Originally posted by sonhouse http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090423132559.htm
New safer method of producing functionally identical to embryonic cells without the use of added genetic material.
This is very exciting. I wonder how many out there will categorically protest
this research without even understanding it or reading about it because of
past ethical concerns. "Stem cell" still has such a negative connotation to
a frighteningly large section of the population. But it's usually because they
don't read the information themselves -- they just listen to what someone
else tells them to believe. Don't know if there's a way to fix that. 🙁
Originally posted by Traveling Again Don't know if there's a way to fix that. 🙁
Its easy. Change the name. Call them 'base cells' or 'undifferentiated cells'. The real question is where and why does it matter that people have a negative attitude towards stem cells. I would guess the answer is politically related funding. So for any projects needing government funding simply keep the name 'stem cell' out of the title.
Originally posted by twhitehead Its easy. Change the name. Call them 'base cells' or 'undifferentiated cells'. The real question is where and why does it matter that people have a negative attitude towards stem cells. I would guess the answer is politically related funding. So for any projects needing government funding simply keep the name 'stem cell' out of the title.
Yes; that would work -or you could kill all stupid people.
I'm with killing the stupid people, because if we change the name, then some stupid, manipulative religious leader will go and say something like: "that is the devil's work, trying to play God. Instead of using stem cells, they now using the (different name) cells".
You see, they won't even notice that it's a different name for the same thing, they will anyway criticize and try to stop anything that's meant to improve our lives.
I wonder if when the stupid people are being killed the anti-stem cell leaders will begin to ask if stem cells can raise their followers from the dead?
Because earlier research used embryonic stem cells. And for these people embryos = right to
life, etc., and it was therefore unethical to "use" embryonic cells for scientific purposes. I'm sure
some are against it because of genetic engineering, but, generally speaking, it is because of this
prior association with embryonic cells.
Originally posted by Traveling Again Because earlier research used embryonic stem cells. And for these people embryos = right to
life, etc., and it was therefore unethical to "use" embryonic cells for scientific purposes. I'm sure
some are against it because of genetic engineering, but, generally speaking, it is because of this
prior association with embryonic cells.
And of course the 'embryo's' they would have been using was from stillborns and such, but it was indirect fear that Dr. Mengala types would deliberately harvest live embryo's in an embryonic journey to create a super-race, all carefully orchestrated by the religious bible thumpers.
Originally posted by dannyUchiha I'm with killing the stupid people, because if we change the name, then some stupid, manipulative religious leader will go and say something like: "that is the devil's work, trying to play God. Instead of using stem cells, they now using the (different name) cells".
You see, they won't even notice that it's a different name for the same thing, they will anyway criticize and try to stop anything that's meant to improve our lives.
24 Apr '09 03:13
major breakthrough in adult stem cells:
Back to Top