherri that she was going to have a 4% of not making it, but should fully recover while remaining on life support, is it ok for the husband to say take her off.

Sadly, you're too slow to keep up. Earlier, you said there was an 80% chance of a 27 week old embryo of being born alive. Now you claim it's 96%. It's not. Where do you pull this nonsense from? And where have I changed my position? I've always said the people involved should get to choose for themselves.

sad sak is confusing maturity of infant born premature with being born alive.

Explain how this is the case arist 2 chat . What am I saying that is wrong? Where are the holes in my demonstration of the inconsistency of the left?

It's a losing battle. That's why I put those ppl on ignore.

 

[koshergrl]

Lying baby killer....the majority despises PP and the abortion game, and the courts did not "rule" that the videos were lies.

Lying to protect the sacred right of infanticide and abuse of women. You are a stellar person indeed....

Further more, you aren't going to *rehash* the science and the fact because the science and the facts don't support the disgusting practice. Science and facts work against you, so I can understand your reluctance to *rehash* what never existed in the first place. At least not on your side.

Whoooa! I directed you to my post which clearly refutes this "baby killer for profit horseshit" and you responded to me that you are not interested enough to look. THEN...you post this! There is something wrong with this picture! What is wrong with you?!!

I don't see a post of yours in the quote you posted.

I will be glad to let you tell my your lies about why planned parenthood is not selling fetal organ tissue.

Where is that defense??

Let's get the party started, I will not repeat anything and the first to sling an ad hominem is the looser.

Whenever you get ready ball is in your court.

When asked a question, ignoring or refusing to answer that question will be a point against you.

Clean and fair if you are intelligent enough to make your points and refute mine.

No weasling, no hiding, first lie you are caught bold face in, you loose.

How big are your balls *****??

And who the **** are you to declare that these are what the rules will be, not to mention changing the subject and ignoring the actual issue which is, whatever they are doing with tissue IS NOT ILLEGAL or unethical and that the witch hunt against them is harming women and impeding research. Refute that *****!

Look more baby killing lies.

Ben Carson Once Did Research On Fetal Brain Tissue - BuzzFeed News

You conflate the issues.

Nobody is saying that fetal tissue may never be used for research.

What is TRUE is that abortionists should NEVER be allowed to SELL fetal tissue for anything..and it is indeed illegal. What is TRUE is that abortionists should NEVER be authorized to CHANGE TREATMENT of women in order to increase profit they get from the sale of fetal tissue. What is TRUE is that abortion-on-demand creates multiple human rights violations, and should be stopped.

 

[paddymurphy]

Neither.
You can't trick me that easily you tricky guy.

Sure you are clueless, no tricks you just too stupid to intelligently discuss the subject retard boy.

It is tissue specific, now tissue specific means it develops into a specific organ which would be termed by all legal definitions a body part.

Take your stupid Bull Shit else where, was no trick, just a simple means to prove how ******* stupid you are.

Selling of body parts is illegal, ******* moron.

And that's how you tried to trick me because the correct answer is that PP aren't selling body parts.

Not that what you've written has any relevance to the topic at all anyway.
You've obviously been Googling and were just dying to bring to class something you've learnt.
Clever boy...we should put that on the fridge.

They're selling or "donating" functioning livers. That's is a body part

So why is no one in jail? You guys are not making sense.

Same reason Hilary is not in jail. Gen. Petreus got tried and convicted for leaking classified material, which is the lowest classification of secret material. Hilary has done so with TOP SECRET information, which is the highest, but I guess she's above the law.

She was not even accused of leaking ANY information. Her private e-mail server was secured. There is no allegation that any of that information went any where else. Stop making shit up.

 

[paddymurphy]

Whoooa! I directed you to my post which clearly refutes this "baby killer for profit horseshit" and you responded to me that you are not interested enough to look. THEN...you post this! There is something wrong with this picture! What is wrong with you?!!

I don't see a post of yours in the quote you posted.

I will be glad to let you tell my your lies about why planned parenthood is not selling fetal organ tissue.

Where is that defense??

Let's get the party started, I will not repeat anything and the first to sling an ad hominem is the looser.

Whenever you get ready ball is in your court.

