RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman

RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

ownedgirlie -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/29/2006 10:48:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania Exactly the case Sinergy, I would add that I have heard some religious pundits express that these viable embryos need to be adopted out. So basically if you are an infertile couple that has some frozen embyos around they cannot be destroyed, they have to be adopted out, meaning your genetic offspring are being coopted by others. I have a problem with that concept, not everyone would be comfortable with that. I guess I see this from another point of view. Having a sister who lost 6 pregnancies and ultimately could not have children of her own...I watched her wait 9 years in agony, wanting desperately to be a mom while those around her were tossing out unwanted embryos. It was horribly painful. The waiting list for mothers who want to adopt infants grows longer each year. It's a very sad thing, and not having been able to have children myself, breaks my heart, also. We truly are a throw-away society, in all facets.

WyrdRich -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/29/2006 10:50:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania Grinding babies rhetoric does indeed sound like zealotry to me, but that is my sensiblities. It has the net effect of making me think of Pat Robertson... but that is just me, and my opinion. I have seen enough people with "baby murderer" signs to last me a life time because I used to have to pass the family planning clinic here... and that is the kinda thing they would say Lemme be sure I have this straight, it is OK for Michael J. Fox to shoot commercials or appear before Congress after changing his medication intake and that is reasoned discourse but if I use graphic (and accurate) descriptions to make a point the other way, that is zealotry. Must be nice to have such simplistic world views.

juliaoceania -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/29/2006 10:52:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WyrdRich quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania Grinding babies rhetoric does indeed sound like zealotry to me, but that is my sensiblities. It has the net effect of making me think of Pat Robertson... but that is just me, and my opinion. I have seen enough people with "baby murderer" signs to last me a life time because I used to have to pass the family planning clinic here... and that is the kinda thing they would say Lemme be sure I have this straight, it is OK for Michael J. Fox to shoot commercials or appear before Congress after changing his medication intake and that is reasoned discourse but if I use graphic (and accurate) descriptions to make a point the other way, that is zealotry. Must be nice to have such simplistic world views. Rich, I do not even need to point out all that is wrong with your post, I am sure others will do it for me....

Sinergy -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/29/2006 10:54:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie Why are you implying idiocy, also? My christian sister chose adoption, because she doesn't believe in-vitro, for the very reason of throwing fertilized eggs out. Many, many "Bible Thumpers" have this same view. I proposed in a previous post that umbilical cord stem cells are an alternative, and why can we not compromise and use those? However, that seems to have been overlooked. I was not implying idiocy, ownedgirlie, I was coming right out and stating it. Many Bible Thumpers believe as you do, but many do not believe as you do. The major difference tends to be personal selfishness in desiring one's own DNA comingled bloodline carry on. My personal attitude is that parenting is behavior, not biology. I have two of my own, I would adopt more if I felt the need to have more kids. I have not extensively researched why fetal stem cells are more effective than umbilical stem cells. I find it odd that many scientists seem to feel fetal cells are superior, as evidenced by the fact that most of the stem cell research which is done in the US utilizes the existing fetal stem cell lines. If you would be willing to provide a peer-reviewed study supporting the claim that umbilical stem cells work just as well in all cases as fetal stem cells, I would love to read it. Sinergy edited because on Sinergy is bad enough

juliaoceania -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/29/2006 10:58:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania Exactly the case Sinergy, I would add that I have heard some religious pundits express that these viable embryos need to be adopted out. So basically if you are an infertile couple that has some frozen embyos around they cannot be destroyed, they have to be adopted out, meaning your genetic offspring are being coopted by others. I have a problem with that concept, not everyone would be comfortable with that. I guess I see this from another point of view. Having a sister who lost 6 pregnancies and ultimately could not have children of her own...I watched her wait 9 years in agony, wanting desperately to be a mom while those around her were tossing out unwanted embryos. It was horribly painful. The waiting list for mothers who want to adopt infants grows longer each year. It's a very sad thing, and not having been able to have children myself, breaks my heart, also. We truly are a throw-away society, in all facets. My sister still has no children, both her and her husband are infertile, but their lack of being able to conceive does not entitle them to other people's genetic material. If people choose to do that, good on them, but it should not be forced. Some people do not view an embryo as sentient life, I am one of those people. Once that embryo becomes a fetus and then a born baby, it is a child being reared by people that never consented to giving that child away... I have major issues with that personally

