Author Topic: The new low.  (Read 11417 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The new low.
« Reply #30 on: September 11, 2008, 02:02:54 PM »
I don't know whether stem cell research has been useful in rectifying the problems Downs syndrome people have. I imagine that it might be more useful in preventing that a child be born with Downs syndrome in the first place, but I know of no connection between stem cel research and any aspect of Downs syndrome. It is not my field, and speculation would be of no value. I am , however, in favor of funding stem cell research with federal tax money.

It seems to me that if, in fact, stem cell resarch is immoral, then the government should seek to ban it totally, not merely refuse to fund it. If it is not immoral, then they should fund it.

It's like saying that we are against murder, so we are hereby refusing to pay for guns to be given to criminals. But anyone else is free to give them guns.

The Juniorbush position on stem cell research is just stupid. And it is for this reason that it is stupid. It does not prevent an immoral act, only not to pay for it.
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

Amianthus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7574
  • Bring on the flames...
    • View Profile
    • Mario's Home Page
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The new low.
« Reply #31 on: September 11, 2008, 02:06:49 PM »
The Juniorbush position on stem cell research is just stupid. And it is for this reason that it is stupid. It does not prevent an immoral act, only not to pay for it.

And yet, the Bush administration has spent more money on stem cell research than any other previous administration.

Incidently, the "Bush position" is not "not pay for it" - it only pays for certain aspects of the research. Just like any other funds the government doles out - there are things you can do with the money and things you cannot do with the money.
Do not anticipate trouble, or worry about what may never happen. Keep in the sunlight. (Benjamin Franklin)

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The new low.
« Reply #32 on: September 11, 2008, 02:15:27 PM »
But again, refusing to deny money on the ground that it is immoral, while refusing to even TRY to have laws passed against said "immoral" acts is just stupid.

If it's immoral, ban it.
If it isn't, fund it.

"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

Amianthus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7574
  • Bring on the flames...
    • View Profile
    • Mario's Home Page
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The new low.
« Reply #33 on: September 11, 2008, 02:46:37 PM »
If it's immoral, ban it.
If it isn't, fund it.

It was funded.

So, what's your problem?
Do not anticipate trouble, or worry about what may never happen. Keep in the sunlight. (Benjamin Franklin)

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The new low.
« Reply #34 on: September 11, 2008, 03:08:27 PM »
If it was all funded, I have no problem. Not that I actually had a problem.

I heard that federal funds were denied for stem cell research. That was what I was discussing. It is not actually MY problem, merely a topic for discussion.
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

Amianthus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7574
  • Bring on the flames...
    • View Profile
    • Mario's Home Page
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The new low.
« Reply #35 on: September 11, 2008, 03:11:57 PM »
If it was all funded, I have no problem. Not that I actually had a problem.

As is frequently the case, the federal government did not fund EVERYTHING that was requested. Funding, however, is not binary. Just because they did not fund 100% does not mean that they funded 0%.

I heard that federal funds were denied for stem cell research.

Not true.
Do not anticipate trouble, or worry about what may never happen. Keep in the sunlight. (Benjamin Franklin)

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The new low.
« Reply #36 on: September 11, 2008, 04:29:40 PM »
<<As far I know, no proposed stem cell research will be used to replace the nucleus of every cell in the body, which is what is needed for a "cure" for Down's Syndrome. >>

You keep confusing research applications with basic research.  Stem cell research aims at giving insight into processes, most obviously the process of cell differentiation.  Cell differentiation is a complex of issues involving signals, metabolic pathways, protein assembly  and probably others as well.  Nobody can tell where the research leads to in terms of both further basic research and applications.  The point is, without the basic research, we're left with a faulty foundation and building on a faulty foundation is never a good idea.  Sometimes you have to do it, but no government should be in the position of holding back work which might create a sounder foundation for the research to proceed on.

<<Stem cell research is being done to study the replacement of damaged or degenerate tissue, especially nerve cells.   This is not a cause of Down's Syndrome.>>

That's an application phase of stem cell research.  Stem cell research can also proceed at the basic level, where the ultimate applications are unknown.  However it's not at all implausible that the results of basic research into cell differentiation, necessarily involving cell division, will provide insights into the problems of missing or extra chromosomes arising out of faulty cell division.>>

<<Look up the diseases that are being researched for a possible treatment with stem cells - Down's Syndrome is not on the list. Nor will you find any other syndrome that is caused by base chromosomal errors. The research being done to correct these involves the use of retro viruses to "rewrite" the DNA and eliminate the problem.>>

I took up your suggestion, which was kind of interesting.  According to the NIH "Stem Cell Information" page, "The Promise of Stem Cells:"

<<Studying stem cells will help us understand how they transform into the dazzling array of specialized cells that make us what we are. Some of the most serious medical conditions, such as cancer and birth defects, are due to problems that occur somewhere in this process. A better understanding of normal cell development will allow us to understand and perhaps correct the errors that cause these medical conditions.

