Embryonic stem cell research not successful but alternatives are
by Steven Ertelt
Yet another very real confirmation that pro-life advocates have been right all along on embryonic stem cell research. We don’t have to sacrifice human life to improve it.
First, a report from England that its top stem cell scientist, Lord Patel of Dunkeld, is beginning to admit defeat:
“In terms of embryonic stem cell therapy, there is currently no such therapy that is available in a large number of patients. It may not deliver therapy for anything. We may find that stem therapy is quite a risky business.”
Secondly, scientists in Boston used an ethical alternative, direct reprogramming, to alleviate Parkinson’s in mice.
They are once again proving we don’t need to destroy human embryos (read: tiny unborn children who are unique human beings) to advance science and help patients suffering from diseases. We need cures, not clones.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Hey, the American Cancer Society has taken federal and private funds since 1913, and still people die of cancer every day.
Clearly it’s time to throw in the towel. Why continue this pointless research?
Gee, John McCain supports embryonic stem cell research. Why would anyone vote for a baby-killer like that?
Laura’s talking to herself. Off your meds again?
John McCain for President! 90% pro-life beats 0% pro-life every time!
We don’t have to sacrifice human life to improve it.
AMEN TO THAT!!!
That statement covers both embryonic stem cells AND abortive mothers as well!
And Michael J. Fox has been quiet lately on the embryonic stem cell issue. It’s been nice!
“90% pro-life beats 0% pro-life every time!”
Except for the *twitch* 10% of people it kills.
“And Michael J. Fox has been quiet lately on the embryonic stem cell issue. It’s been nice!”
Maybe he lost the ability to speak. It’s nice when people can’t speak for themselves because it let’s you speak for them. Then they say everything you want. Ah the pro-life movement is making more sense. *twitch twitch*
I have to go be sick but I’ll be back.
When’s Jill coming back? I hope she comes back soon I miss her.
Jess, I am so sorry to hear you are sick. I hope you’ll be feeling better soon.
And as for Jill, she will be back on the 11th, I believe! :)
Bethany, I’ll feel better when our dining commons open back up (it caught fire today) and I can actually have real food instead of sugar filled pop tarts.
Actually, Jess, re: Michael J. Fox, the lead story on his organization’s Parkinson’s website michaeljfox.org gave an overwhelmingly positive view of this latest development and included the following paragraph,
“For many years, a small group of patients with Parkinson’s disease have received experimental cell transplants using dopamine neurons derived from foetuses. But the use of foetal tissue poses ethical and logistical hurdles for widespread use. Scientists have performed similar experiments in animals using stem cells derived from embryos or created with nuclear transfer, also known as therapeutic cloning. But iPS cells offer a way to avoid the use of embryos as well as the technical challenges of nuclear transfer. And if the cells came from a patient’s own skin, there would be no potential complications from immune rejection of foreign tissue.”
I particularly like that last sentence, which recognizes benefits to adult stem cell research beyond just the questionable ethics of embryonic stem cell research. I’d say that this is encouraging news for both those lobbying for treatments and for the pro-life community, and I’m glad to see it getting the attention it deserves.
So sorry to hear you are sick. I’m home with a sick little one, and the stomach flu is just a bummer no matter how you slice it.
We learned how to manipulate adult stem cells by studying embryonic stem cells.
If right-to-lifers had had their way, we would have no adult stem cell cures.
The newspaper also interviewed Dr. Willy Lensch, from the Children’s Hospital in Boston, who also confirmed the possibility that the prospect of embryonic stem cell research may never play out.
“I could not guarantee to anyone that this work will actually lead to improvements in disease as a definite,” he admitted.
For American bioethics watchdog Wesley Smith, the admissions aren’t surprising.
“For the last ten years, ‘the scientists,’ in order to win the political debates over embryonic stem cell research and [human cloning] often wildly hyped the potential for cures,” he said.
“In the process, they convinced Californians–now facing a $16 billion budget deficit and tens of billions in bond debt–to borrow $300 million every year to pay for human cloning and embryonic stem cell research,” he explained.
“States vied with each other in an Oklahoma land race type scramble to throw money at Big Biotech. The focus of the media became obsessed with overturning President Bush’s funding policy, to the point that it committed serial journalistic malpractice with biased reporting and a news blockade on non embryonic stem cell successes,” Smith added.
