embryonic stem cells?

[Chris_]

The Georgia Senate recently passed a bill limiting what can be done with embryonic stem cells. I just read a LTTE complaining that the state was condemning those with spinal chord injuries and cancer with the passage of this bill. This follows along with the left's rants when W cut funding of embryonic stem cell research.

I know we have some liberals on this site. We may even have some conservatives on here who support embryonic stem cell research. I'd like you to take a few minutes of your time to explain to me why you think (apparently with much certainty based upon the rants I've read) that embryonic stem cell research is the magic cure for many medical problems.

I ask this because I can't really find any reasons to hold embryonic stem cell research as any thing special. I've read/heard of evidence showing the potential of ADULT stem cells. I've even read/heard of the successful use of ADULT stem cells. I've also read/heard of the failures of embryonic stem cells such as causing tumors. I haven't, however, seen any evidence of the "greatness" of embryonic stem cells other than the left's cry that they will heal the sick and make the lame walk.

[Splashdown]

The only "greatness" of embryonic stem cell research, as far as I can determine, is that it further cheapens the value of the unborn. It's just another pro-abortion argument, as far as I can see.

[Chris_]

The debate over embryonic stem cell research is NOT about the use of the cells for research, it is all about PUBLIC FUNDING of embryonic stem cell research. 

There are several stem cell avenues of research that are ongoing now, and have been for decades, using private research funds, and these are advancing due to the fact that they are yielding promising treatments, and potential cures.

Embryonic stem cells have, thus far, shown little value in generation of new treatments, and, as a result, private funds are being directed elsewhere.  Should this avenue of research show promise, there would be billions in private funding from biomedical and pharma companies available for use.

Liberals, and some "moderates" see this as an issue where the pro-life crowd is stifling the advance of science, and have therefore adopted it as an issue that they can use to bash the Christian conservatives.  Since the "evil corporations" won't step up to the plate, liberals think that the government should fill the funding gap, so that this type of research can go forward, whether it generates results or not.

I don't think that any thinking person would object too strongly to research on embryos that are destined for destruction anyway, but the pro-life folks (correctly so) see this as the beginning of an effort that will result in the intentional creation of embryos that are to be used for research only, along with the incentivazation of sale of reproductive cells by people attempting to raise money.  I think that there is merit to this part of the debate, as nowhere in the discussion have any of the proponents of such activities established any limits on where the method of development of these embryos will become unacceptable.

doc

[Peter3_1]

Embrionic stem cells research has produced a new bolld source for transfusions. That's it. Something that COULD have been done from the  umbilical cord blood, or the cord itself.

ESC research WAS going on, just none on more than a few approved " lines", seven, eight or so, for federal funds. The theory that these cells offer the most POTENTIAL is correct, so research goes on in PRIVATELY FUNDED ways. But in PRACTICE, adult stem cells show real results.

I am sad to reoprt that paralized bodies will not now be restored, spare organs grown, all from swell undifferentated embrio's cells......at least not within our lifetime. There is too much we don't know that we're trying to slide around without adequate science in place.