ownedgirlie -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/29/2006 11:18:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy I was not implying idiocy, ownedgirlie, I was coming right out and stating it. Yet quote: Did they turn on their brain when they woke up the morning they had to make this decision? I'm not trying to be argumentative, but to me, that implied idiocy. quote: If you would be willing to provide a peer-reviewed study supporting the claim that umbilical stem cells work just as well in all cases as fetal stem cells, I would love to read it. Um...here are a few, lol. Enjoy! :) NewsScientis: Cord blood yields ethical embryonic cells http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7864 The cushioning material or matrix within the umbilical cord known as Wharton’s jelly is a rich and readily available source of primitive stem cells, according to findings by a research team at Kansas State University. http://www.innovations-report.de/html/berichte/biowissenschaften_chemie/bericht-15818.html UK and US team believe they have found a way round this using cord blood and space technology borrowed from NASA. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4157362.stm Tampa, FL (June 12, 2003) -- Stem cells derived from human umbilical cord blood (HUCB) migrate to damaged areas in the brain and spinal cord caused by disease or injury and provide some therapeutic benefit, two new animal studies by researchers at the University of South Florida Center of Excellence in Aging and Brain Repair found. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/06/030617081312.htm Stem cell transplants from disposable umbilical cord blood provide new hope for leukemia patients http://www.mcw.edu/display/router.asp?docid=7510 Umbilical cord matrix, a rich new stem cell source, study shows http://www.scienceblog.com/community/older/2003/F/20033573.html Umbilical Cord Matrix a Rich New Stem Cell Source, Study Shows. http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-96512263.html ClinicalStudies.gov – a current study which ran from March, 2001 to February, 2006, for the purpose of treatment of sickle cell anemia. National Institutes of Health Clinical Center http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00012545 Various conclusions from National Institutes for Health (NIH): http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=17068185&query_hl=2&itool=pubmed_docsum http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?itool=abstractplus&db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=abstractplus&list_uids=16051923 The alpha(IIb)beta(3) integrin and GPIb-V-IX complex identify distinct stages in the maturation of CD34(+) cord blood cells to megakaryocytes. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=11110688&query_hl=9&itool=pubmed_docsum INTRODUCTION: Umbilical cord blood (CB) has been used as an alternative source for haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in recent years. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=15531951&query_hl=9&itool=pubmed_docsum The high proliferative potential of cord blood (CB) stem cells and the identification of the key factor of megakaryopoiesis, thrombopoietin (TPO), permit the ex vivo expansion of megakaryocytes (MKs) for possible use in early post-transplant support of patients and the production of functional platelets for transfusion. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=12804177&query_hl=9&itool=pubmed_docsum Umbilical cord blood (UCB) is now commonly used as a source of stem cells for hematopoietic reconstitution following myeloablative therapy in patients with a variety of diseases. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=11454314&query_hl=9&itool=pubmed_docsum I could go on. I suggest hanging out on that site awhile – there are 6 pages of Clinical Studies on the subject.

ownedgirlie -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/29/2006 11:20:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania My sister still has no children, both her and her husband are infertile, but their lack of being able to conceive does not entitle them to other people's genetic material. If people choose to do that, good on them, but it should not be forced. Some people do not view an embryo as sentient life, I am one of those people. Once that embryo becomes a fetus and then a born baby, it is a child being reared by people that never consented to giving that child away... I have major issues with that personally I said nothing about entitlement. I said I was sensitive to the issue because of the reason I stated. Nor did I say anything about forcing anyone. I simply think the choices to toss out embryos is unfortunate.

juliaoceania -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/29/2006 11:30:01 AM)
quote: I said nothing about entitlement. I said I was sensitive to the issue because of the reason I stated. I did not state that you said people were entitled to do this, but my original comment about Fundies that want to make these embryos adoptable would give people an entitlement to adopt excess embryos I see it from both sides of the coin as having someone that I love whom is childless, but having my own child too, I would not like the idea of my biological offspring out there and not rearing them and having them in my life, that is how I feel about it. quote: Nor did I say anything about forcing anyone. I simply think the choices to toss out embryos is unfortunate. My original comment that you responded to was about forcing people to give their genetic material to others, so you responded to me, and I responded back in kind. It is one thing to liken the waste of trees, animal life, and natural resources to a throw-a-way society. It is another thing in my mind to say people are just casually tossing away their genetic material out like yesterday's trash because they are squicked about the idea of numerous biological children running around that they will never know... I do not think that it is throwing away anymore than I would think of it as throwing away when people do not donate their organs, each person has an individual choice about their tissue and what they want done with it.

ownedgirlie -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/29/2006 11:34:58 AM)
We're going to have to agree to disagree on this subject. Any further comments I make will hijack the thread even more than we already have.

Level -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/29/2006 11:40:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania quote: I said nothing about entitlement. I said I was sensitive to the issue because of the reason I stated. I did not state that you said people were entitled to do this, but my original comment about Fundies that want to make these embryos adoptable would give people an entitlement to adopt excess embryos It seems you critize those "fundies" for both being unwilling to care for the unborn, and for being willing to adopt them and care for them. "It seems like the very people that are so upset by abortion and stem cell research tend to not want to pay for those babies to have medical care and food stamps... it is rather hypocritical, love all the babies until they are born indeed."

juliaoceania -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/29/2006 11:44:09 AM)
Hmmmm.... there are many children that are unadoptable, seems everyone wants a baby BTW, Sinergy and I have discussed foster parenting for this very reason, there are many kids no one wants... and they are not cells in a petri dish, they are full fledged needy kids from broken environments... kids that just need a safe place to be and a little kindness Some of the people that rant and rave about abortion do help kids like these, I am not under the impression that Rush is one of them.

Sinergy -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/29/2006 11:45:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy I was not implying idiocy, ownedgirlie, I was coming right out and stating it. Yet quote: Did they turn on their brain when they woke up the morning they had to make this decision? I'm not trying to be argumentative, but to me, that implied idiocy. quote: If you would be willing to provide a peer-reviewed study supporting the claim that umbilical stem cells work just as well in all cases as fetal stem cells, I would love to read it. Um...here are a few, lol. Enjoy! :) [snipped study links] I could go on. I suggest hanging out on that site awhile – there are 6 pages of Clinical Studies on the subject. Thank you for the lovely site. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1997/06/970606123807.htm This one study by Maria Michejda Ph.D at Georgetown shows that fetal bone marrow (where stem cells are made) is eight times more effective than umbilical cord blood stem cells, and 23 times more effective than adult bone marrow. The point I made was that there is a scientific reason why fetal stem cells are more effective than umbilical stem cells, so it is not a case where either one works just as well as the other. The question of ethics then becomes "Do we use fetal stem cells to cure disease a certain percentage of the time, or accept the fact that only 1/8 of those attempts to cure a disease done with umbilical stem cells will be effective" My question to people who would say "Of course we should use umbilical cord stem cells" would be to ask them if they had to make the choice of which to use to save their own or their own child's life, which would they choose? Sinergy

Level -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/29/2006 11:51:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania Hmmmm.... there are many children that are unadoptable, seems everyone wants a baby BTW, Sinergy and I have discussed foster parenting for this very reason, there are many kids no one wants... and they are not cells in a petri dish, they are full fledged needy kids from broken environments... kids that just need a safe place to be and a little kindness Helping the helpless is a good thing, julia, and I commend you guys or anyone else that does so. Some of the people that rant and rave about abortion do help kids like these, I am not under the impression that Rush is one of them. I don't know what Rush does with his money, as far as charities go. I hope he is generous.

Archer -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/29/2006 11:56:09 AM)
This one study by Maria Michejda Ph.D at Georgetown shows that fetal bone marrow (where stem cells are made) is eight times more effective than umbilical cord blood stem cells, and 23 times more effective than adult bone marrow. Just as a matter of bringing it back on track of the OP (3) No stem cells may be taken from a human blastocyst more than fourteen days after cell division begins; provided, however, that time during which a blastocyst is frozen does not count against the fourteen-day limit. Would seem that the 23 times better samples are still not to be workable since Fetal stage will not be reached. Since it's the proposed law that is at the core here's the source document. (You know how I am about source documents, LOL) http://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/2006petitions/ppStemCell.asp Now at least folks will have the actual proposed law to debate as opposed to what the various pundants want to have us believe about the proposed law.

