Log in

View Full Version : Stem Cell Research - May Not Need Human Embryos


Vampyr
08-22-2005, 04:53 PM
Not that I was against it anyway...but it might make things easier.

WASHINGTON (Aug. 22) - Harvard scientists announced they've discovered a way to fuse adult skin cells with embryonic stem cells, a promising and dramatic breakthrough that could lead to the creation of useful stem cells without first having to create and destroy human embryos.

Members of the research team were to discuss their findings Monday. Preliminary results of the potentially groundbreaking research were disclosed Sunday on the Science magazine web site.

The scientists said they were able to show in their early research that the fused cell "was reprogrammed to its embryonic state."

"If future experiments indicate that this reprogrammed state is retained after removing the embryonic stem cell DNA - currently a formidable technical hurdle - the hybrid cells could theoretically be used to produce embryonic stem cells lines that are tailored to individual patients without the need to create and destroy human embryos," said a summary of the research reported on the Science site.

That could lead to creation of stem cells without having to use human eggs or make new human embryos in the process, thereby sidestepping much of the controversy over stem cell research.

The Harvard researchers used laboratory grown human embryonic stem cells - such as the ones that President Bush has already approved for use by federally funded researchers - to essentially convert a skin cell into an embryonic stem cell itself.

If a number of hurdles can be overcome in subsequent research, the new technique "may circumvent some of the logistical and societal concerns" that have hampered much of the research in this country, Chad A. Cowan, Kevin Eggan and colleagues from the Harvard Stem Cell Institute report in the Science article.

Those social concerns are reflected in the Senate's looming debate over a House-passed bill to force taxpayers to fund stem cell research that would destroy human embryos, legislation President Bush has promised to veto. Bush and many fellow conservatives believe it is immoral to create embryos only to destroy them, even in the name of scientific progress that could cure or treat diseases afflicting millions of people.

Debate and a vote on the bill will proceed next month as planned, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist's spokeswoman, Amy Call, said Monday. Frist earlier this month said he will vote for the bill, widely expected to pass even in the face of Bush's veto threat.

The hybrid cells created by the Harvard team "had the appearance, growth rate, and several key genetic characteristics of human embryonic cells," the summary of their work said.

"They also behaved like embryonic cells, differentiating into cells from each of the three main tissue types that form in a developing embryo. The authors conclude that human embryonic cells have the ability to reprogram adult cell chromosomes following cell fusion."


http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20050822085309990002&ncid=NWS00010000000001

Dyne
08-22-2005, 06:11 PM
At this rate, I hope they find a real cure for cancer soon. I mean, first the alligator-HIV thing, now this. Human technological development is rising exponentially these days.

Jonbo298
08-22-2005, 06:23 PM
I dont care how its done, as long as it cures. Screw your religious beliefes. If it serves the greater humanity for cures, use it.

Xantar
08-22-2005, 06:28 PM
It's kind of funny watching the news article railing against the immorality of creating an embryo just to destroy it later and harvest stem cells, especially considering that nobody was proposing that we do that in the first place. All anybody wanted to do, in case you didn't know, was use stem cells from embryos in fertility clinics that were going to destroy the embryos anyway.

I wonder if the Associated Press really put in all that stuff about forcing taxpayers to fund the destruction of embryos.

Jason1
08-22-2005, 09:09 PM
Yea, I honestly dont understand people who are against stem cell research. I mean what, would you rather they just throw the embryos in the trash? Flush them down the toilet perhaps? Or use them to save lives?

Professor S
08-23-2005, 01:02 AM
It's kind of funny watching the news article railing against the immorality of creating an embryo just to destroy it later and harvest stem cells, especially considering that nobody was proposing that we do that in the first place. All anybody wanted to do, in case you didn't know, was use stem cells from embryos in fertility clinics that were going to destroy the embryos anyway.

I wonder if the Associated Press really put in all that stuff about forcing taxpayers to fund the destruction of embryos.

I have never had a problem with science using existing stem cells from fertility clinics and other means as long as long as the embryos were intended to create life. To simply let them go to waste would be silly and would not let something good happen from a noble intention that never came to pass. I am very much against the creation of embyos for the intention of destruction, though, as that would be abhorrent in my eyes. Life has already lost too much value in modern times.

Now on face value I am all for use of these embryos, but then again is everything as it seems on face value? Are these discarded embryos donated or do the clinics charge the research companies for them? If the fertility clinics are charging for them, that is a whole different ethical ball of wax and the whole system could be corrupt and rife with abuses.

Example: A fertility clinic charges for each embryo sent to a fertility clinic. So to make more of a profit, the clinic creates far more embryos than it could ever use for creation of life so it can sell the excess to the research companies for a profit. So there you have what is essentially a black market based on the creation of embryos for the intent of destruction.

Once again, I don't know whether or not this is happening, but it is a subject that should be examined. I'm all for the use of these embryos as long as no form of moneys are exchanged in the process.

Jonbo298
08-23-2005, 01:23 AM
People say you shouldnt destroy life but yet not letting life die is whats causing the earth to slowly get overpopulated. Whens the last time the global populatoin fell :p

Happydude
08-23-2005, 08:07 AM
hopefully they will be able to find the cures for all the most dangerous deseases soon...

Neo
08-23-2005, 08:39 AM
hopefully they will be able to find the cures for all the most dangerous deseases soon...

If they did that we would then have to find a cure for overpopulation that doesn't start with the letter "g."

Professor S
08-23-2005, 12:19 PM
People make far too big of a deal about overpopulation. The situation will take care of itself over time. I was watching Bill Nye (yes, the Science Guy) just the other day and he said that if the child to parent ratio drops from 2.5 to 1.7, we will be down to 3 Billion people on the planet (which is ideal) in just two generations. This is a blink of an eye in world history terms.

The child to parent ratio is already dropping in many western nations, and it will follow in the rest of the world over time as well.

Using overpopulation as an excuse to condone destruction of life in this case is silly anyway, as you are essentially destroying the life to extend anothers.

Dylflon
08-23-2005, 02:55 PM
I'm with Strangler here.

Due to cost of living and the fact that we've settled in as first world nations, western countries are producing less babies.

Throughout history, countries that start developing exponentially experience population booms. As soon as China and India get themselves set up I'm sure they'll start having less kids too.



Even the three child family in my parts is becomming somewhat rare. Now if I see a family with a lot of kids, I assume they're catholic. :p