Nancy Reagan: Just say Yes! To Stem Cell Research!

[Tmy]

Nancy Reagan plea on stem cells (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3700015.stm)

Former US First Lady Nancy Reagan has urged the Bush administration to support embryonic stem cell research.

She is said to believe the research could lead to a cure for Alzheimer's disease, which has afflicted her husband, Ronald Reagan.

The Bush administration has blocked public funding of this type of research because of his party's ethical reservations about embryo research.

___________________________________________


Bushs stem cell stance really bugs me. Even Republican icon Nancy sees that its bogus. Its a religious fundie policy.

Imagine putting limits on new cancer reseach? People would be up in arms.

[HarryKeogh]

this reminds me of the conservative couples who suddenly become pro-choice when their teenage daughter gets pregnant.

[Toastrider]

No argument here, though I feel very sorry for Mrs. Reagan. Losing a loved one to Alzheimer's rates right up there with 'best forms of hell on Earth'. The person's still alive, but...

It always changes the equation when it's someone you know and love.

--Toasty

[Kodiak]

Originally posted by HarryKeogh
this reminds me of the conservative couples who suddenly become pro-choice when their teenage daughter gets pregnant.

Of course it does because you cannot control your liberal bias.


Provide evidence that the Reagan's were anti-stem cell research before the former President came down with Alzheimer's.

[richardm]

Originally posted by Kodiak


Of course it does because you cannot control your liberal bias.


Provide evidence that the Reagan's were anti-stem cell research before the former President came down with Alzheimer's.

Well, Ronald Reagan did write this article (http://www.humanlifereview.com/reagan/reagan_conscience.html), which would indicate that he would have taken a dim view of the research, and for much the same reasons that the Bush adminstration does.

Edited to add: Reagan's had Alzheimer's for the last ten years. Stem Cell research hasn't been mainstream for much longer than that (the first research was done in 1981), so it's quite a small window to be finding direct objections in.

[Kodiak]

Originally posted by richardm


Well, Ronald Reagan did write this article (http://www.humanlifereview.com/reagan/reagan_conscience.html), which would indicate that he would have taken a dim view of the research, and for much the same reasons that the Bush adminstration does.

Edited to add: Reagan's had Alzheimer's for the last ten years. Stem Cell research hasn't been mainstream for much longer than that (the first research was done in 1981), so it's quite a small window to be finding direct objections in.

Okay, maybe Ronald would be a hypocrite, but where has Nancy stood on the issue?

Another good point on when the technology became available.

Harry's post I still clearly based on bias though... :p ;)

[richardm]

Originally posted by Kodiak


Okay, maybe Ronald would be a hypocrite, but where has Nancy stood on the issue?


She did, apparently (http://en.thinkexist.com/quotations/abortion/) , say this:

I do not believe in abortion at will. I do not believe that if a woman just wants to have an abortion she should... I do believe if you have an abortion you are committing murder.

So, again, it appears she would be inclined to support the current Bush legislation, all things being equal.

FWIW, I think that people should be allowed to change their minds. Although to be honest I can't really say whether I'm saying that because she has changed her mind to agree with me ;)

[LFTKBS]

Kodiak, that's like asking if Pope Leo X would have opposed gender-reassignment surgery.

It didn't exist in his day - at least that I know of - but it's certainly safe to wager that he would have opposed it, given his stance on other issues.

I think Harry is dead-on and your rebuttal is way disingenuous.

[Tmy]

The ban has been around for like 3 years. And Nancy had been quite all that time??? Why?? Methinks she was debating Political loyalties vs her alzeimer fight. I think she finally picked sides.

[Kodiak]

Originally posted by LFTKBS
Kodiak, that's like asking if Pope Leo X would have opposed gender-reassignment surgery.

It didn't exist in his day - at least that I know of - but it's certainly safe to wager that he would have opposed it, given his stance on other issues.

I think Harry is dead-on and your rebuttal is way disingenuous.

I agree that Harry seems to be on very solid ground.

My rebuttal was not so much disingenuous as it was ignorant. I saw a perceived bias and responded in a knee-jerk fashion. I failed to ascertain whether his position was indeed valid, as it turns out, it is.

I apologize as I have nobody to blame but myself.

[LFTKBS]

Originally posted by Kodiak
I agree that Harry seems to be on very solid ground.

My rebuttal was not so much disingenuous as it was ignorant. I saw a perceived bias and responded in a knee-jerk fashion. I failed to ascertain whether his position was indeed valid, as it turns out it is.

I apologize as I have nobody to blame but myself.

Oh. Well, then.

Let's all go get ice cream!

[richardm]

Originally posted by LFTKBS


Oh. Well, then.

Let's all go get ice cream!

Yay! Can I have chopped nuts and monkey blood on mine?

[Fade]

Originally posted by richardm


Yay! Can I have chopped nuts and monkey blood on mine?

Eewwwwww

Gross..

God you are so so disgusting..


What kind of freak puts NUTS on ice cream?

