Stem Cells

[sandmann]

Well, first, I have yet to see any real consensus in the scientific community about adult stem cell's superiority to embryonic stem cells. In fact, the only place I've heard that is from individuals who oppose embryonic stem cell research.

Second, adult and embryonic stem cells are effectively NOT equally funded. The federally funded embryonic stem cell line is years old and is severely perverted by mouse DNA. There is absolutely zero federal funding for newer, cleaner, more productive lines.

[James S]

[Andy]

[James S]

[James S]

[James S]

[Maf54]

[James S]

The point is that adult stem cells are 'better'. They're actually in clinical trials now, curing hundreds people, and more effectively than embryonic because the patient's own cells can be used.

There are currently no and never have been any embryonic stem cell clinical trials.

[edit] oh wait, I'm wrong. They're, right now, debating asking the FDA for approval to maybe begin one in perhaps a year.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn9 ... cards.html

I'm all for the betterment of science and the increase in the health sciences, but why do we even need embryonic stem cells? Answer, we don't. If tests can be run on embryonic stem cells, that's great, especially if they can help us understand the more readily available and more effective adult stem cells. But we don't need embryonic stem cells.

[Maf54]

[James S]

[Andy]

[James S]

So I can't expect results from embryonic stem cells in 10 or so years, but I end up GETTING those results from adult stem cells... and this is your argument FOR ESCs? Wow.

Researchers have found ways to get ALL CELL TYPES out of bone marrow ASCs... as my article from 2002 reveals. What else do you call pluripotence? And yet you assert otherwise. I'm confused.

Mainstream ESC applications may very well be 20-50 years off... and yet we have mainstream ASC applications today. Again, this is your argument FOR ESCs?

I link to several articles in actual scientific journals, and provide search results that show even more. And you assert that the opposite of what they reveal is true. Even going so far as to say that biology as a science can NOT give the results from ESCs that ASCs already do... as an argument for more research into ESCs. That science simply isn't capable of the advances necessary to create the applications that ASCs already have provided in innumberable clinical trials.

My mind is boggled.

[Maf54]

[James S]

[James S]

September of 2005, Korean doctors use adult stem cells from the umbilicus to restore feeling to parapalegic woman, with motorfunction after seven days:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic ... E_ID=46546

July 2006, Human hair follicles found to provide a source of multipotent ASCs in UPenn research:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 180513.htm


June 2005, Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh VERIFIES the indefinite growth of ASCs in culture:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 102413.htm

April 2003, Adult (mice) stem cells extracted and grown in lab, used to cure mice from multiple sclerosis:
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3638