Common Sense on Stem Cell Research

[westcoastdog]

1. We live in a capitalist society. Many countries in the world are investing heavily in stem cell research. Do we want a French or Chinese drug company to find a stem cell cure for Parkinson's disease and reap billions in profits?

2. Bush43 has authorized federal funds for existing stem cell lines, which were obtained from infertile couples. In other words, people with patently defective genes. If you were going to receive stem cells, wouldn't you rather receive cells from individuals with an outstanding genetic history.

People oppose stem cell research on religious grounds. I would like them to sign a public oath that they would refuse stem cell treatment that would save their life or cure a serious illness. Or is that too much sacrifice? For you opponents out there, would you rather die than accept stem cells taken from embryos? I'm sorry but life isn't always fair.

I posted my opinion in the political section because opponents have made it a political issue, not a scientific one.

Prediction: If one foreign drug company develops a stem cell treatment that cures a disease and reaps hundreds of millions of dollars in profits, the Republican party will immediately remove all restrictions on federal grants.

[Scribbler1]

You may be right, but I think that since the multibillion doolar pharmaceutical companies are international in nature it may not play that way.
If there is an American component in whichever company that discovers anything of use, I think it would be available here as many other medical breakthroughs already are.

[unicx]

Ok, so there are other countries with more "liberal" rules as to stem cell research and the USA has a more restricted policy. Assuming the important part of this debate is that stem cell research can be used to potentially save lives. Then even if the USA doesn't perfect it, some other country is allowed to and will. And since theoretically if another country perfects it and it becomes a means in which to save lives the USA will... in turn begin to accept and allow it in a more "liberal" fashion.

Prediction: If one foreign drug company develops a stem cell treatment that cures a disease and reaps hundreds of millions of dollars in profits, the Republican party will immediately remove all restrictions on federal grants.

As you've "predicted", which for the record i agree.
So, either way whether the USA allows it now or not, stem cell research is being done, which should be the important part.

1. We live in a capitalist society. Many countries in the world are investing heavily in stem cell research. Do we want a French or Chinese drug company to find a stem cell cure for Parkinson's disease and reap billions in profits?

What's wrong with the "French or Chinese" reaping all the profits, I'm sure they could also use it.
The important issue here should not be "who" gets the money for it in the end. And heck if you're going to talk about that, whichever country comes up with it deserves it, the USA is not the only country with a deficit. Other countries need money too. And America should not be so "big-headed" as to believe that we need to reap the profit for everything.

[Compugasm]

1. Isn't the whole argument against a drug monopoly? What good is a patent on something you can't produce (because it's a low paying factory job) and can't sell (because it's 2.5x the price)?

2. I'm afraid your going to have to state medical credentials to even make that claim. If you don't have those credientials, you'll have to source one, and who that person works for.

[unicx]

1. Isn't the whole argument against a drug monopoly? What good is a patent on something you can't produce (because it's a low paying factory job) and can't sell (because it's 2.5x the price)?

You are exactly correct. To me it is just sad that you could put a price on someones' life or well being, but it happens all the time and that's the way things have to work in order to live in the type of society we do. The fact that something so morally wrong has to be part of the world (as is the same with war) will just always be something that bothers me as well as i'm sure most everyone else.

[Compugasm]

From what I understand, the bans have to do with separation of Church and State. I'm not surprised, considering the mere mention of a cross provokes ACLU lawsuits. Yea! no prayer in school, but no cures either.

What if a group of Muslims produce a life saving medication, would you sign a public oath that Allah(swt) is God, and you swear your undying love to him? You might think that sounds silly, but it will happen soon. It's their belief that Allah gave that knowledge, and to not use it, would be a crime.

[unicx]

If swearing my undying love to Allah in front of everyone and signing a legal document stating that is what i would have to do to save lives then yes i would. I would be lying through my teeth and people might judge me but the overall outcome would be worth it. The bans make sense to me though, but i am glad that if in fact other countries are furthering it more than we are, that they are doing so

[westcoastdog]

Folks, you read my posting through your own tinted perspectives and missed my main points. Sometimes the hardest things to perceive are the obvious. Medical expertise? I'm describing the country you live in, its culture and values. My "medical information" is from the newspapers and science magazines, and is trivial rather than erudite or esoteric. The federally authorized stem cell lines are derived from the embryos of infertile couples.

Unicx, you seem to be opposed to the use of stem cells from embryos. Would you refuse treatment from this type of stem cells if it would save your life or the life of your child?

Fortunately, you won't have to face this question any time soon (and I hope never), but in a decade or two, if one believes scientists, stem cells will be used to cure diseases. Having followed medical research for investment purposes since the seventies, my own opinion is 15-20 years away. Drug research produces more hype than results because it is expensive and companies have to attract investors. However, science is inexorable, like glacier, moving in centimeters and inches but always moving, progressing.