“Well, those cures have not even appeared as distant silhouettes on the horizon yet, and finally, a few in the media are beginning to notice,” Smith concluded.
“By hyping the potential, the politicized science sector mislead people to win a political debate, and in the process reduced science to just another special interest spinning and obfuscating to get a greater share of gruel in the public trough.”
As Steve said: “We don’t have to sacrifice human life to improve it.”
“If right-to-lifers had had their way, we would have no adult stem cell cures.”
False. How long have we worked with cord blood vs. ESCR?
Andy, we learned about the existance of stem cells GENERALLY by studying embryonic stem cells.
If we had listened to the right-to-lifers we wouldn’t even know what a stem cell is.
Here’s a quote of the day for you, from USA Today:
“If California and New York vote to retain abortion rights after Roe, national Republicans won’t interfere.”
David Frum, Author of Comeback: Conservatism That Can Win.
SoMG – We also learned a great deal about the human body from experiments done by the Nazis, but it doesn’t suggest that the ends justify the means – which is the argument you are making.
I believe that’s called a non sequitur.
Logically, it doesn’t follow.
Now if you had a valid argument…
And Michael J. Fox has been quiet lately on the embryonic stem cell issue. It’s been nice!
Posted by: Julie at April 8, 2008 6:06 PM
I know!! Isn’t it awful when people with incurable diseases speak out about possible treatments and cures? They should just shut up already!
I know!! Isn’t it awful when people with incurable diseases speak out about possible treatments and cures? They should just shut up already!
Hieronymous, possible treatments? Show me one true possibility or promise that embryonic stem cells have EVER shown, without developing tumors in rats or some other horrible thing.
There was NEVER any promise in Embryonic stem cells.
Bethany, that’s fine if you think that. Clearly, other people, scientists included, thought differently.
Let’s see an instance where it actually showed promise, Hieronymous.
Chris 7:37 Great point! Thanks. :)
Clearly, other people, scientists included, thought differently.
Posted by: Hieronymous at April 9, 2008 8:00 AM
This is actually not accurate. Scientists tried to use embryonic stem cells in Parkinson patients and it made the symptoms worse. At first it seemed to help, but it ultimately accelerated the disease and the tremors were made worse bc of that treatment.
We comtinue to see biomedical companies (not just in the US, but in Indonesia and UK) get out of embryonic stem cell research bc it doesn’t work. Adult stem cells work and that is being used to treat all kinds of diseases right now. Adult stem cells are the real deal. There is growing concensus that it will takes decades if ever for embryonic stem cells to be useful.
The only reaseon for embryonic stem cell research is to ultimately clone human beings. That is what is driving that area of research, not finding cures to diseases. Those involved in this field know if they came out and said the ultimate goal is to clone human beings, they would all be closed down. Although I am sure that there are those who would justify that as well. What’s that saying – the end justifies the means!
@Hier,
being one of those folks in-line for stem cell use has made me aware of the directions this research takes … I have yet to hear of a single instance where embryonic cells have aided treatment, but I’ve heard of positive results fron applications of adult stem cells in a few hundred conditions. I second Bethany’s challenge to you!
this is not to say, there are not some fundamental errors here. For instance: stem cells are cells and not drugs. So for effectiveness they require the support of nutrition and directed-energy/exercise to establish themselves …. extensive physiotherapy/acupuncture in accompaniment is vital.
It is strange how stem cells are viewed, as the body’s repair kit. They are likely ‘THE’ way that our body learns anything hard-wire. From language acquisition; to sitting, crawling, standing, walking, running, jumping and dancing; to playing a piano; to speaking …. on and on require the extensive use of stem cells and their ability to become a variety of different types of cells.
All –
Pardon me if this post sounds snippy, but could you all try reading for comprehension sometime? I have NO IDEA whether embryonic stem cells showed promise at any point, but I don’t think you can argue that there are people, including scientists, who thought (note use of past tense there?) so at one time (and perhaps still do).
Frankly, I don’t think any of you, except perhaps for John McDonell, have any real idea either. None of you are researchers or scientists, as far as I know, and with the exception of John, none of you have any personal stake in the issue.
