Stem cells nurture damaged spine: study

[9sublime]

Are you? Or do you just pick and choose?

Pretty much his tactic on everything to do with politics. He hears what he wants.

 

[Coyote]

Pretty much his tactic on everything to do with politics. He hears what he wants.

Oh...is that why he resorts to personal attacks then?

 

[palerider]

The topic of this thread is human stemcell research is it not? Therefor why is it necessary to qualify blastocyst, embryo and fetus with the term "human" - it is what it is. I have also never denied it is a member of the species "homosapiens" have I?

Because human beings is exactly what they are and killing them for the purpose of medical research is exactly what it is.

 

[Coyote]

Because human beings is exactly what they are and killing them for the purpose of medical research is exactly what it is.

In your opinion.

 

[palerider]

If you have read my posts on other boards then you can see that my thoughts evolve and I am capable of changing my mind.

Are you? Or do you just pick and choose?

My thoughts are the product of a thorough evolution. At one time, I was, if not pro choice, one who really didn't care one way or another. I encountered someone in a discussion that knew the science backwards, forwards, and sideways.

As you probably can guess, I am not one who likes to be wrong. I devoted more time an engergy than I would like to admit to research aimed specifically at proving to the "pompous bastard" that unborns were not human beings. I visited the librarys of no less than 6 medical universities to read textbooks on the subjects of embryology and human developmental biology.

The more I learned and the deeper I dug, the more undeniable became that the offspring of two human beings is a human being at whatever stage of development it happens to be in. Being a thinking person I had two options. I could either stop being a thinking person and continue to argue that unborns were not human beings and completely ignore the mountains of research that I had done, or I could adjust my views to what every available shred of credible science clearly said.

There are two positions here. Either you favor killing human beings for the purpose of experimenting on them or you do not. That is the discussion boiled down to its essential truth. Squirm and equivocate as much as you like, but you simply can not escape that most basic truth.

That being said. Now. Do you favor killing human beings for the purpose of medical experiments?

 

[palerider]

There is a difference between "began in earnest" and the beginning of research.

According to http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=history+of+stemcell+research&btnG=Google+Search, adult stemcell research was beiing done prior to 1980's in attempting to treat leukemia. A lot of the groundwork was already laid by the time research began in earnest. The same argument can be said for fetal stemcell research however - from what I have read, fetal stemcells behave very differently then adult stemcells.

They were feeding bone marrow by mouth for God's sake. That hardly reaches the level of research in earnest or any sort of groundbreaking. Feeding bone marrow by mouth to cure leukemia is right up there with carrying posies in your pocket to ward of the plague.

What is also comes down to is why exactly must it be an either/or argument? Why not conduct research on both until it is clear that one is a dead end? I don't happen to think that it is yet.

Because in order to continue the research, it is necessary to keep killing human beings. It is clear by now that you aren't going to be able to demonstrate in any credible way that unborns are not human beings. I don't favor killing human beings for medical research. Do you or don't you?

In addition - from what I've read, embryonic stemcells behave very differently from adult stemcells and this is causing problems.

Yes they behave very differently. They are completely unpredictable and they will continue to be until we can read strands of DNA like you read text on this screen and that is not going to be for a very very very long time if ever.

Since you seem to know my views on abortion - perhaps you'd like to tell me what they are? Or are you going to cherry pick through them and twist them out of context - without the guts to actually debate them head on?

Anyone who cares to do a quick bit of research can find them. You aren't very difficult to follow across the net.

 

[palerider]

Oh...is that why he resorts to personal attacks then?

Point out a personal attack keeping in mind that a personal attack is an attack in lieu of an argument.

 

[palerider]

In your opinion.

My opinion is corroborated by credible science. Yours, on the other hand...

 

[palerider]

Pretty much his tactic on everything to do with politics. He hears what he wants.

So sayeth the king of the one liners. Do you have anything to contribute to the conversation or are you just here to snipe?

 

[Coyote]

They were feeding bone marrow by mouth for God's sake. That hardly reaches the level of research in earnest or any sort of groundbreaking. Feeding bone marrow by mouth to cure leukemia is right up there with carrying posies in your pocket to ward of the plague.

Read further.

Because in order to continue the research, it is necessary to keep killing human beings.

Your opinion.

It is clear by now that you aren't going to be able to demonstrate in any credible way that unborns are not human beings.

Your opinion.

I don't favor killing human beings for medical research. Do you or don't you?

My opinion on this is evolving but in general, I don't favor the killing of any human being for any reason - that's my personal opinion. But I also don't consider a homosapiens blastocyst to be a human being.

Yes they behave very differently. They are completely unpredictable and they will continue to be until we can read strands of DNA like you read text on this screen and that is not going to be for a very very very long time if ever.

All the more reason to continue research. There have been tremendous and rapid advances made in genetics research recently. Just because something appears complex and unpredictable does not mean in can not be unraveled and is not a sufficient reason to quit researching it.

Anyone who cares to do a quick bit of research can find them. You aren't very difficult to follow across the net.

I don't try to be.

 

[Coyote]

My opinion is corroborated by credible science. Yours, on the other hand...

What credible science do you have to support your opinions that:

A homosapiens blastocyst is a full fledged "human being"?

Fonz offered credible scientific evidence on the neurological development of conscience which some feel defines a "human being". You totally disregard that.

I offer evidence that fetal stemcell research has not been going on for very long, and that lack of federal funding and political regulation has severely restricted what can be done. You offer nothing more then your opinion on the funding aspect. You basically state that because it has not yet shown the promise that adult stemcells have shown it should be stopped despite the fact that fetal stemcells behave very differently and more research is needed.

 

[Coyote]

Point out a personal attack keeping in mind that a personal attack is an attack in lieu of an argument.

Why should I keep that in mind? A personal attack is a personal attack.

Your use of the words is aimed to dehumanize a human being so that you may do with them as you will, thus making you no better than a klansman shouting ni*ger or a nazi pointing and screaming juden.

Be a grown up and face yourself for what you are.

 

[Coyote]

This argument is a loser as well coyote. By your own
Don't lie. This isn't the only place you post. Your views on abortion are no secret.

I stated I am neither pro nor con. If you truely read my posts you would know that. I think even Cheshire Cat will support me on this.

My personal feelings on my personal choices are one thing.

Forcing those choices on another person quite another.

 

[9sublime]

My opinion is corroborated by credible science. Yours, on the other hand...

On the topic of one liners. Christ all bloody mighty your a hypocrite arn't you. Sorry, I'll stop with the one liners anyway.

 

[palerider]

What credible science do you have to support your opinions that:

A homosapiens blastocyst is a full fledged "human being"?

I have brought references from medical textbooks on the subjects of embryology and human developmental biology.

Fonz offered credible scientific evidence on the neurological development of conscience which some feel defines a "human being". You totally disregard that.

Fonz brought forward a companion book to a developmental biology textbook that offered topics for discussion and contradicted his position as much as it supported it because it made clear that it was only presenting various "OPINIONS". That is not credible science.


Let me ask you a question. Perhaps you can give a straight answer.

Can you offer any credible proof that an unborn at any stage is not a human being?