PDA

View Full Version : Adult stem cell projects should be focus



Max
08-27-2006, 02:12 PM
Adult stem cell projects should be focus

By John Kost

There has been significant interest and discussion regarding stem cell research as a result of the "funding" legislation passed by Congress and vetoed by President Bush.
Unfortunately, as is often the case in life-issue-oriented subjects, many facts are left out of the dialogue and media coverage.
Following are some basics:
There are two types of stem cells - embryonic and adult.
To date, adult stem cell research can claim success stories in 72 different diseases. The list includes various health problems, including cancers, anemia, liver and bladder diseases, Parkinson's disease and spinal cord injury.
There are no success stories involving embryonic stem cell research.
Only embryonic stem cell research was covered in the vetoed legislation that provided "funding" only. Legality was not at issue. Both types of stem cell research are legal.
Federal funding already exists for both embryonic and adult stem cell research.
A total of $25 million had already been approved for embryonic stem cell research on stem cell samples in existence as of August 2001. Twenty cell lines were created for research and others remain in storage for possible use.
For those who believe human life begins at conception (when the male sperm fertilizes the female egg), as President Bush and Pro-Life organizations do, embryonic stem cell research is a moral problem.
But set that aside and ponder a few questions:
Why does most media coverage on stem cell research [omit the fact that there are] multiple stem-cell types, making it sound like the vetoed legislation was the only answer?
How recently have you seen a report that did anything more than reference the subject broadly? And when have you seen a report that reflected "human" success stories identifying the type of stem cell research responsible for the success?
If there is such "promise" in embryonic stem cell research, why does it need massive federal funding assistance? It would seem the private sector would provide funding if there was a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.
Why throw money at research that has had no success when there is research that has documented many successes?
This is an emotional and complex subject. People should not be led down a path of thinking that cures are just around the corner if only the government would fund stem cell research.
People like Dr. Bert Vogelstein, professor of oncology and pathology at Johns Hopkins Hospital, say all claims of therapeutic benefit from embryonic stem cells are conjectural. Marcus Grumble, a Ph.D. in the Department of Molecular and Medical Genetics at Oregon Health and Sciences University concurs there is no evidence of benefit from embryonic stem cell research. They are but two of many who concur because they recognize the failure of embryonic stem cell research and the success of adult stem cell research.
In the end, two basic questions regarding embryonic stem cell research will have to be answered: When does life begin, and do the ends justify the means?
It would seem to make sense to focus on research that is providing positive results (adult stem cells) and does not pose ethical questions.




http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/mld/sunnews/news/opinion/15373298.htm

babyccc
08-27-2006, 08:13 PM
If Adult Stem Cells Have Proven Results---then Why Aren't You And I Up Living Our Lives As Before??????????? Just As You Ask If Embryonic Cells Are Proven----why Need Government Funding.

Reason Is Cause Neither Is Proven. Both Need More Research. That's The fact.

Thank You