<<Another potential application of stem cells is making cells and tissues for medical therapies. Today, donated organs and tissues are often used to replace those that are diseased or destroyed. Unfortunately, the number of people needing a transplant far exceeds the number of organs available for transplantation. Pluripotent stem cells offer the possibility of a renewable source of replacement cells and tissues to treat a myriad of diseases, conditions, and disabilities including Parkinson's and Alzheimer's diseases, spinal cord injury, stroke, burns, heart disease, diabetes, osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis.>>

I think it's pretty self-evident that a lot of special-needs children, even according to this article, might be helped by the knowledge gained from stem-cell research, and that it's unconscionable for any government to deny funding for promising research solely on ideological or religious grounds.

kimba1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8010
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The new low.
« Reply #37 on: September 11, 2008, 04:38:08 PM »
I think overall the research will go pretty well in the near future.
If I`m not mistaken the bulk of it is being done overseas with much less restrictions than here so the U.S. simply just pay a premium for some of the results.
I think the U.S. at the moment is legally not able to have the most advance tech or medicines.
our self imposed restictions (not all bad) is holding us back a few years
if thier is a cure for cancer people over sea WILL get it before us.

Amianthus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7574
  • Bring on the flames...
    • View Profile
    • Mario's Home Page
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The new low.
« Reply #38 on: September 11, 2008, 04:39:19 PM »
I think it's pretty self-evident that a lot of special-needs children, even according to this article, might be helped by the knowledge gained from stem-cell research, and that it's unconscionable for any government to deny funding for promising research solely on ideological or religious grounds.

Good thing the US is funding stem cell research, then, huh?
Do not anticipate trouble, or worry about what may never happen. Keep in the sunlight. (Benjamin Franklin)

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The new low.
« Reply #39 on: September 11, 2008, 05:32:08 PM »
<<Good thing the US is funding stem cell research, then, huh?>>

As  you very well know, they are only funding a part of the potential stem-cell research available, i.e. that part that depends on the sixty-some lines of cells in use at the time of the ban.  If none of those lines of stem cells suit the researchers' purposes, research based on new lines will not be funded.  It's almost as if FDR had told the Manhattan Project, "Well, we'll fund research based on U-235 but nothing on Plutonium.  We'll fund critical-mass research, but nothing on implosion devices." 

They're letting religion interfere with scientific progress and dictate what to fund and what not to fund.  It can't possibly work out well.  Some basic research is going to be choked off and unless you can guarantee that none of would have paid off, you will have to admit that this is a set-back for science.

kimba1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8010
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The new low.
« Reply #40 on: September 11, 2008, 06:57:32 PM »
this is why stem cell research is more seriously done out of the united states.
good bet in less than 5 years time we`re going to see a serious lag in all areas in science compared to the rest of the world.
at least we`re making a blackhole here.
hopely the colateral tech made will help.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The new low.
« Reply #41 on: September 11, 2008, 07:03:26 PM »
<<Good thing the US is funding stem cell research, then, huh?>>

They're letting religion interfere with scientific progress and dictate what to fund and what not to fund. 

Not to mention that damn Constitutional roadblock. 
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The new low.
« Reply #42 on: September 11, 2008, 07:05:22 PM »
<<Not to mention that damn Constitutional roadblock.>>

There's a Constitutional roadblock to funding human fetal stem-cell research?  I don't think even the Republicans know of it.

Amianthus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7574
  • Bring on the flames...
    • View Profile
    • Mario's Home Page
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The new low.
« Reply #43 on: September 11, 2008, 07:41:09 PM »
Some basic research is going to be choked off and unless you can guarantee that none of would have paid off, you will have to admit that this is a set-back for science.

We can't fund EVERY POSSIBLE line of research. The costs would be staggering. Choices need to be made as to which lines of research will be funded by the federal government.
Do not anticipate trouble, or worry about what may never happen. Keep in the sunlight. (Benjamin Franklin)

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The new low.
« Reply #44 on: September 11, 2008, 08:31:13 PM »
<<Not to mention that damn Constitutional roadblock.>>

There's a Constitutional roadblock to funding human fetal stem-cell research?  I don't think even the Republicans know of it.

You're actually right, many don't.  That's why there's such egregious out of control extra-constitutional spending, by BOTH parties, in DC.  The Constitution outlines what the Fed is mandated to do.  No where does it mandate any funds for research into stem cells, or any other thing for that matter.  So, what we have here is a COMPROMISE, between what the left would want, some the-sky's-the-limit form of funding research vs NO tax monies for research.  Be thankful for the compromise
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle