Added: 5 years ago
From: missouricures
Views: 44,984
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (209)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • A group of Canadian patients just back from Noble have reported similar results. “I can actually see what I thought were long-dead muscles forming in my feet” said Larry Vermeersch of Kenora, Ontario. “My balance is back and I’m walking without a cane. I’m a pretty hard guy to convince, but getting these two procedures together has made me a believer. I’m looking forward to the physio ahead because I can feel everything coming back.” Log on to ccsviclinic. ca for more information.

  • Yes, it could save the life of someone you love while not giving another person even the slightest chance at life. Fair? Who are we to make that decision?

  • @ellybelly94 There's no logic to what you're saying. There are untold trillions of lives who never had a chance because you decided to write comments on YouTube instead of doing your damndest to either get pregnant or get someone pregnant, whatever your gender is. The idea of "potential life" is not a real issue. Every cell in your body could potentially be used to create a new human life. Every sperm or egg. Should we put their interests over a young mother who develops terminal breast cancer?

  • No to celebrities setting public policy.Regardless of the cause !

    No to emotional manipulation.

  • I really like Sheryl Crow alot, but she is a lefty. This commerical bums me out because embryonic stem cell research has been show to be useless and wasted on research that could really help. The stem cell thing is totally political and has nothing to do with real science. I still like Sheryl though. She is a talented beautiful woman who is really deceived.

  • Ask Sheryl about Marilyn Manson. She will react to his name with shame and guilty conscience. Because she is deceiving her fans.

  • if we did'nt have all these diseses this world would be so over populated with healthy people.We would be all living to well into the our 90z and disturbing the balance between the old and the new, All of our country's would look like china and india thats just too much people to sustain a clean living and we will have to resort to eating bugs and worms and everything else thats not supposed to be eatin from humans. with that i say disese's are kinda good in a way

  • i see what your saying. next time i see a kid who has a hear-defect and is destined to die b4 his 7th birthday ill just say "sry kid but if u dont die form this disease the world will b over populated."

  • Comment removed

  • Ask SHERYL about Marilyn Manson. She will react to his name with shame and guilty conscience. Because she is deceiving her fans.

  • You keep saying this at every Sheryl Crow vid I watch.. please enlighten us/me?

  • This video is not available in my country? What the Fuck?

  • What kind of stem cells?

    The kind that works (somatic) or the kind that creates tumors (embryonic)?

  • I hate the term "cancer survivor".

  • Breast cancer is Sheryl Crow's lie. Ask her about it.

  • I would support research if stem cells were ONLY being taken from living sources (ie a healthy baby is born and the parents donate her umbilical cord) but to take a murdered baby, rip apart its body and remove its stem cells is a sickening and BARBARIC thing. That is not science, it is playing god and murder at the same time.

  • a blastocyst isn't a baby and can't be "killed" it's a collection of cells that have yet to form the various organs. harvesting one is no different than harvesting a few cells from my cheek or thumb. only the cells have not differentiated like my cheek or thumb cells. no moral concern in the use of a blastocyst.

  • yellowdart, you are just a collection of cells, just more of them. A human embryo is a HUMAN. period. Taking a few cells from a blastocyst would be like cutting out your brain and killing you in the name of "progress".

  • The embryos used do not yet contain any brain cells as those cells have not yet diferenciated to them yet.Religions allow pulling the plug on the brain dead so why stop this vital reserch if no brain at all? Lets get out of the middle ages please!

  • I cant stand you religious fanatics. God would want the circle of life to continue. An umbilical cord that gets tossed after birth could be passed on to someone who suffers. But its okay to be an organ donor?????  So you can put a dead persons parts in someone else. But its not okay to improve the quality of life for a child????? You people are sick and the day you are suffering from a spine or brain injury and you need help and its in China because of jerks like you I will laugh!

  • obviously none of you people haven't been affected by a need for stemcell treatment. My 8 yoa daughter is nearly blind and is going to China for stemcell treatment to gain vision she's never had. If your mom or friend had an accident and lost sight I'm sure your religious banter would drift away. But abortion is legal right?????? Stemcells are going to change medical history and will put alot of deadbeat doctors out of business.

