What do U think???

[Judy3]

Is what we need, is to educate our congressmen and senators to the fact that we need a bill so that adult stem cells can be processed in the USA?
I think we should all work on our elected officials so they understand what adult stem cell therapy is all about. My beautician today told me she is strickly against stem cells cause it is "killing Babies". then I explained to her my trip for adult stem cells and how they had to be processed in Isreal and she is now a believer. She is going to her church and explain the difference and ask them to help us with adult stem cell therapy. she is one, of a million that didn't know there are other ways. Could we all bomb bard our elected officials for a bill? All I hear is Embilical and Fetal Stem cells from government.
we need to push adult cells.


Judy3
Adult cells on Oct 28, 2008

 

[michaelsdad00]

I believe that the FDA is blocking treatment.

The PhD's who sit on FDA panels and are on the payroll of the big pharmaceutical companies are blocking the the treatment of people in the USA in my opinion.
Dave Snow

 

[barbara]

I think what David says has a lot of merit to it. It also is pretty disgusting to hear that the FDA, who is supposed to protect us, is mired in corruption and questionable tactics such as having members of their advisory boards also hold stock in companies they advise on! I also agree with Judy that it is necessary to hammer our elected officials as much as possible. It is rather odd that no one really takes the time to understand embryonic stem cell research. This is hardly what I would say constitutes killing babies and yet people are ready to condemn it because they do not understand it and that is very sad. I am very thankful to the doctors and owners of companies that are offering legitimate stem cell treatments even if it means a trip outside the U.S. in many cases. I have never heard one American doctor say that he or she does not want to treat patients in the U.S. It is only because of the U.S. and its policies that these doctors must treat us elsewhere.

 

[michaelsdad00]

legitimate stem cell treatments

Barbara, You have pasted together two disparate lines of thought. I was talking about legitimate stem cell treatments such as transplantation of human umbilical cord blood derived stem cells or autologous adult stem cell therapy. I did not mention nor intended to mention embryonic stem cell research. I do not condone nor find it appropriate to speak of the two in the same line of thought. It is rather odd that no that you have linked the two here in response to my posting. This discussion should not be about the morality or immorality of stealing life in any form. I believe that I understand embryonic stem cell research and it's mention had no bearing on my posting. It is very sad that it was mixed in with my posting and doing so only continues to confuse the issues.
David Snow

 

[barbara]

David - You misunderstand me. I am not advocating killing anyone or anything. I am simply stating that I do not think that the majority of opponents even understand embryonic stem cell therapy. I did not imply that you didn't understand it. New discoveries are making this a moot point anyway in my opinion. I also wanted to reply to Judy and did not feel I needed to make a separate posting to do this.

 

[barbara]

New research could end embryonic debate

This article is why I say the entire embryonic debate could become a moot point.

Article Date: 03 Mar 2009


New research using skin cells to create cells that appear to be biologically identical to embryonic stem cells could "sidestep the moral and political quagmire that has hindered the development of a new generation of cures," the Washington Post reports. Andras Nagy of Mount Sinai Hospital in Toronto, the lead researcher of the studies published in the journal Nature, said the development of the cells is a "leap forward in the safe application" of skin cells, which he expects could have a "massive impact on this field."

The alternative cells -- known as induced pluripotent stem cells, or IPS cells -- appear similar to embryonic stem cells but can be produced by activating genes in adult cells. Until now, using the cells was labeled as dangerous because viruses were needed to genetically manipulate them, which could lead to cancer if cells were placed in a patient. The researchers were able to develop a safer alternative using strands of genetic material instead of viruses, and tests have shown that the transformed cells had many of the same properties as embryonic stem cells, according to Nagy. Although the scientists did their initial work on skin cells from embryos, they say their approach will be equally efficient on adult skin cells and they plan to begin experiments using this type, the Post reports. This new approach could produce safer cell lines that would be less likely to cause cancer in patients, as well as allow scientists to research cells without the need for a special laboratory for working with viruses. Nagy said, "A much larger number of laboratories will be able to push this field forward." George Daly, a stem cell researcher at Children's Hospital in Boston, called the advance a "major step forward in realizing the value of these cells for medical research." Mark Kay of Stanford University agreed that the advance is significant but added that more research will be needed to prove how safe the alternative is and that there "still may be room for improvement."

The Post reports that the development could lead to changes in the political debate as well as the scientific arena, as scientists "anxiously" await President Obama's move to lift the federal ban on embryonic stem cell research. Critics of lifting the ban said the latest research is evidence that alternative cells make embryonic stem cell research unnecessary. Meanwhile, many scientists, while praising the development as an important advance, say that research into both types of cells is crucial because it remains unclear which type is more useful. Kay said, "No one has cured any disease in people with any of these approaches yet. We don't know enough yet to know which approach will be better" (Stein, Washington Post, 3/2).

Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org.