WHAT I WAS RESPONDING TO WAS A NASTY COMMENT ABOUT SOMEONE WITH PARKINSON’S THAT IMPLIED THAT HE HAD NO RIGHT TO SPEAK OUT ABOUT THE ISSUE. I think he does. Get it?
I used to work in a stem cell lab. However, I was the researcher’s assistant, and was there to learn so don’t by any means freak out and call me a fraud because I am NOT an expert on this.
In doing stem cell research with mice, I learned that mice actually have a part of their brain (a region which is also found in the human brain) that help to regenerate neurons for the olfactory bulb. There is a gene that Dave (my post-doc) believes may control the proliferation, and that is what his project is working on. I realize this is only with mice, but it’s still exciting!
At any rate, I believe that there is potential in embryonic stem cells. If anything, studying them lead to the discovery of adult stem cells, which is great since they have found lots of treatments using them! Besides, we can’t expect to see results immedietly…look how long we’ve been working on getting a cure for cancer and the common cold, and we still haven’t done it.
The only reaseon for embryonic stem cell research is to ultimately clone human beings. That is what is driving that area of research, not finding cures to diseases. Those involved in this field know if they came out and said the ultimate goal is to clone human beings, they would all be closed down. Although I am sure that there are those who would justify that as well. What’s that saying – the end justifies the means!
Posted by: Tara at April 9, 2008 9:01 AM
Glad to see that the pro-life mind-reading capabilities are still in full effect. It’s a constant source of amazement to me how so many of you are able to tell me exactly what other people’s motivations, psychology, and intentions are without those people ever saying a word! You are all truly gifted!
You should get out there on the street corners and start offering diagnoses to passers-by based upon their choice of wardrobe! I’m sure you could do it, and I know that everyone would appreciate your efforts!
Pardon me if this post sounds snippy, but could you all try reading for comprehension sometime? I have NO IDEA whether embryonic stem cells showed promise at any point, but I don’t think you can argue that there are people, including scientists, who thought (note use of past tense there?) so at one time (and perhaps still do).
I read what you said just fine. It doesn’t matter if your point was something else…you made a claim that there were “possible cures” through embryonic stem cells, and I simply wanted some kind of a proof of that claim. Saying a scientist believed it isn’t proof. Scientists believe all kinds of freaky stuff I don’t support, and the scientific community has never been 100 percent united on every issue, has it? Of course there will be some scientists who support certain things that are not true.
Frankly, I don’t think any of you, except perhaps for John McDonell, have any real idea either.
I think that we have the ability to look at the evidence, and take note that people have been cured by adult stem cells, while the embryonic stem cells have produced nothing good whatsoever.
None of you are researchers or scientists, as far as I know, and with the exception of John, none of you have any personal stake in the issue.
We don’t have to be a scientist to know that there have been no embryonic cures for anything. just get over it, people. Embryonic Stem cells are pointless. They do not save lives and never had such potential.
WHAT I WAS RESPONDING TO WAS A NASTY COMMENT ABOUT SOMEONE WITH PARKINSON’S THAT IMPLIED THAT HE HAD NO RIGHT TO SPEAK OUT ABOUT THE ISSUE. I think he does. Get it?
And I think we have the right to question and disagree with a celebrity who supports something publicly, which kills human life and does not have the potential of helping any human life, including that celebrity’s own human life. All it does is destroy destroy destroy, while adult stem cells are helping diseases.
Here is a short list of some of the things Adult stem cells have actually helped or cured to date:
Cancers:
1. Brain Cancer
2. Retinoblastoma
3. Ovarian Cancer
4. Skin Cancer: Merkel Cell Carcinoma
5. Testicular Cancer
6. Tumors abdominal organs Lymphoma
7. Non-Hodgkin
Glad to see that the pro-life mind-reading capabilities are still in full effect. It’s a constant source of amazement to me how so many of you are able to tell me exactly what other people’s motivations, psychology, and intentions are without those people ever saying a word! You are all truly gifted!
Heironymous, didn’t you say that you knew that the motivations of scientists who want to use Embryonic stem cell research was all about helping people with their diseases? It must be a great psychological gift that you have as well, knowing exactly what motivates these people!
I guess you’re in good company.
Heironymous, didn’t you say that you knew that the motivations of scientists who want to use Embryonic stem cell research was all about helping people with their diseases?
