Stem Cell Research

[The Orgasmatron]

The South Koreans have done it again. Last year Seoul National University's Woo Suk Hwang announced that his team had derived stem-cell lines from cloned human embryos for the first time. Last week Hwang made another announcement: the scientists had now created "patient-specific" embryonic-stem-cell lines, and they'd done it far more efficiently than a year ago—a giant leap forward in the controversial science. "The Korean study underlines the urgency for us to get moving if we're going to be part of the game," says Zach Hall of the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM).

The new lines were derived from the skin cells of patients who had spinal-cord injuries, an immune disorder or juvenile diabetes. Using so-called therapeutic cloning, the skin cells were merged with donor eggs whose nuclei had been removed, making the new stem cells genetic matches for the patients. Scientists believe that stem cells like these might one day replace unhealthy tissue without fear of rejection. And they would allow researchers to study disease in a lab dish, pinpoint glitches as they happen, then look for new drugs to fix the problem.

There is no federal law against therapeutic cloning, though some states have banned the procedure. Critics say the technique is morally unacceptable and could lead to human cloning. California and New Jersey, while expressly prohibiting reproductive cloning, permit cloning for the purposes of research. Massachusetts, which has been deliberating legislation, may soon follow suit—and just in time. Pioneering researcher Doug Melton, codirector of the Harvard Stem Cell Institute, tells NEWSWEEK that he and collaborator Kevin Eggan have received approval from oversight and ethics boards to move forward on therapeutic cloning to create embryonic stem cells from patients with Parkinson's, Alzheimer's and type 1 diabetes. "We're ready to do it," says Melton, whose work is funded through private donations. "Now, instead of waiting until a patient gets one of these diseases, we can try to figure out how these cells go wrong." As therapeutic cloning moves forward—CIRM's Hall says he expects the institute to fund similar research in California—bioethicists are voicing concerns about how to protect the women who provide eggs. "We want to be sure that they really know what they're doing," says David Magnus, a bioethicist at Stanford. Melton says donors will be informed of the risks (women must take hormone injections before egg retrieval), they will not be paid (outside of expenses) and they must understand that they are donating for research—not for an immediate cure either for one's self or a family member. "These are long-term projects," he says. The scientific news comes just as the stem-cell debate heats up on Capitol Hill. This week the House is expected to vote on a bill that would expand the number of embryonic-stem-cell lines eligible for federal funding. (The bill does not address therapeutic cloning.) Late last week President George W. Bush said he'd veto any legislation that "destroys life in order to save life."

Taken from Newsweek

Any opinions?

[Aemaeth]

Good idea in my view.

[The Orgasmatron]

I can see how it could be a good thing, as long as they aren't trying to create an entirely new human.

[Vilestyle]

I don't think they are, but someone eventually is going to try. Either way, this is useful so-far. My grandmother died from Alzheimers...It's pretty nasty. If there's research being done for a potential band-aid cure, more power to 'em.

[Mr Blaine Ng]

It's a great idea and thing to do because they can help so much people

[The Orgasmatron]

I think that there is human cloning attempts being made somewhere, but the government is covering it up. Hooray for conspiracies!

[Vilestyle]

Conspiracies indeed. The government(s) cover anything and everything valuable up. I mean, if they could clone people perfectly, all they'd have to do is find the perfect subject, clone him/her a couple thousand times, and they have an army there. Of course, this theory would mostlikely cost millions of dollars.

[The Orgasmatron]

Wow, sounds like Star Wars.

(post #200)

[DaCougarMech]

sounds good. might be good for growing whole new organs to replace ones that are broken down

[Mr Blaine Ng]

If we could clone soldiers then everyone in Iraq would be back home

[The Orgasmatron]

No, if we could clone soldiers, then we would have other countries trying to pay our scientists for the information on how to make them. And after they get it, it would literally be the Clone Wars.

[xDBD]

I'm all for scientific advancement, but this is just too much IMO. Yes, cancer hurts, but it's nature's way of thinning the population and removing weak genes. We're literally playing god with this, and I can't say I agree with it. Ideally, it would be a great move in medical technology, but it is going to be exploited way too heavily. I think we should just live and die. There's no point in cheating nature as far as I can see. They, or whoever wants too, can clone cells all day long, but i'll never take part in it. That's just me though

To be an anarchist asshole, if we're just hearing about this news, you KNOW the technology is already developed and functional. The CIA uses computer technology five years ahead of us, for christs sake. Back in the Republican Convention the Govt. had blimps fly around Manhattan equipped with x-ray film cameras to gain black-and-white images of the insides of homes and buildings. You want conspiracy, just ask. There's some serious shit going down that the general population doesn't even wanna know about

[The Orgasmatron]

Wow, you always post alot. And I can see why this would be wrong. In my oponopn, though, the pros way outweigh the cons.

[Silver Ice]

Critics say the technique is morally unacceptable and could lead to human cloning

where the hell do morals come into play with science?
if people dont mind donating why not let them. sounds to me like good ol president bush is using religion again rather than politics to decide. obviously some people will try to clone, but it is likely that they will be discovered. unless, of course, cloning becomes legal for some (medical) reason.

[The Orgasmatron]

Medical reasons? Like what? All I can think of is organ/blood donations. I mean, they have to be from a similar genetic make-up, so who better than yourself?

[Mr Blaine Ng]

Yea, I have to agree with xDBD if people doesn't die then we would have too much people living and then theres going to be food problems and all these other problems, but if it was only for medical uses lie to cure diseases then I'm all for it.

[The Orgasmatron]

I say we make me 12 Angelina Jolie clones for my personal use.

[Mr Blaine Ng]

LOL HAHAHAHHAHA. How about a few pamela Anderson for me lol. Back to the topic. People should just clone humans for the organs and then kill the clone and only keep the organs.

[Vilestyle]

Not even. We should all just die naturally. Personally, I try to touch as little medication as possible. Eventually, our bodies will become immune to the shit, and diseases will effect us even easier, because now our treatments are feeding the disease. Replacing organs is risky, too. The person has the potential to die during the operation. If we removed medication, and any other way to heal ourselves of illness or injury, then we would end up being less careful with our wellbeing, cause hey! I can just buy an organ and be all better! Not gonna happen in my eyes.

If we were to abolish medical treatments of every kind (Never gonna happen), people would be forced to be more healthily aware. Over 60% of the U.S is obese and/or overweight, most dangerously. With no meds, we'd be more careful with what we eat, what we do, etc. And, we wouldn't need to worry about illness, because it would be much less frequent.

^---My views on the matter.

[The Orgasmatron]

If we had some way of making an artificial body that is not human to cultivate different organs, I think that would be great.