When asked a question, ignoring or refusing to answer that question will be a point against you.

Clean and fair if you are intelligent enough to make your points and refute mine.

No weasling, no hiding, first lie you are caught bold face in, you loose.

How big are your balls *****??

And who the **** are you to declare that these are what the rules will be, not to mention changing the subject and ignoring the actual issue which is, whatever they are doing with tissue IS NOT ILLEGAL or unethical and that the witch hunt against them is harming women and impeding research. Refute that *****!

Look more baby killing lies.

Ben Carson Once Did Research On Fetal Brain Tissue - BuzzFeed News

You conflate the issues.

Nobody is saying that fetal tissue may never be used for research.

What is TRUE is that abortionists should NEVER be allowed to SELL fetal tissue for anything..and it is indeed illegal. What is TRUE is that abortionists should NEVER be authorized to CHANGE TREATMENT of women in order to increase profit they get from the sale of fetal tissue. What is TRUE is that abortion-on-demand creates multiple human rights violations, and should be stopped.

It is not legal to sell fetal tissue and there is no evidence that anyone did sell fetal tissue. But, since you agree that it is appropriate to use fetal tissue for research, the next question is who should pay for the cost of removing, preserving and transporting such tissue? The Center for Organ Recovery will pay hospitals for the cost of removing, storing and transporting organs for transplant. Does that mean that hospitals are profiting from the "sale of human organs." ?

 

[Asclepias]

Sure you are clueless, no tricks you just too stupid to intelligently discuss the subject retard boy.

It is tissue specific, now tissue specific means it develops into a specific organ which would be termed by all legal definitions a body part.

Take your stupid Bull Shit else where, was no trick, just a simple means to prove how ******* stupid you are.

Selling of body parts is illegal, ******* moron.

And that's how you tried to trick me because the correct answer is that PP aren't selling body parts.

Not that what you've written has any relevance to the topic at all anyway.
You've obviously been Googling and were just dying to bring to class something you've learnt.
Clever boy...we should put that on the fridge.

They're selling or "donating" functioning livers. That's is a body part

So why is no one in jail? You guys are not making sense.

Same reason Hilary is not in jail. Gen. Petreus got tried and convicted for leaking classified material, which is the lowest classification of secret material. Hilary has done so with TOP SECRET information, which is the highest, but I guess she's above the law.

She was not even accused of leaking ANY information. Her private e-mail server was secured. There is no allegation that any of that information went any where else. Stop making shit up.

Lets see if he answers my question. I'm guessing about right now his brain is short circuiting.

 

[aris2chat]

Haha it became 80% when you started asking the viability of a 27 week embryo, which I've stated numerous times that I am talking about carrying the baby to term. And I've also said 3 months was just a number I threw out, would you prefer I said six months. Either way 80% or 98%, 3 months or six months it doesn't matter. The point of the analogy was to demonstrate your inconsistency was when you said It's not morally right to take Sherri off life support, but it's ok to do it to a baby.

I'm sorry this provides an internal conflict with your views, but it may not be just as simple as it's just a clump of cells, go ahed and kill it.

There is no conflict. I think you're crazy. With 6 months to go to delivery, the chances of a live birth are far less than 80%. Your 98% figure remains delusional. And there is no inconsistency. Both get to choose. The woman gets to choose for her pregnancy and people get to choose for their spouse.

An expecting mother in the second trimester has only a 4% percent chance of a miscarriage. And you said it was not ok to choose to take Sherri off of life support. So I guess you are changing your opinion. Since you are changing opinions, if the doctor told the husband of Sherri that she was going to have a 4% of not making it, but should fully recover while remaining on life support, is it ok for the husband to say take her off.

Sadly, you're too slow to keep up. Earlier, you said there was an 80% chance of a 27 week old embryo of being born alive. Now you claim it's 96%. It's not. Where do you pull this nonsense from? And where have I changed my position? I've always said the people involved should get to choose for themselves.

sad sak is confusing maturity of infant born premature with being born alive.

Explain how this is the case arist 2 chat . What am I saying that is wrong? Where are the holes in my demonstration of the inconsistency of the left?

Your statistics were for the change of a live birth at each month in gestation to birth. It is not about the change of premature babies to survive.
The longer the gestation the better change the fetus will go to full term.
The chance of a premy to survive after birth is not just by age, but other factors as well. Until they are full term, lungs, heart, kidneys, brain are all under developed and the bones are too soft...........

 

[aris2chat]

Are you saying that the "socio-political aims and beliefs" of the Nazis was to save babies?
Are you defending the Nazis as the saviours of babies now?
I've heard some excellent attempts at historical revision in my time but that might just take the cake.

You seem to think you have a lock on this subject, how about an intelligence test?

The tissue being sold by planned parenthood falls into which category "embryonic" or "tissue specific"??

It is important to the remainder of your schooling so please be sure and answer, not dodge the question.

Hurry up, I don't have time to wait for you to self teach through Google.

Neither.
You can't trick me that easily you tricky guy.

Sure you are clueless, no tricks you just too stupid to intelligently discuss the subject retard boy.

It is tissue specific, now tissue specific means it develops into a specific organ which would be termed by all legal definitions a body part.

Take your stupid Bull Shit else where, was no trick, just a simple means to prove how ******* stupid you are.

Selling of body parts is illegal, ******* moron.

And that's how you tried to trick me because the correct answer is that PP aren't selling body parts.

Not that what you've written has any relevance to the topic at all anyway.
You've obviously been Googling and were just dying to bring to class something you've learnt.
Clever boy...we should put that on the fridge.

They're selling or "donating" functioning livers. That's is a body part

they can't function as they are under developed.
As for the 'liver' that was begun ten years ago in the Neatherlands. Now they use the cells to treat hemophilia by matching the cells up with the persons DNA to create a clotting agent. The liver after all is what purifies the blood. Mouse liver were not as effective. When possible, staying within the species is preferable for a body match. When no possible other animals are used for transplants and testing, but eventually human trials have to begin.

Would you rather have a pig heart, or a human heart that was donated?

Would you rather have baboon blood or human blood?

The fetal cell are so immature they can be programed with the person's DNA to get match. They can't transplant the fetal liver as it is far too small and the programming is not complete as to what type of cell it should be yet. It is still learning it is supposed to be a liver cell before the fetus is born.

It is like a lump of clay, it has to be molded and shaped before it become a work of art. It takes time. It does not become a work of art when it is first thrown. The cells are the same way, they are still learning what they are. That is why they can be so easily match/programed for someone's DNA

 

[aris2chat]

Haha it became 80% when you started asking the viability of a 27 week embryo, which I've stated numerous times that I am talking about carrying the baby to term. And I've also said 3 months was just a number I threw out, would you prefer I said six months. Either way 80% or 98%, 3 months or six months it doesn't matter. The point of the analogy was to demonstrate your inconsistency was when you said It's not morally right to take Sherri off life support, but it's ok to do it to a baby.

I'm sorry this provides an internal conflict with your views, but it may not be just as simple as it's just a clump of cells, go ahed and kill it.

There is no conflict. I think you're crazy. With 6 months to go to delivery, the chances of a live birth are far less than 80%. Your 98% figure remains delusional. And there is no inconsistency. Both get to choose. The woman gets to choose for her pregnancy and people get to choose for their spouse.

An expecting mother in the second trimester has only a 4% percent chance of a miscarriage. And you said it was not ok to choose to take Sherri off of life support. So I guess you are changing your opinion. Since you are changing opinions, if the doctor told the husband of Sherri that she was going to have a 4% of not making it, but should fully recover while remaining on life support, is it ok for the husband to say take her off.

Sadly, you're too slow to keep up. Earlier, you said there was an 80% chance of a 27 week old embryo of being born alive. Now you claim it's 96%. It's not. Where do you pull this nonsense from? And where have I changed my position? I've always said the people involved should get to choose for themselves.

sad sak is confusing maturity of infant born premature with being born alive.

pre mature infants are usually born alive, what is confusing about that??

You seem to be trying to make a point, but your rambling statement is indicative you lack the proper English skills to convey that thought.

One is chance of being born alive and the other is the chance of a premy to survive

 

[sakinago]

And that's how you tried to trick me because the correct answer is that PP aren't selling body parts.

Not that what you've written has any relevance to the topic at all anyway.
You've obviously been Googling and were just dying to bring to class something you've learnt.
Clever boy...we should put that on the fridge.

They're selling or "donating" functioning livers. That's is a body part

So why is no one in jail? You guys are not making sense.

Same reason Hilary is not in jail. Gen. Petreus got tried and convicted for leaking classified material, which is the lowest classification of secret material. Hilary has done so with TOP SECRET information, which is the highest, but I guess she's above the law.

She was not even accused of leaking ANY information. Her private e-mail server was secured. There is no allegation that any of that information went any where else. Stop making shit up.

Lets see if he answers my question. I'm guessing about right now his brain is short circuiting.

Nope lunch break was over. And it's because we have an activist justice department. We rightfully impeached Nixon for having a list of 100 targeted people...but the IRS admittedly targets 1000 of conservative groups with millions of members or potential members, then destroys evidence of that targeting, evidence that they knew was going to be under investigation, and no one gets on trouble? That's just some right wing conspiracy?

 

[DrDoomNGloom]

You seem to think you have a lock on this subject, how about an intelligence test?

The tissue being sold by planned parenthood falls into which category "embryonic" or "tissue specific"??

It is important to the remainder of your schooling so please be sure and answer, not dodge the question.

Hurry up, I don't have time to wait for you to self teach through Google.

Neither.
You can't trick me that easily you tricky guy.

Sure you are clueless, no tricks you just too stupid to intelligently discuss the subject retard boy.

It is tissue specific, now tissue specific means it develops into a specific organ which would be termed by all legal definitions a body part.

Take your stupid Bull Shit else where, was no trick, just a simple means to prove how ******* stupid you are.

Selling of body parts is illegal, ******* moron.

And that's how you tried to trick me because the correct answer is that PP aren't selling body parts.

Not that what you've written has any relevance to the topic at all anyway.
You've obviously been Googling and were just dying to bring to class something you've learnt.
Clever boy...we should put that on the fridge.

They're selling or "donating" functioning livers. That's is a body part

they can't function as they are under developed.
As for the 'liver' that was begun ten years ago in the Neatherlands. Now they use the cells to treat hemophilia by matching the cells up with the persons DNA to create a clotting agent. The liver after all is what purifies the blood. Mouse liver were not as effective. When possible, staying within the species is preferable for a body match. When no possible other animals are used for transplants and testing, but eventually human trials have to begin.

Would you rather have a pig heart, or a human heart that was donated?

Would you rather have baboon blood or human blood?

The fetal cell are so immature they can be programed with the person's DNA to get match. They can't transplant the fetal liver as it is far too small and the programming is not complete as to what type of cell it should be yet. It is still learning it is supposed to be a liver cell before the fetus is born.

It is like a lump of clay, it has to be molded and shaped before it become a work of art. It takes time. It does not become a work of art when it is first thrown. The cells are the same way, they are still learning what they are. That is why they can be so easily match/programed for someone's DNA

Why do folks that are ignorant in medicine come in and spout Bull Shit??

So ever heard of Ionescu-Shiley heart valves??

Bovine or Porcine, pick your flavor, seems to have made this company millions.

There is no widely accepted "blood substitute" , it's primary function is to carry oxygen and no you can not use others species blood in humans.

Those fetal cells, that can be programmed, are those "embryonic" or "fetal"??

That fetal liver can not be grown larger in the lab??

So not possible to transplant a fetal tissue liver into a human, you do realize the article that follows will pretty much end your moronic stance.

[Snip]
Fetal liver transplants.
Gale RP1.
Author information
Abstract
Transplants of hematopoietic stem cells derived from fetal liver during the second trimester of pregnancy can restore hematopoiesis in animals and humans with bone marrow failure. These cells also have a reduced likelihood of causing graft-versus-host disease. Because fetal liver derived hematopoietic stem cells are relatively pure and considerable proliferative potential, they may be reasonable targets for studies of gene modification. Other possible uses of fetal liver derived stem cells are also considered as are results of fetal liver transplants in animals and humans. These data are compared to alternative sources of hematopoietic stem cells including bone marrow and umbilical cord and adult blood.