  • Way to go!! I have a disease that can be very nasty and I would love to see a cure before I die.

  • Why do you insist that the human genetic code is "sacred" or "taboo"? It is a chemical process. For that matter -we- are chemical processes. If you deny yourself a useful tool simply because it reminds you uncomfortably of your mortality, you have uselessly and pointlessly crippled yourself.

  • well in that case lets make murder legal, or better yet lets stop reproducing since human life to you is worthless. face it people as ugly as it may sound we are meant to die. we humans are becoming too succesful at surviving we are overcrowding the planet.

  • Way to blow things completely out of proportion. I'm saying we slaughter millions of cows to eat every day out of necessity (more or less), so why would we not use genetic code of embryos that would otherwise be DISCARDED (in your words: killed) anyway?

    If you had to choose between dying for no reason and dying to save a million lives, what would you consider the ethical choice?

  • We've found other ways, stfu.

  • Immoral how? Because god says so?

  • For all of you ESCR supporters...I think it is time for you to read The Dickey Amendment. When it was written, what was the cause for it's creation and exactly what it is expected to accomplish. The Why's

  • The new laws that they want now with embryotic stemm cell research will only use the invetro system..thats fertalized eggs from left over cells that will be flushed down the toilet anyhow. Let the cells live. Vote for new laws.

  • Still need to explain that its NOT killing babies.

  • Way to go Sheryl!

  • I support stem cell research of ALL kind. To close your mind to all the human life this could save is like your grandmother oppossing microwave ovens due to radiation!!!

  • 10/4/2007 Dear Ms. Crow or Staff: THE TIME IS RIPE... THE TIME IS NOW... I offer a very provocative program which your listening audience will be receptive too. Have a (1) hour program devoted entirely to the topic of "Embryonic Clean Stem Cell Research" where a listening audience will be able to call in, e-mail, send video questions. Their queries will be answered by experts in this field not Political nor Religious leaders. Thanks, Dave 267-249-4592

  • Couldn't have said it better Way. (I think you meant clinic embryos may BE cancer resistant, though.) New study is that cancer SCs mimic normal SCs to evade chemotherapy (those cheeky monkeys). How ESCs to help? This initiative includes SCNT - which doesn't work in humans BUT requires countless eggs just to try. SCNT kills women. It gives them and their kids cancer. Sheryl Crow Supports Cancer.

  • "SCNT kills women. It gives them and their kids cancer."

    That isn't true at all! SCNT (Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer) is simply the name of the process in which stem cells duplicate themselves.

    Harvesting stem cells does not hurt women, anymore than having a period hurts women.

    It doesn't cause cancer! It has the potential to cure cancer. Your ignorance is astounding!

  • SCNT is not a way to clone cells. It's not the stem cell harvesting - but the EGG harvesting that puts women and children at risk. (Really, the eggs don't come from chickens or magically appear.) Interesting you mention periods, though - menstrual blood has pluripotent stem cells (ERC) with amazing growth factors. "Endometrial Regenerative Cells: A Novel Stem Cell Population", Journal of Translational Medicine.

  • " It gives them and their kids cancer. Sheryl Crow Supports Cancer."

    You're a fucking idiot. They do no such thing.

  • Higher incidence of cancers for offspring of those who suffer OHSS (as well as the women themselves). 10% of egg donors suffer OHSS w/1% having serious long-term health consequences - including (cancer), stroke, and death. NAS estimates $100,000-$200,000/patient just for eggs. Silly when iPS are easier than SCNT while providing individualized pluripotent stem cells for treatment and disease study.

  • Your post makes no sense.

  • Unklebillybob, embryonic stem cells are from BEFORE cell differentiation, adult stem cells are from AFTER it; now, to be fair, I don't recall EXACTLY what it means (it's from Biology class last year) but I know that it means that ESCR actually has MORE potential for cures than ASCR. Rather than assuming that ESCR not having made breakthroughs yet must mean it has less potential, why not consider other factors, like, maybe, relatively less support for ESCR?

  • Undifferentiated stem cells don't know what to be. When placed in organism it forms tumors from all 3 germ layers. (Sheryl supports cancer) Must differentiate/mature PAST adult stem cells and then they are rejected like non-self final tissue. Not better for therapy, only 'to study' and sell. Cloning risks women's lives. Egg donors at increased risk for stroke, death, and cancers. (Sheryl supports cancer.)

  • Sheryl supports cancer? What the damn hell do you think you're talking about? Researching undifferentiated cells can actually help give scientists better understanding of cell development which can in turn give them better understanding of uncontrolled cell growth, which can in turn lead to deeper understanding of cancer, leading to better treament, and perhaps even a cure for it.

  • Embryonic stem cells (ESC) form tumors when they come/go into the same species, never therapeutic. Study cancer stem cells to understand cancer. Testicular carcinoma research yielded ESC foundation, not reverse. Genes turn off as differentiate, ESCs NOT the same as from patient w/cancer. IVF donors are healthy. Maybe cells from embryos not cancer resistant. Acquiring new embryos puts egg donors & their future offspring at increased cancer risk. Thus, Sheryl supports cancer.

  • "Acquiring new embryos puts egg donors & their future offspring at icreased cancer risk."

    Now that just doesn't make any sense. Donating eggs for science is not risky at all! It is exactly the same process they use to harvest eggs in IVF. And women do that all the time with absolutely no complications.

  • You ARE ill informed. In "Issues in Oocyte Donation for Stem Cell Research", SCIENCE Magazine states Doctors against since, "up to 10% of women who undergo ovarian stimulation experience severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), which can cause pain, and occasionally leads to hospitalization, renal failure, potential future infertility, and even death." Visit HandsOffOurOvaries *dot* com or EndEggsploitation *dot* org for more info.

  • YouTube Video "Trading on the female body" starts with mother of woman who died in the process.

  • Admittedly, researching ES gives an understanding of uncontrolled growth. Why not study specific CANCER stem cells vs healthy ones from embryos that may be cancer resistant. 1960s pluripotent SC studies were with testicular carcinomas. That ES cause cancers in vivo doesn't make in vitro studies valid - unless you, like Sheryl Crow supports cancer.

  • "Why not study specific CANCER stem cells vs healthy ones from embryos that may be cancer resistant.... "

    They have been doing this for several years. It's rather laughable, considering I did a google scholoar search on "cancer stem cell" and and got thousands of hits. Apparently you're not actually aware of the dozens of potential therapies embryonic stem cell research holds.

  • You don't even make sense here. Do you even know what a 'cancer stem cell' is?

  • "You don't even make sense here."

    Then you're even more stupid than you appear.  Do the search I noted. You'll see that your criticism is empty. "Do you even know what a 'cancer stem cell' is? "

    Of course I do, but I sincerely doubt you know anything that what you're gathering from some paranoid religious nutcase website. What's your definition?

  • By definition, all stem cells must differentiate & self-renew. Cancer stem cells make more of themselves and cancer cells. It makes more sense to study SCs known to contribute to specific forms of cancers than ES, because you don't know they would have developed that form of cancer. (ES still cause cancer outside natural environment they misread biochemical cues.)

  • "It makes more sense to study SCs known to contribute to specific forms of cancers than ES,..."

    Your entire cancer stem cell argument is a non-sequitur. As I've shown, this is an existing path of research and it's purpose is not what you suppose, nor does it yield the results you propose.

    Again, you're obviously wholly ignorant about biology, especially cytology. Now, go and educate yourself rather than wasting my time.

  • Shhhh. I'd hate to lose my job ; )

    Dr. Wilmut (Dolly's Daddy) will, too - he just said publically what I've been saying here.

  • Stem cells (SC) self-renew and differentiate. Cancer SCs make more of self AND cancer cells. When studying cancer, should study known contributors. ES cause cancer in utero by misreading biochemical cues in completed human, but cancer-type predisposition of specific embryos unknown. What did you think your google search meant?

  • "Undifferentiated stem cells don't know what to be."

    Duh, that's why they're refered to as undifferentiated.

    " When placed in organism it forms tumors from all 3 germ layers. Must differentiate/mature PAST adult stem cells and then they are rejected like non-self final tissue. "

    You must be a demented religious freak. What is your source for these lies?