[tusaki]

Heh, if it is possible to find a cure for certain types of diseases using stem cells, god obviously wanted it so. "Thou shall not kill" - does that include NOT researching potential treatments?

But as unicx said, these things will be researched. somewhere, somehow, and the results will become available on the market.

[Compugasm]

Originally posted by westcoastdog,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (westcoastdog,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>you read my posting through your own tinted perspectives...Having followed medical research for investment purposes since the seventies[/b]

Ah, I see clearly now?
<!--QuoteBegin-westcoastdog,
Drug research produces more hype than results because it is expensive and companies have to attract investors. However, science is inexorable, like glacier, moving in centimeters and inches but always moving, progressing.[/quote]
We all realize this. Separation of Church and State works against your objective though.

[westcoastdog]

Separation of Church and State? The Catholic and some Protestant churches want to impose their rules and laws on the entire population. They have the ear of Bush43, who doesn't listen to scientists and is a creationist (no kidding). It's one of the oddities of politics that conservatives who want to minimize government want government to enforce their version of morality.

[Compugasm]

Separation of Church and State? The Jewish and some Muslim churches want to impose their rules and laws on the entire population. They have the ear of Kerry, who doesn't listen to Christians and is a communist (no kidding). It's one of the oddities of politics that liberals who want to maximize government want government to enforce their version of morality.

[westcoastdog]

Compugasm,

Kerry listens to Jews and Moslems? And communists?! LOL. Were you drunk or stoned when you made those accusations about Kerry, who is Catholic and is married to a devout Catholic (read the New Yorker bio on her)? Sharon has a direct line to Bush43, and Perl and Wolfowitz are in his cabal.

Refresh my memory. What proposals has Kerry advocated that represent Jewish or Moslem positions? I can't think of any. Kerry represents the most liberal state in the union, a state that is heavily Catholic, and he votes for liberal measures. If he didn't, he wouldn't be senator.

My comments about Bush43 are not unique or off the wall. It's common knowledge that the religious right have made him their saint, and he wears his religion like chevrons on his sleeve.

Regarding my comment about his disregard for the opinions of scientists, about six months ago a number of top scientists signed a statement accusing his administration of suppressing scientific findings and ignoring others. This protest is unprecedented.

I ask you again, what Kerry positions represent a specific sectarian position?

[Compugasm]

I don't care what Kerry's position is. Nor do I care what Bush's position is. I through in some random nouns into a re-iteration of your last post, as a demonstration of the futility in the argument. If you want discussion in cabals, evil catholics or Pot-Kettle-Black arguments... I'm not doing it when you've got your hand in the deep pocket. My last post stands, as is.

[westcoastdog]

Compugasm,

Wild accusations without an ounce of evidence. Tsk. Tsk. In Woodward's latest book, Bush43 says that he doesn't have to answer any questions or explain because he is the president. So, you, in the anonymity of the Internet, say I can post the looniest things my imagination creates; so what if the website is dedicated to serious discourse. Ah! I understand. Internet graffiti! I deface therefore I exist!

[bishop]

i might be mistaken here, but can't private companies do whatever research on stem cells that they want? i always thought they could and that companies that wanted federal funding had to abide by bush's rules.

It's one of the oddities of politics that liberals who want to maximize government want government to enforce their version of morality.

not exactly.. i support federal aid for stem cell research (i also support increased federal funding for alternative energy research), because it's in our interests to do so. if we fail to develop something in that field, another country certainly will. our refusal to choose conservative "morality" over economic reality is not in our nation's interests.

restricting research of stem cells, not supporting the development of alternative energies, etc... these are all examples of things the government is doing that's lowering our competitive edge in the world. some of their motivation against change is political (ex. the bible thumpers), some of it is mercantalist (ex. the oil companies).

stem cell research makes good economic sense. and, this research can also save many lives as well.

[Compugasm]

WestCoastDog, I might be able to prove it, but 15yrs in the business, and it never crossed your mind? If you had a doubt, I might have a chance. But Cabals, evil catholics, and your Invisible Hand™ economics is no place for me to begin a "Common Sense discussion of Stem Cell Research". I certainly won't be able to convice you otherwise on a messageboard. So, you win the argument. I'm rolling over. I concede. Taken a dive. I resign.

[bishop]

what's the problem??? westcoast wasn't inciting any arguments. dude was just trying to invite some debate.

[westcoastdog]

This thread digressed, perhaps unavoidably, from the political influence of religious groups on stem cell research to their general influence on the president. Regarding stem cell research, private companies who do not receive federal funds have no restrictions. The fed limitations affect mainly university scientists. In California there is a proposition authorizing the State to raise $3 billion dollars for stem cell research, and it appears to have a good chance of passing.

There has been strong religious opposition to contraception (still illegal in Ireland, I believe) and abortion. Having lost those two battles, the religious right is now engaged in another losing battle against stem cell research. I say losing because their war will be lost with the first successful stem cell treatment for a major disease. Republicans will destroy any obstacle that prevents them from making profits, especially the huge profits from drugs.

[Flobie]

I have found the following information to be extremely useful in deciding against embryonic stem cell research and pushing more for adult stem cell research, as it shows more promise.

"To date, current research on embryonic stem cells has resulted in no promising results. Ironically, a leading pro-ESCR advocate is the Juvenile Diabetes Foundation, but ESCR research has failed in fighting this disease.

Past supporters of this controversial research are now speaking out about the false hype surrounding the results. The San Francisco Chronicle recently reported that doubters are coming out of the woodwork. Paul Billings, who studied stem cells’ effects and co-founded a stem cell bank, said that hopes for major new medical treatments based on embryonic stem cells are “very remote”. “The problems are so complex that we’re not likely to be able to tackle them with the stem cell gambit in the foreseeable future.”

Researchers in China met with a disastrous result. Fetal tissue injected into a patient’s brain produced temporary improvement, but within two years the patient developed a brain tumor and died. An autopsy revealed that the fetal cells had taken root, but had then metamorphed into other types of human tissue – hair, skin and bone. These grew into the tumor, which killed the patient.

A devastating result occurred at Columbia University’s College of Physicians and Surgeons, and was published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

In some of the patients, the implanted embryonic cells apparently grew too well, churning out so much of a chemical that controls movement that they writhed and jerked uncontrollably. Dr. Paul E. Greene called the uncontrollable movements developed by some patients as “absolutely devastating.” He said, “They chew constantly, their fingers go up and down, their writs flex and distend. It’s a real nightmare. And we can’t selectively turn it off. No more fetal transplants. We are absolutely and adamantly convinced that this should be considered for research only.”

In stark contrast to the failures of embryonic stem cell research, the future looks very promising for treatment with adult stem cells.

The following are examples of research breakthroughs with adult stem cells. Please note that this list is only a sampling.

-Researchers at Harvard Medical School say adult stem cells may eliminate the need for embryonic ones. The researchers experienced a permanent reversal of Type 1 diabetes in mice by killing the cells responsible for the diabetes. The animals’ adult stem cells took over and regenerated missing cells needed to produce insulin and eliminate the disease. The results hold promise for rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis, lupus and more than 50 other ailments.

-At the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, a man with a rare, potentially fatal skin disorder that was so severe that he could no longer eat, is now symptom-free after receiving a transplant of his own adult stem cells.

-Doctors at Northwestern Memorial Hospital in Chicago extracted the adult stem cells from the blood of two Crohn’s patients and successfully used them to rebuild their faulty immune systems.

-Dr. Edward Holland of the Northern Kentucky Eye Laser Center in the greater Cincinnati metropolitan area, is using adult stem cell transplants as part of a treatment to dramatically improve the eyesight of his patients.

-New research in the UK on rats indicates that transplants of adult stem cells can help stroke victims regain movement, senses and understanding. They also show that the adult cells were more effective than cells from aborted babies.

-The Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York came to similar conclusions.
A study by the Institute for Stem Cell Research in Milan, Italy showed that certain cells from the brains of adult rats can be used to generate muscular tissue.
Researchers at the University of South Florida in Tampa have found that adult stem cells from the umbilical cord blood may be able to help repair damaged brain tissue after a stroke.

-Scientists at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of NJ have found that bone marrow cells may be converted into replacement nerve cells, able to treat brain and nerve injuries. Dr. Ira Black and his team were able to convert 80% of the bone marrow cells into nerve cells.


-Forbes Magazine provided additional confirmation that adult stem cell research is far more successful that embryonic stem cell experimentation. In their September 3, 2001 issue, page 36, they quoted an article printed in the Wall Street Journal Europe by Richard Miniter.

“Of the 15 US biotech companies solely devoted to developing cures using stem cells, only two focus on embryos. Embryo stem cell research is at the drawing-board stage – not for lack of funds but for lack of promising research to finance. Venture capitalists have no agenda beyond making money; if they see embryo projects that are likely to bear fruit over the next five to seven years – the usual VC time horizon – they will fund them. That the market is speaking so loudly against embryo stem cell research probably explains why embryo researchers are so eager to reverse the ban on government funding.”

Diane Irving, Ph.D., a former professor of biology at Georgetown University and former biochemist with the National Cancer Institute, said, “I have argued that adult stem cells are better because they are closer to the stage of differentiation than embryonic or fetal cells – therefore they do not have as long a distance to travel differentiation-wise as the younger cells. Therefore there is far less of a chance for genetic errors to be accumulated in the implanted cells and less side effects for the patient to deal with.”

Cloning holds even less promise for success than research with embryonic stem cells does. It took 277 attempts to get Dolly. Scientists estimate an overall failure rate for cloning farm animals is 95% or greater. One shudders to think how many living human embryos will be sacrificed in attempts to clone humans."