No, actually I didn’t say that.
I read what you said just fine. It doesn’t matter if your point was something else…you made a claim that there were “possible cures” through embryonic stem cells, and I simply wanted some kind of a proof of that claim.
No, that was not a claim I was making. That was a claim that Michael J. Fox was making when he spoke out about embryonic stem cell research, which is what I was referring to. And he was/is entitled to make that claim.
We don’t have to be a scientist to know that there have been no embryonic cures for anything. just get over it, people. Embryonic Stem cells are pointless. They do not save lives and never had such potential.
Right. All that’s necessary is that you check on lifenews to find out what’s going on in someone else’s research lab.
And I think we have the right to question and disagree with a celebrity who supports something publicly, which kills human life and does not have the potential of helping any human life, including that celebrity’s own human life.
Disagreeing is one thing, and disagreement is fine. The comment I was responding to was about how great it is that he shuts up, which is an attitude that I find unpleasant. MJF has a very personal stake in this type of research, and I’m guessing that he probably knows a lot about it. I think that entitles him to talk about it without being told to shut up.
Bethany and John McD,
We learned what stem cells are, and how to manipulate them, by studying embryos.
If we right-to-lifers had been in charge, we would have no adult stem cells, no umbilical cord blood stem cells.
All the cures and treatments that use adult stem cells or umbilical cord blood stem cells owe their existance to scientists who stood up to the right-to-lifers and experimented on embryos.
Right-to-lifers should not be determining scientific policy.
That should read: “If right-to-lifers had been in charge….”
SOMG, please reread Chris’s post at April 9, 2008 7:37 AM
Hi SoMG,
the whole point of medical science is about improvement …. but improvement means ???? Barrack Obama has ‘change’ as his political platform. But ‘change’ is a double-edged sword … either progress or regress. Death is regress …life is progress …. abortion is a dying.
Your argument akin to the argument that abortion spares society future criminals … ’tis strange because criminals are ‘wanted’, no?
I read it. Comparisons between embryonic stem cell research and the nazi holocaust do not impress me.
It’s just so silly for right-to-lifers to argue that adult stem cell research is preferable to embryonic stem cell research when the whole field of adult stem cell research is just a spin-off from embryonic stem cell research and wouldn’t exist if those same right-to-lifers had had their way.
No, it’s not a “spin off”…it’s a totally different thing, SOMG that was discovered by – what you say- was an accident.
There could have been more ethical ways that scientists could have made this discovery.
Embryonic stem cell research is not necessary. Adult stem cells cure and help mankind, from what we can tell today.
Embryonic stem cells are useless. They have no cures or therapeutic benefit for humans. Never have, never will.
That we discovered adult stem cells (something beneficial) by accident while studying something else, doesn’t justify the means by which it was discovered.
Bethany, human embryonic stem cells are worth studying just as a matter of basic science.
Suppose you’re a stem cell biologist. Any experiment you can think of doing with adult stem cells is also worth doing on embryonic stem cells just so you can compare the two results and try to understand what makes them different.
Hiero: Disagreeing is one thing, and disagreement is fine. The comment I was responding to was about how great it is that he shuts up, which is an attitude that I find unpleasant. MJF has a very personal stake in this type of research, and I’m guessing that he probably knows a lot about it. I think that entitles him to talk about it without being told to shut up.
I hope I’m able to comment on your post without being accused of putting words in your mouth. Some people here don’t share your opinion on the value of ESCR…. but I don’t think that anyone was trying to imply that MJF should “shut up” or that he doesn’t have a RIGHT to speak out about the issue.
Julie, on April 8, 2008 6:06 PM stated: And Michael J. Fox has been quiet lately on the embryonic stem cell issue. It’s been nice! in response to a statement in the article that said: We don’t have to sacrifice human life to improve it.
We should remember that we all share the same goal to help cure diseases, and we only differ in regards to what research methods should be used.
It appears that they’ve already done enough to know it’s worthless.
Oh, and as for “what makes them different”? I’m not even a scientist and I can tell you that. One cures, the other causes tumors.
Bethany, you wrote: “One cures, the other causes tumors.”
Why? Why do embryonic stem cells grow into tumors?