ownedgirlie -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/29/2006 11:59:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy Thank you for the lovely site. You are welcome. quote: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1997/06/970606123807.htm This one study by Maria Michejda Ph.D at Georgetown shows that fetal bone marrow (where stem cells are made) is eight times more effective than umbilical cord blood stem cells, and 23 times more effective than adult bone marrow. I listed many current sites that are studying the opposite, and you listed one study, conducted 9 years ago, that suggests otherwise. I think some progress has been made since 1997. Mind you, I am not saying one is better than the other. I was asking the question of why no one seems to be discussing it. quote: The point I made was that there is a scientific reason why fetal stem cells are more effective than umbilical stem cells, so it is not a case where either one works just as well as the other. I'm not sure this is correct anymore, with current information. I would be interested to know, either way, actually. quote: The question of ethics then becomes "Do we use fetal stem cells to cure disease a certain percentage of the time, or accept the fact that only 1/8 of those attempts to cure a disease done with umbilical stem cells will be effective" Indeed it is an ethical question. But I don't know if the 1/8 scenario is still factual. quote: My question to people who would say "Of course we should use umbilical cord stem cells" would be to ask them if they had to make the choice of which to use to save their own or their own child's life, which would they choose? I suppose it would depend on how they feel about the issue, and their sense of ethics.

LotusSong -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/29/2006 12:01:59 PM)
Why is it "God's Will" that knowledge to cure human illnesses can be manipulated by the dogma of a religion.. and infertility is not viewed as "God's Will" also and those that are, will just have to live with it? When the first test tube baby was proposed.. that was all "OH no we are playing GOD!!!!". Now it is common place. And hey.if a few embryos don't' take hold and die.. hey.. tough luck- try again. There is a story- A man is swept away by a raging river but struggled to grasp a tree branch and hold on. He prayed for help. His friend threw him a life saver. The man yelled "No.. God will save me!" as it floated down the river. A boat came to him and the man was tossed a rope. "Grab the rope and I'll save you!" "No!" the man replied.. "God will save me!". The boater floated away. Then the man prayed again "God SAVE ME!" and a helicopter appeared overhead with a bullhorn blaring as they lowered a rescue basket" "GET IN- we can save you!" The man yelled back "NO! GOD WILL SAVE ME!!" The helicopter flew off. The man could no longer hang on and drowned in the raging river. He appeared at the gates of Heaven where God was waiting for him. The man lamented "God I believed in you.. I prayed to you.. I obeyed all your laws! WHY did you let me die? Why didn't you send HELP!??" God said "I sent the lifesaver and you refused. I sent the rope and you refused. When you refused the helicopter, I just figured the heck with it". I pray the stem cell research isn't treated the same way. People deserve hope. If I could, I'd offer you opponents of this research one hour.. no 15 minutes, in my body to see how you would cope.

ownedgirlie -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/29/2006 12:04:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LotusSong I pray the stem cell research isn't treated the same way. People deserve hope. If I could, I'd offer you opponents of this research one hour.. no 15 minutes, in my body to see how you would cope. And I continue to ask the unanswered question - if a medical situation can be resolved by umbilical cord blood cells, would you use that over fetal cells?

Archer -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/29/2006 12:04:45 PM)
Major problem many have stated in the law is it gives a foot in the door to human cloaning. While it says at first cloneing will be banned. "(1) No person may clone or attempt to clone a human being" It later goes on to define cloaning only as implanting cloned human cells into a uterus. Leaving clones grown outside a body (I know it's still science fiction to grow them to full sized) but it is allowing cloned human cells to be used for research with the same restrictions on any other stem cell blastocyst. So they will be permitted to clone human blastocysts. I'm torn on the issue personally.

ownedgirlie -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/29/2006 12:06:37 PM)
I saw a documentary years ago that kind of freaked me out. Scientists were cloning human body parts on animals. They showed film of a live lab rat which had a human ear growing off its back. Science fiction isn't so fictional anymore!! Edited to spell animal correctly :)

Archer -> RE: Rush, Fox, and Olberman (10/29/2006 12:09:53 PM)
I've seen that as well it was a sidestep around the no cloning entire humans law. A step trying to grow replacement parts cloned from the person who needed them. We need the moral arguments now rather than when the science is avaliable though so that we don't end up with the SciFi channel movies becomming real. There are moral choices to be made with this issue, who's morals win the day remains to be seen.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125