  • Scientific American, Dr. Sean Morrison - head of UofM's Stem Cell program, and pretty much every study ever done. Tumor formation is the preliminary test for 'embryonic' stem cells, silly. No tumor - no ES. Tumerogenesis is less likely in xenotransplants, making any safety study questionable.

  • "Tumor formation is the preliminary test for 'embryonic' stem cells, silly. No tumor - no ES. Tumerogenesis is less likely in xenotransplants, making any safety study questionable. "

    Your disjointed ramblings make no sense.

  • While teratoma formation rarely occurs in xenogeneic transplantation paradigms of ES cellderived neural progeny, more than 70% of mice that received murine ES cell-derived neural precursor cells develop teratomas, thus posing a major safety problem for allogeneic and syngeneic transplantation paradigms.

    Maybe you could read something - at least the NIH's Stem Cell BASICS before your next reply.

  • "Maybe you could read something - at least the NIH's Stem Cell BASICS before your next reply. "

    Must you continue to ramble without posing a cogent argument? Seriously, this is your last chance. Quote mining serves no end.

  • You, friend, provide no argument, just criticism. I am simply providing the sources you requested about ES causing cancers and then being grown PAST adult stem cell to final tissue. "So any therapeutic applications will require scientists to drive the ES cells' differentiation into particular specialised cells for transplantation into patients ... rigorous screening will be required to make surenot ES cells are still present." Scientific American, July 2005.

    Sheryl Crow Supports Cancer!

  • "you requested about ES causing cancers "

    No, you're quote mining little bits of these sources YOU claim say ESC cause cancer. If you give the quote in context, as I did, you'll see that you're wrong. This is a very dishonest method of "debate".

    "and then being grown PAST adult stem cell to final tissue"

    We're through. It's obvious you don't even know the difference between ASC and ESC. You're only interested in spreading your ignorance and paranoia.

  • "ES cells, unlike adult stem cells, cannot be used directly in therapy because they cause cancer. Indeed, one laboratory test for ES cells is to inject them into mice and analyse the teratoma (a tumour formed of foetal tissue) that arises.

  • Here's the rest of the passage you plagiarized from SCIAM.

    "So any therapeutic application will require scientists to drive the ES cells' differentiation into particular specialised cells for transplantation into patients--for instance, beta cells to produce insulin for diabetics or dopamine-producing neurones to treat Parkinson's disease. And rigorous screening will be required to make sure that no ES cells are still present."

    Your dishonest, fanatical ramblings are becoming irksome.

  • That's EXACTLY what I said in the first place. I intended to post it - but too long for YouTube (note I've already done it).

    ES cause cancer. Must differentiate/mature PAST adult stem cells and then they are rejected like non-self final tissue. (please don't make me have to source that tissue from someone other than yourself is rejected and the lab animals are bred to not reject them).

  • Shinya Yamanaka (first to develop iPS) used the ES "problem of tissue rejection following

    transplantation into patients" - and used as an example of how close to ES the subjects induced pluripotent were to ES reported that transplantation of the iPS cells under the skin of mice resulted in tumors." You won't reject them, though, because they come from you.

  • " I intended to post it - but too long for YouTube (note I've already done it"

    Bullshit. You only posted it after I called you out.

    You've done nothing here but expose your simple-minded ignorance of the basics of health and scientific research.

    "Must differentiate/mature PAST adult stem cells and then they are rejected like non-self final tissue."

    Again you expose your ignorance. Once again you fail to post something meaninful or truthful. You're dismissed.

  • Hid - We've heard this hundreds if not thousands of times...ESCR has the potential to cure everything,,,from a hangnail to organic brain syndromes to even replacing a severed limb...if only given enough time and money. BOLOGNA! Through-out the entire world,(which doesn't have the type of restrictions the USA has) ESCR has not produced any cures, PERIOD!

  • "Through-out the entire world,(which doesn't have the type of restrictions the USA has) ESCR has not produced any cures, PERIOD!" - Unklebillybob

    Oh please, just because it hasn't so far (and there's no denying that "so far" applies here in any case, as it's not like now's the end of time) doesn't mean it never will; I remember my own doctor telling me it's going to take time.

