From: Gloworm ® 27/03/2002 22:10:53 Subject: stem cells!!! post id: 677728 hi all.... I heard on the radio today, that doctors are now saying that stem cells can help Alzheimer's, kidney, and heart troubles as well as a few other things, I agree with this as it will save a lot of lives. but the doo gooders and some members of churches think its killing an embryo/ this is not so as a lot of these are thrown out and would [die] anyway. i think that it should go ahead what do you all think????? From: Cyril 27/03/2002 22:17:18 Subject: re: stem cells!!! post id: 677747 I agree, Gloworm. This stem cell research has enormous potential, but there will always be superstitious types who'll find reasons to object to anything involving embryo cells. From: Hober 27/03/2002 23:02:06 Subject: re: stem cells!!! post id: 677810 Understanding stem cells can benefit our knowledge of ailments of so many types that their research is essential. Their functional understanding can benefit treatment of cancers which are often stem cells repairing or building tissue that go wrong somehow and continue to replicate, degenerative tissue diseases like Alzheimer's (with amyloid research) and multiple sclerosis (with autoimmune research) could be better understood, not to mention spinal, nerve and other tissue damage. I don't think embryos can be considered "sacred". Women regularly miscarry during menstruation before they even know they are pregnant, so a fertilised egg is not considered to be of great consequence by the reproductive cycle. If the church is worried about being unnatural, listen to nature: I don't think she doesn't consider it that significant. From: Arno ® 28/03/2002 0:14:49 Subject: re: stem cells!!! post id: 677937 Under stringent ethicolegal guidelines I think it's something worth trying. Arno From: Woodie ® 28/03/2002 1:51:17 Subject: re: stem cells!!! post id: 677996 Why are they called "stem" cells? Is it an acronym? From: oPi ® 28/03/2002 2:22:11 Subject: re: stem cells!!! post id: 678008 We have 4 embryo's in storage. After years of trying IVF we finally got 2 to work, and had twins - a boy and a girl. We decided to keep the other 4 for the maximum allowable term of 10 years (at a cost of $110 per year for storage +CPI). That was 3 years ago, and now 1100 dollars later in 2009, we will have to make a decision. Before Stem cell research was in the media, we had decided we wouldn't donate them to another mother, as we couldn't stand the thought of 4 kids just like our 2 being brought up by someone we don't even know. Or, the thought of not even knowing if those 4 ever worked - the doctors don't tell you if they have made another woman pregnant or not - you just dis~own them. Now, with stem cell research all the rage we are having another think. My wife is keen to donate - but I'm a little reluctant. What controls are in place to stop the tests allowing the embryos to reach a 20 week stage or more. Every body has a different viewpoint as to when life begins. My belief is it begins when the heart first starts to beat - ie at 5 to 6 weeks in the womb. The idea of my potential son or daughter being aborted at 5, 10, 20 or more weeks after an experiment has been terminated worries me. I don't have a problem flushing 8 cell embryo's down the toilet, but I do have a problem giving the go ahead to an experimenter / doctor too flush a (maybe 10 billion cell) fetus's down the toilet. opi From: Woodie ® 28/03/2002 2:31:30 Subject: re: stem cells!!! post id: 678010 Please correct me if I am wrong, but stem cell reasearch/use does not involve the implantation of embryos purely so they can be aborted later in the pregnancy. It doesn't involve the implantation of externally fertilised embryos at all. Does it?? From: Martin Smith (Avatar) 28/03/2002 14:12:13 Subject: re: stem cells!!! post id: 678469 OPi - under present guidelines what you are worried about wouldn't happen. In fact it couldn't happen with present technology. MS From: J.F. ® 31/03/2002 21:21:38 Subject: re: stem cells!!! post id: 683455 Please correct me if I am wrong, but stem cell reasearch/use does not involve the implantation of embryos purely so they can be aborted later in the pregnancy. It doesn't involve the implantation of externally fertilised embryos at all. Does it?? AFAIK, it involves removing cells from early embryos, which renders them unable to "turn into" a foetus; they will not be implantated, nor ever form a baby; they have been killed. I went to a seminar on ESC last year that explained more about them, but as it was my first lecture on the topic of ESC, + it was intended for the medical students at my hospital, it was a steep learning- curve for me + I struggle to recall it now. I remember a diagram showing the blastcyst + there was a space in the middle of the ball of cells. The ESC were initially just a patch on one wall of the hollow ball of cells. They would become the whole actual embryo, later. The thing about ESC is that they are pluripotent: they can form all the tissue types of the foetus. There are less- multipurpose types of stem cells, found in various organs even in adult life. These may turn out to be more useful + less - troublesome, from both ethical + medical POV. This forum is un-moderated. The views and opinions expressed are those of the individual poster and not the ABC. The ABC reserves the right to remove offensive or inappropriate messages.