[Nie Trink Wasser]

so what does everyone think of this :

Adult Stem Cells

"Adult stem cells have been isolated from numerous adult tissues, umbilical cord, and other non-embryonic sources, and have demonstrated a surprising ability for transformation into other tissue and cell types and for repair of damaged tissues. "

http://www.stemcellresearch.org/facts/prentice.htm

[Tmy]

Originally posted by Nie Trink Wasser
so what does everyone think of this :

Adult Stem Cells

"Adult stem cells have been isolated from numerous adult tissues, umbilical cord, and other non-embryonic sources, and have demonstrated a surprising ability for transformation into other tissue and cell types and for repair of damaged tissues. "

http://www.stemcellresearch.org/facts/prentice.htm

Hmm this bothers me. After all I am a liberal. And theres nothing more I like better than killing unborn babies. In fact I dont care about the medical benefits derived from stem cell research. I just want the abortion numbers to skyrocket. Harvesting unborn souls will surely impress my master...........SATAN!!!! :p

[Nie Trink Wasser]

Originally posted by Tmy


Hmm this bothers me. After all I am a liberal. And theres nothing more I like better than killing unborn babies. In fact I dont care about the medical benefits derived from stem cell research. I just want the abortion numbers to skyrocket. Harvesting unborn souls will surely impress my master...........SATAN!!!! :p


I apologize.....I thought I could have a beneficial discussion about adult stem cells and leave out the moronic bullsh!t.....thanks for reminding me where I am posting !

Im off then..

[LFTKBS]

Wow, Tmy, it worked.

Good job.

In any case, alternatives to fetal stem cells are rad. But let's not toss out fetal stem cells just yet.

[Shane Costello]

Is there really a contradiction in being anti-abortion and pro-ESC research? Nancy Reagan isn't the only pro-life Republican (http://www.cnn.com/2001/HEALTH/07/17/stem.cell.hearing/) who supports ESC research. (http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/07/18/stem.cell)

It seems to me that some people are labouring under the notion that aborted foetuses are a source of ESC. Not true. (http://stemcells.nih.gov/infoCenter/stemCellBasics.asp)

Embryonic stem cells, as their name suggests, are derived from embryos. Specifically, embryonic stem cells are derived from embryos that develop from eggs that have been fertilized in vitro — in an in vitro fertilization clinic — and then donated for research purposes with informed consent of the donors. They are not derived from eggs fertilized in a woman's body.The embryos from which human embryonic stem cells are derived are typically four or five days old and are a hollow microscopic ball of cells called the blastocyst. The blastocyst includes three structures: the trophoblast, which is the layer of cells that surrounds the blastocyst; the blastocoel, which is the hollow cavity inside the blastocyst; and the inner cell mass, which is a group of approximately 30 cells at one end of the blastocoel.

It seems to me that the only contradiction would be if Nancy Reagan had hitherto been opposed to IVF, but that her own personal circumstances had now caused an about-turn in her beliefs.

[Shane Costello]

Originally posted by LFTKBS:
In any case, alternatives to fetal stem cells are rad. But let's not toss out fetal stem cells just yet.

Unless I'm mistaken, foetal stem cells and adult stem cells are one and the same.

[richardm]

Originally posted by Shane Costello
It seems to me that some people are labouring under the notion that aborted foetuses are a source of ESC. Not true. (http://stemcells.nih.gov/infoCenter/stemCellBasics.asp)


Bush is on record as saying that he opposes stem cell research because it involves the destruction of human embryos. To be consistent, I would say that anyone who opposes abortion at any stage after conception because it's murder would also have to say they disapproved of the destruction of any human embryo under any circumstance, because although the research versions are "brought on" in vitro, it is exactly the same thing.

[LFTKBS]

Originally posted by Shane Costello


Unless I'm mistaken, foetal stem cells and adult stem cells are one and the same.

I was referring to the original source; this is not my area of expertise, so I could be way off. Don't take anything I say on the subject as gospel.

However, in the other parts of the PCEH forum, everything I say is right and don't you forget it.

[tamiO]

Originally posted by Tmy


Imagine putting limits on new cancer reseach? People would be up in arms.

Doesn't the restriction on stem cell research indeed put limits on cancer research?

[Tmy]

Originally posted by tamiO


Doesn't the restriction on stem cell research indeed put limits on cancer research?

I think so. But not in so many words.

Imagine a statement like "Ban on Lukemia research." Thatd be catchy.

[Shane Costello]

Originally posted by richardm:
Bush is on record as saying that he opposes stem cell research because it involves the destruction of human embryos. To be consistent, I would say that anyone who opposes abortion at any stage after conception because it's murder would also have to say they disapproved of the destruction of any human embryo under any circumstance, because although the research versions are "brought on" in vitro, it is exactly the same thing.

I know that certain Catholic pro-life groups in Ireland oppose IVF for this very reason. I'm not aware of any US groups that do so. What's GWB's line on IVF? I mean he must be opposed to that too?

[tamiO]

I saw on the news ticker on Fox a few minutes ago, that Great Britain was setting up a stem cell bank and there were expected to be thousands of lines stored there in the near future.