  • hid - Look at the big picture here. Why is stem cell research being conducted in the first place?

  • And what is your basis for saying the "entire world" doesn't have the "type of restrictions"? What support is there for ESCR in countries with the scientific and technological capacity to find cures, and what makes you think this support would be enough? Thing is, we can't reasonably claim to know how long it would take to find cures; granted, we can't be 100% sure it will but it's worth trying more so than where other tax dollars are going are worth it.

  • hid - I have two things for you to Look-up/Read:

    1) The Nuremberg Code

    2) The Dickey Amendment

    After you read these two documents, we can talk again.

  • I see unklebillybob is still posting lies and misinformation.

  • Kay - Hello, again. I still see you still won't accept the facts...ESCR is still producing nothing...Well, that's not exactly correct,,,they are producing tumors and failures. Still, my question to you, specifically, if why not put the money in the proven ASCR? Oh yea, BTW, what lies? What misinformation? And please don't hold back!

  • ""Oh yea, BTW, what lies? What misinformation? And please don't hold back!"

    That answer is contained in your post, to wit:

    "ESCR is still producing nothing...Well, that's not exactly correct,,,they are producing tumors and failures."

    "Still, my question to you, specifically, if why not put the money in the proven ASCR"

    I've already answered that question.

    You dumb fucking hick...

  • kay - Intelligence bleeding through, potty mouth. But to take your same words, since YOU continue to repeat the same lies and questions over and over, your ESCR isn't working.

  • i hear ya

  • "i hear ya"

    He's either a troll (unlikely) or mentally disturbed (quite likely) since he continues to repeat the same lies and questions over and over.

  • i'm a she stupid. hence the name

    red LADY!!

  • "i'm a she stupid. hence the name

    red LADY!!"

    No no no! I was talking about unklebillybob!

    SORRY!

  • oh ok sorry didn't mean to be harsh

  • Haha, no harm done.

  • alrighty

  • Sheryl rocks and she has her priorities straight. Gotta love her...

  • seriosly and she ain't no crack addict or drugie either so she's a good role model too!

  • That's a very good point. It seems that the news is full of skanks like Paris, Britny, and Lindsay Lohan who have no morals or at least no self-control. Kinda sad...

  • yeah

  • I heard a while back that Britney Spears (cool, her initials are B.S. ) has a business arrangement with one of the paparazzo for like $250,000 a year..

    Crazy people!

  • WOW!! ppl like her need help. i actually thought she was gonna turn her life around but that thought has sunk.

  • It's really a shame. If she would have concentrated on updating her music to fit her age and current trends she might still be a popular musician. Instead, she started hanging out with Paris and flashing her coochie to the entire planet.

  • I've got a stem you can reseach baby...

  • dar - Adult Stem Cell Research (ASCR) should be allowed. Look at the 70+ successes it has produced.

    BTW, tried the site you posted, doesn't work.

  • Yeah this is so wrong, why use those cells to find a cure for cancer when you could throw them in a trash can?

  • mrm - What cures are you speaking of?

  • Im definite;y for stem cell research.

  • und - Which one? The stem cell research that produces successes or the stem cell research that hasn't produced any successes?

  • jes - I don't kill anyone or any lab animals, anymore.

  • Jes - On this one point, "When is a Human human", there is no need for discussion, for I come from the old school and there is nothing that will change my mind on this...As for ESC vs ASC, we know two things; 1) ASC works, 2) ESC "may have, shows promise, is making great strides, has the potential to become, may far exceed ..." But isn't producing anything

  • Jes - Think about this...Why in the world do you want to waste good research money in an area that has already received successes from ASCR?  Ask any of your ESCR people how long will it take for their research to reach a point where they can repair a damaged heart muscle.

  • "Why in the world do you want to waste good research money in an area that has already received successes from ASCR?"

    I answered that in my previous post.

  • jes - your almost heading in the direction of ASCR. Jes, you've missed a step. Remember, put the sperm and egg together, you now have a new human being. And by any other name...it's still a human being.

  • jes - OK, "...what's the problem with using cells they are gooing to throw away anyway?" If we were only talking about using those throw-away cells, that would be one thing...but with the amount of research money at stake, there will be unethical problems...in the name of science, of course.