Which proteins are involved? Which oncogenes get activated? What class of drugs could prevent it? What sort of prior genetic modification of the cells could prevent it? What prevents adult stem cells from forming similar tumors?
These are key questions to our understanding of cell specialization and of cancer, and you can’t begin to answer them if you don’t study the embryonic stem cells.
Why? Why do embryonic stem cells grow into tumors?
It’s pretty simple to me. Because of the way we were designed by God, destroying life to help life will always result in disorder.
The actual scientific explanation doesn’t interest me. I know there is nothing that can be done to change this fact, regardless of how they manipulate the cells, no matter what they do.
Anything done with embryonic cells will have disorderly or destructive results.
I realize you do not agree with this, nor do you have to. That is just one explanation of why I believe that embryonic stem cell research has not worked so far, and can never work.
Which proteins are involved? Which oncogenes get activated? What class of drugs could prevent it? What sort of prior genetic modification of the cells could prevent it? What prevents adult stem cells from forming similar tumors?
These are key questions to our understanding of cell specialization and of cancer, and you can’t begin to answer them if you don’t study the embryonic stem cells.
Alfred Kinsey had lots of scientific questions which he wanted to know the answers to. He wanted to know, how many children are actually born homosexual? How would a child react if he was being molested by a pedophile? Do children have orgasms? Do children masturbate? He used “scientific” measures to find the answers to these questions, using pedophiles who raped children as the experimenters. Pedophiles with stop watches would time the reactions of the children screaming and fighting against the rape, and then Kinsey would call this “orgasm”.
My point here is, sure, there are lots of questions out there. But we don’t need to find the answers to every question at the expense of human life.
There is no reason that human beings should be used as experiments for finding out the answers to such questions.
That is what Nazi Germany did when they tested on Jews in their medical experiments. Which is why that analogy is still relevant to this discussion.
SoMG arguing that we wouldn’t have cures from ASCR if we didn’t do ESCR first is, first of all, completely wrong.
-Stem cells were first discovered through the study of cancer, not the study of embryos
-Embryonic stem cells were first derived from animal embryos in 1981 – over 10 years after the first bone marrow transplant
Second, even IF the discovery of adult stem cells came after the discovery of embryonic stem cells, SoMG’s argument that we needed to do ESCR first is completely illogical. It’s like saying that if McCain had been elected president in 2000, we wouldn’t be in Iraq right now. It’s an absurd claim to make.
Finally, we must remember that there are three camps in the ESCR argument:
Pro-life position: ESCR should be outlawed.
“Moderate” position: ESCR should not be funded by taxes. Note that this is Bush’s position, and he has been called a religious fanatic extremist for holding this essentially moderate view.
Machiavellian position: Religious fascists won’t let us use their money to experiment on embryos!
WOW! Thank you for that information about how stem cells were discovered, John L! I heard SOMG make that claim many times but I did not know the facts. Shame on me!
I should never just assume someone like SOMG is telling the truth about anything…thanks again, John. You made my day.
How were Stem Cells discovered, and how did Stem Cell Research Begin?
Stem cells were essentially discovered almost fifty years ago by a man named Leroy Stevens. While working at the Jackson Laboratory in Bar Harbor , ME he found a lab mouse with unusually enlarged scrotum. When he examined the mouse, he discovered that there had been a tumor inside of its scrotum that contained various tissues, including those of hair and teeth. He traced the origins of the tumor to a stem cell.
More about Leroy Stevens:
“We learned what stem cells are, and how to manipulate them, by studying embryos.”
As has already been pointed out to you, SoMG, this is completely false. You’re drifting away from the pro-ESCR playbook, now. Remember: your argument has been that adult stem cells had “an unfair head start” with regard to treating disease (even though this “head start” is merely a result of the fact that ASCs are easier to isolate and safer to work with than are ESCs). So now you’re actually claiming that the ESCs CAME FIRST and that we wouldn’t know anything about ASCs were it not for ESCs?! Good grief, dude, which is it?
I hope all your family members die from a disease that could passably be treated by stem cells then you retards will use your heads instead of believe in this “divine” being.
the research needs to continue, cures and treatments will be found, people WILL get abortions and in vitro fertilization clinics WILL continue to throw out embryos. WHY NOT put them to good use?
Good day and Get sick!!
-drew