Re: Some wandering thoughts.........

[Guest guest]

Bill, I was very interested in the article fwd'd from WPOST.

I have no scientific learning; it has taken me a long time to even get a handle on all this stem cell stuff.............but this is what I come up with at this time.

Fertilizing the sperm and egg in a dish and never attaching the "blast" to the uterine (living) wall is not an embryo as most think of embryo. This is a therapeutic embryo??? Strict conservatives believe this has the same status as embryo in utero. How is this so far???

This is what the stem cell proponents want to use for research by making new ones and not being limited to the ones already on hand in sperm banks etc. (Bush way).

IF I understand Hatch's view, he "goes for it' even though he is against the death penalty, abortion, euthanasia, late term abortion or any other taking of life by artificial means. That is precisely my stand but I see no problem with research on two germs in a dish.

Now about the CREATOR. HE made it possible for this type of research to be done. It's out there. Like everything else in the universe, its up to mankind to use the knowledge ethically and judicially.

Barb in SWVA

[Guest guest]

Barbara,

Let's take it one by one. First a definition of embryo from my

dictionary (1971)

embryo = a. The earliest stages in the development of an

organism, before it has assumed it's distinctive form. b. The

germ of a viviparous (bringing forth living young) animal in the first

stages of it's existence as an individual organism, that is , in the

human species, the first seven weeks.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fertilizing

the sperm and egg in a dish and never attaching the "blast" to the uterine

(living) wall is not an embryo as most think of embryo. This is a

therapeutic embryo??? Strict conservatives believe this has the same

status as embryo in utero. How is this so far???

That is what the news people are calling a therapeutic embryo, but in fact

under the Feinstein Bill it can NEVER be placed in a womb OR artifical

womb to become a human. Scientists have proven that at this stage (called

a blastocyst), it can NOT become human without a womb. They

have encouraged these organizisms to grow and they become a mass of unrelated,

disorganized cells. No brain, skin, muscle, bone, etc. only cells.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

This

is what the stem cell proponents want to use for research by making new

ones and not being limited to the ones already on hand in sperm banks

etc. (Bush way).

That is correct.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

IF

I understand Hatch's view, he "goes for it' even though he is against the

death penalty, abortion, euthanasia, late term abortion or any other taking

of life by artificial means. That is precisely my stand but I see

no problem with research on two germs in a dish.

This seems to be Hatch's view, but the blastocysts are not "germs" they

are two types of human cell both totipotent and pluripotent stem cells.

However, blood cells are "human cells" also, so if you lose a drop of blood

and the cells die, is that murder? We allow the totipotent (which

would become - if placed in a womb - the placenta or afterbirth) cells

to die, while saving the pluripotent cells and using them for cures.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now

about the CREATOR. HE made it possible for this type of research

to be done. It's out there. Like everything else in the

universe, its up to mankind to use the knowledge ethically and judicially.

That is my view also. I am a Christian and therefore believe in Christ's

teachings, but Christ healed and said over and over not to hurt people.

I believe that a nation which condones war as a necessary evil to save

mankind, should also recognize the saving value of these cells just as

we recognize (in spite of some religious objections) the value of blood

transfusions and antibiotics. To me destroying the blastocysts, by

allowing them to thaw out is a huge waste of a possible cure.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Stem cells themselves are capable of being "programmed" with chemicals

to grow into specific types of cells. They have discovered which

chemicals make the stem cells grow into brain cells at this time.

However, it takes a human body to teach them to grow into nerves, bone,

muscle, etc. The individual cells are incapable of growing into tissue

itself. In time, if we do discover a metod of making them grow the

way a womb would program them - that would be legally defined as an artificial

womb - which is specifically forbidden by the Feinstein/Kennedy Bill.

So this addition to that Bill should eliminate doubts that this is an end

run to grow (clone) humans. The goal of stem cell research is to

grow specific cell (like dopamine producing neurons) to fight the death

of cells in your body or to replace dead cells in your body. It would

hopefully mean that you could get an injection of cells that would use

your body's DNA to learn to replace the dead cells.

Please note also that opponents of this research tout "adult stem cell

research" - BUT this is also cloning specific cells. Cloning is getting

cells to divide and grow new cells, by definition that is a stem cell.

I know it is complicated. I do not understand the whole process

myself, BUT neither do most of the religious detractors. If they

did, why do they not understand that adult stem cells are cloned.

Could it be that present cures for some cancers would be outlawed by the

Brownback Bill and doctors could be thown into jail for curing you??

Take care, Bill Werre