  • You religous would rather follow ethics than save lives!! U r FAGS! Go Stem Cell Research!!!!!!!!

    Go Charles Darwin!!! Go Big Bang!!! Go Evolution!!!

  • jes - Those type of cells have been used.  You've researched a bit. What are the results that they found from Portugal? What are the results from The UK?

  • jes - I think you are right..."There is only an ethical argument if you stick in your big beardy fella living in the cloud." I'll bet dr joseph mengele had the same kind of thoughts.

  • jes - You are starting to sound rude. But I'll answer you anyway. Your own quote, "Suggestions that ESC MIGHT BE USEFUL FOR GROWING CELLS..." Do you know how many times we have heard this. Not dozens not hundreds but thousands of times.

  • jes - you can throw all the good money at this project you want, but at the end of the decade, you still don't have any, successes within the entire world.

  • Yes, old user name. I got a message from an old aquaintance on my old account.

    Of course, not all Christians are bad, just the lying deceptive ones.

  • Odd how that happens. I ran another one off from a Michael J. Fox stem cell video.

    This guy was also an "income tax" conspiracy nut. Income tax, stem cell, evolution, they're all ultra-conservative fundie nuts.

  • Odd things Christians, They keep wanting to tell you how right they are but if you ask them a question they disappear

  • "You know that the cells they don't use are destroyed right? There is no argument for your side. "

    They either ignore it or are ignorant of this fact because "Pastor" conveniently left it out of the sermon on the "Evils of Science". These nitwits still claim that us evil scientists are creating embryos simply to destroy them.

  • Yes to all the above. I did a quick search on pubmed and found 2000+ articles on embryonic stem cell research with interests projects such as Parkinsons, Cancer, and heart disease. A quick count of 50 of those articles found only a handful by U.S. researchers.

  • kay - Within those 2000+ articles, how many successful proceedures or results did they have?

  • only small minded people would not be in favor for something that would be so useful to mankind. Cheers for Sheryl!

  • I all for stem cell research. hopefully it will cure my hearing loss and severe tinnitus.

  • I, too, have lost significant hearing. Great Britain has some terrific hESC in this area. Also, GB will be starting clinical trials to cure blindness using hESC within the next 5 yrs (worked on mice - now working on humans) Canada has used hESC to actually differentiate cells to glucose reacting beta cells (Geron and university of Alberta) great things down the road

  • cdoyle - I've been reviewing Embryonic Stem Cell Research for over ten years. In that entire time,not one cure for anything has resulted from ESC Research. We are going in the wrong direction.

  • My nephew is a PhD, MD who uses hESC in research.

    google Geron and University of Alberta and Type 1 diabetes. Last year cooperation of Harvard and Stanford University scientists found that injected stem cells into the ears of deaf mice and regenerated hair follicle cells that make hearing possible. Remember hESC research (like our race to the moon) will develop exponentionally faster as time goes on

  • cdoyle - Not at this time. We've done this for ten years. If any of our ESCR had accomplished anything, we would be the first to know about it. We do know however, that adult stem cell research has proven successful. Why not put the researach monies where success is?

  • Let me know where adult stem cells have cured Parkinsons, Type 1 diabetes, ALS, cancer, etc. Why leave a stone unturned? If there is a cure for Type 1 with adult cells, why are millions still injecting themselves with insulin to stay alive? We invested billions in space research with little certainty that we could actually put a man on the moon. We experienced prolific advances in technology because of it. Let's use all types of research to attempt to lessen the suffering.

  • cheryl - Much of the debates in the popular media refuses to accept or flatly ignore/obscure the medical breakthrough made by ASCR. These break-throughs and successes have to-date, eluded ESCR and treatments. I've used the term Adult Stem Cell Research, however, a more accurate discription would be tissue stem cells. These are the regenerative cells of the body that have the ability to develop into other tissues of the body.

    (Cont)

  • Maybe embryonic stem cell research hasn't proven as successful because old-fashioned idiots try to stifle it at every possible opportunity. Do me a favor, go support invitro-fertilization, which also destroys embryos, but oppose embryonic stem cell research because you have been trained to.