Fetal liver transplants. - PubMed - NCBI

 

[Asclepias]

They're selling or "donating" functioning livers. That's is a body part

So why is no one in jail? You guys are not making sense.

Same reason Hilary is not in jail. Gen. Petreus got tried and convicted for leaking classified material, which is the lowest classification of secret material. Hilary has done so with TOP SECRET information, which is the highest, but I guess she's above the law.

She was not even accused of leaking ANY information. Her private e-mail server was secured. There is no allegation that any of that information went any where else. Stop making shit up.

Lets see if he answers my question. I'm guessing about right now his brain is short circuiting.

Nope lunch break was over. And it's because we have an activist justice department. We rightfully impeached Nixon for having a list of 100 targeted people...but the IRS admittedly targets 1000 of conservative groups with millions of members or potential members, then destroys evidence of that targeting, evidence that they knew was going to be under investigation, and no one gets on trouble? That's just some right wing conspiracy?

So you admit all you have is a conspiracy theory? Thanks. I rest my case.

 

[DrDoomNGloom]

Whole fetal liver transplantation--a new approach to cell therapy.
Oren R1, Breitman Y, Gur E, Traister A, Zvibel I, Brazovsky E, Shafritz DA, Halpern Z.
Author information
Abstract
We recently developed a novel rat model for liver repopulation, heterografting of microliver slices, aimed at overcoming the limitations inherent in both whole liver and hepatocyte transplantations. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the potential of whole fetal liver transplantations to survive and differentiate within the adult liver, using the adult liver slice transplantation model. Embryonic day 14 whole fetal livers from dipeptidyl peptidase IV+/+ wild-type Fischer 344 rats were transplanted into the livers of dipeptidyl peptidase IV-/- mutant rats. Adult hepatic markers, dipeptidyl peptidase IV, albumin, glycogen, and proliferation cell nuclear antigen- proliferation cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) were assessed in the transplanted liver tissue by immunohistochemistry. Two groups of 9 rats each were transplanted with 3 fetal livers per recipient. Two months later the rats were sacrificed and the markers were detected in the transplanted tissues. In conclusion, the results of this study raise the possibility that fetal liver transplantation could serve as a model for genetic metabolic liver diseases.

 

[sakinago]

There is no conflict. I think you're crazy. With 6 months to go to delivery, the chances of a live birth are far less than 80%. Your 98% figure remains delusional. And there is no inconsistency. Both get to choose. The woman gets to choose for her pregnancy and people get to choose for their spouse.

An expecting mother in the second trimester has only a 4% percent chance of a miscarriage. And you said it was not ok to choose to take Sherri off of life support. So I guess you are changing your opinion. Since you are changing opinions, if the doctor told the husband of Sherri that she was going to have a 4% of not making it, but should fully recover while remaining on life support, is it ok for the husband to say take her off.

Sadly, you're too slow to keep up. Earlier, you said there was an 80% chance of a 27 week old embryo of being born alive. Now you claim it's 96%. It's not. Where do you pull this nonsense from? And where have I changed my position? I've always said the people involved should get to choose for themselves.

sad sak is confusing maturity of infant born premature with being born alive.

Explain how this is the case arist 2 chat . What am I saying that is wrong? Where are the holes in my demonstration of the inconsistency of the left?

Your statistics were for the change of a live birth at each month in gestation to birth. It is not about the change of premature babies to survive.
The longer the gestation the better change the fetus will go to full term.
The chance of a premy to survive after birth is not just by age, but other factors as well. Until they are full term, lungs, heart, kidneys, brain are all under developed and the bones are too soft...........

Ha no, it has very little to do with numbers. arist 2 chat, if a dr looking over schaivo says "she's getting better everyday, and will make a full recovery in 4 or so months on life support, slight chance she won't make it, but she'll be back to normal just give it time" ... Is it still ok for the husband to pull her off life support?

 

[DrDoomNGloom]

One is chance of being born alive and the other is the chance of a premy to survive

What is the relevance of either premies or babies to a conversation about planned parenthood and selling of body parts??

Your off topic post with no content are going to start being reported.