  • "go support invitro-fertilization, which also destroys embryos"

    Here's what most opponents of embryonic stem cell research don't understand: the cells used are left over embryos from in vitro fert. procedures and will be destroyed anyway.

  • bunny - You are going in the wrong direction. We have people today that need help. ASCR has proven to successful in giving people help, now. Did you happen to take the time and read any of my post, below? If you want additional material of how successful ASCR has been and is, I'll be happy to provide you with that material. But ESCR, is at best, a fanciful dream.

  • " But ESCR, is at best, a fanciful dream.

    "

    Still spreading lies I see.

  • cheryl - These developing tissues can and have been helped along to become heart tissue, skin cells, a host of other tissues, to include neural matter. Successful treatments have been in autoimmune diseases - such as Crohn's disease, lupus, multiple sclerosis, and rheumatoid arthritis. Also, ASC have helped patients with corneal degeneration - assisting in the restoration of vision and have restored cardiac function to sufferers of heart attacks. (cont)

  • "Also, ASC have helped patients with corneal degeneration - assisting in the restoration of vision and have restored cardiac function to sufferers of heart attacks."

    There are some limited adult stem cell therapies, but the greatest potential lies with embryonic stem cells.

    Tell us, why are you opposed to the use of federal funds for embryonic stem cell research?

  • kay - This is what I know, ESC have not helped anyone. The prospects that they may, could, might, may someday, will - if enough money is dumped into it, produce over a period of 'who knows' time(decades) give us positive results.

    Kay, today there are great strides with ASCR...This is good for those who need it, RIGHT NOW. Some people can't wait for ESCR to become perfected. Hope that answers your question.

  • "This is what I know,"

    This is what I know: your knowledge of human biology wouldn't fill a thimble. "... great strides with ASCR...This is good for those who need it, RIGHT NOW. Some people can't wait for ESCR to become perfected."

    Funding ESCR has no negative on funding already available for ASCR. Furthermore, there is great potential for ESCR to cure diseases that can't be cured with ASCR.

    "Hope that answers your question. "

    Not even close.

  • cheryl - Please note that all of these successes have come from ASCR and none,,,I mean none from ESCR. Read, Michael Fumento, "The Stem Cell Cover-up" Insight Magazine May 24, 2004.

    This ESCR is and always has been about money. Since 2003 there has been successes in patients with spinal cord injuries, through ASCR. Let's put our research dollars in an area that has been proven successful

  • ESCR can't be successful without the necessary government funding to conduct the research. Bush and Co. have set back research on this by at least six years since they yanked meaningful funding.

    You really should read a a recent non-biased (i.e. Christian) publication for real information on stem cell research.

  • 'Read, Michael Fumento, "The Stem Cell Cover-up" Insight Magazine May 24, 2004'

    Not exactly peer review by a fellow scientist, is it?

  • "Not exactly peer review by a fellow scientist, is it?"

    No. Thanks, made me choke on a cracker.

  • made me choke on a cracker.

    Not anyone I know, hopefully

  • he he... I think you're lucky enough to not personally know any crackers.

  • "Let's put our research dollars in an area that has been proven successful"

    There has been more success with ASCR because the government never limited that funding. ESCR holds magnitudes of greater potential over ASCR and we would likely see the same advances with ESCR if the funding was available.

  • Typical of the creationists, happily send people to the electric chair but cry 'murder' when someone touches a cell

  • Indeed. They also have no qualms about sending people to die in a war to make the rich even richer.

  • I noticed he dodged J.I.'s question about the chimp vs the cell. He must be poring over his back issues of "Insight" magazine to see what his opinion should be.

  • kay - 1st, I don't read Insight. 2nd, I don't kill any lab animals (and haven't for a long time) and 3rd ESCR hasn't, isn't and will never work right. Too many variables we're unable to control.

  • "I don't read Insight."

    Liar. You gave it as a source on stem cell research in another post.

    ",,,I mean none from ESCR. Read, Michael Fumento, "The Stem Cell Cover-up" Insight Magazine May 24, 2004."

    Just answer the question: adult chimp, or a single human cell. No one asked you to actually kill it.

    "3rd ESCR hasn't, isn't and will never work right."

    Another outright lie.

    "Too many variables we're unable to control."

    Oh please, enlighten us.

  • kay - The Stem Cell Cover-up was an article through Stem Cell Research Facts.

    I haven't killed any lab animals or youthenized any lab animals, in the name of science, for a number of years. Human cell-from embryo? Doesn't work.

    ESCR hasn't, isn't and will never work right. Because you cannot control all the variables. (cont)

  • " haven't killed any lab animals or youthenized any lab animals, in the name of science, for a number of years."

    Why do you bring that up again, it's immaterial to the argument.

    "Youthenized"? You claim to have been an assistant professor working in biomedical research and you can't properly spell euthanized? LOL

  • kay - Yep, Youthenized, just see Greg Beato.

  • Stop babbling, and changing the subject and start answering our questions. Or, go away and live a quiet life of ignorance.

    Either way, stop misrepresenting your knowledge and stop lying about the promising future of embryonic stem cell research.

  • kay - (cont) Variables: It almost impossible to differentialt uniformly and homogeneously into the specific tissue you want to target. FACT! Next, ESC, from any unrelated donor are very likely to be rejected by the host aftere being transplanted. DON'T BELIEVE ME, RESEARCH IT YOURSELF. Finally, ESC have a good chance of creating/forming tumors...You know, Tumorigenic

  • " It almost impossible to differentialt uniformly and homogeneously into the specific tissue you want to target."

    Another outright lie from you. If that is true then why are so many researchers doing it?

    "DON'T BELIEVE ME, RESEARCH IT YOURSELF."

    I know you're lying because I HAVE researched it myself. Why do you continue to lie?

    "ESC have a good chance of creating/forming tumors"

    Lie. Give us a source for this or shut the fuck up.

  • You've been given ample evidence that ES cause cancer; it is their nature when in utero without a trophoblast and considered proof of pluripotence. Obviously, you resort to profanity and insults because you've lost on the point.

  • Ann - I see you've been discussing with kay, also. And as you've observed, when kay can't back-up all of those statements, kay spews, potty mouth language. Nice!

    Also, great strides in ASCR were made at the end of 2007. Time to drop ESCR!!!!!!!!!

  • cheryl - I see that my posts are reverse of how I wanted to post them to you. Ergo, read them from just above your post up. If you want any other information, please feel free to ask.

    UBB

  • "Why not put the researach monies where success is?"

    Again, if ESCR hadn't been crippled 6 years ago, who knows where we might be right now.

  • Kay - Were you aware that ESC's have been & still are rejected by the recipient's immune system after cells have been implanted? Suppose the researchers were still confident with that specific research and proceeded with the experiment(s)...Due to the rejection factor, the patient would then require the use of systemic immunosuppression.

  • "Suppose the researchers were still confident with that specific research "

    What a preposterous notion.

    It appears that you know NOTHING about science in general, let alone stem cell research. Maybe you should do some actual research other than "Insight" magazine, or some other blatantly biased source.

  • kay - Wrong scientific journal.

  • kay - I'm sorry, you were talking to me! OK then. Please present me with any reputable scientific journal, magazine, paper or unpublished findings that show ESCR has been successful. Take your time, you will be researching for a while.

  • kay - (cont) ran out of space... By contrast, With ASC we do not have to worry about this rejection factor because the cells come directly from the patient's own body.

  • kay - "Again, if ESCR hadn't been crippled 6 years ago, who knows where we might be right now." * We are not the only ones in the world who are working on ESCR...The only success any have had is growing tumors. So, the answer to your thought is that we are exactly in the same place...no success in ESCR - Stay with ASCR and quit fooling around with a project that isn't working.

  • "We are not the only ones in the world who are working on ESCR."

    That's the only statement you've made. A search of the literature shows that less than 10% of embryonic cell research is conducted in the U.S. Why? NO FUNDING!

    ".The only success any have had is growing tumors."

    Complete horseshit, and you know it.

    If all you're going to do is post your same lies over and over, I'll not respond.

    Why do Christians on youtube lie so much?

  • Why do Christians on youtube lie so much?

    Habit, I suppose

  • I suppose I should just rephrase my question striking the words "on", and "youtube".