The thrill (of the wedge) is gone
Last week came news of a huge stem cell breakthrough. How big? According to ABC:
“It represents a phenomenal breakthrough, more important than cloning… or the discovery of human embryonic stem cells,” said Dr. Markus Grompe, director of the Oregon Stem Cell Center in Portland. “This is a Nobel Prize worthy advance.”
And from the Associated Press….
“This work represents a tremendous scientific milestone – the biological equivalent of the Wright Brothers’ first airplane,” said Dr. Robert Lanza, whose company, Advanced Cell Technology, has been trying to extract stem cells from cloned human embryos.
It really is big. Separate research teams in the US and Japan both announced they had reprogrammed adult skin cells to become the equivalent of embryonic stem cells. The innovation is called “direct reprogramming” and the cells are called “iPS cells.” Ironically, the American team, led by James Thomson of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, was the first to isolate embryonic stem cells in 1998.
The double payoff is these cells will provide exact donor-patient matches (the donor being the patient) that scientists had heretofore thought only possible by cloning. Speaking of, according to the AP:
Scottish researcher Ian Wilmut, famous for his role in cloning Dolly the sheep a decade ago, has said he is giving up the cloning approach to produce stem cells and plans to pursue direct reprogramming instead.
But in the week following this grand announcement, which would nullify ethical debates on embryonic stem cell research and cloning, Democrats, particularly presidential candidates, have gone silent. Objectively speaking, they should be rejoicing. Consider House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s June 21 statement the day before President Bush vetoed the latest Democrat-sponsored escr funding bill:
“Tomorrow, with a single stroke of his cruel veto pen, President Bush will dash the hopes of millions of Americans seeking cures through the miracle of stem-cell research.”
But now those cruelly dashed – unintangible – hopes have been restored by a bigger – tangible – miracle.
So it seems President Bush’s pen wasn’t so cruel, it was wise. And that’s why Democrats have gone silent, except a few like Tom Harkin who are still weakly waving the escr banner. The wedge is gone.
But there’s more. John Kass, Chicago Tribune columnist, wrote yesterday:
Though I can’t begin to explain the science, the politics seem clear, despite the Orwellian twisting of the language over the years, despite the political symbolism and political iconography. It’s clear enough.
It’s about abortion. It has always been about abortion, about the choices we make and how we fight to use or deny human embryos for research — all of it like hands that shape our future culture.
There have been other scientific and funding aspects to the stem-cell debate, but at the retail political level, “stem-cell research” has long been a proxy for abortion rights and for the rights of human life unborn.
So “stem-cell” is code, a slogan, the fact understood by political consultants and their candidates, by the abortion rights groups and the politicians who seek their votes and by those that oppose abortion rights and seek those other votes.
[Photo of cell division courtesy of The Times Online]
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.
Thank [insert deity of choice here].
Now we can finally get down to business instead of bickering.
*dances*
I have been so excited about this since I heard about it a few days ago. I’m thankful that FINALLY it’s been realized by these scientists and researchers that destruction to other human lives is NOT necessary to cure sickness and disease.
I wonder if this news is disappointing to the abortion supporters?
I wonder if this news is disappointing to the abortion supporters?
Posted by: Bethany at November 26, 2007 10:05 AM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Why?
Do you think we ENJOY Parkinson’s, Multiple Sclerosis and Cancer? Any jump in genetic engineering technology is a gift to us all.
“Do you think we ENJOY Parkinson’s, Multiple Sclerosis and Cancer?”
No, we think you guys enjoy abortion.
You do realize that waste embryos with be thawed out and dumped down sinks every day in this country?
I’ve never quite understood why you people thought it was better to dump them down sinks than to use them for research.
What will PP do now with all of the lost $$$ from fetal harvesting??? The end is near!!! I can just feel it!!!
No wonder the Dems are silent on this one. Embryonic stem cell research was their “baby”. No need…no comment…
Laura said, “I’ve never quite understood why you people thought it was better to dump them down sinks than to use them for research.”
What “people” exactly is that comment directed to???
I’ve never quite understood why you people thought it was better to dump them down sinks than to use them for research.
No, we think dumping them down sinks is wrong too. We don’t support that either. Most of us support embryo adoption for those who will not be used elsewhere.
No, we think you guys enjoy abortion.
Exactly, Rosie!
*shakes head*
Oh AB Laura and Bethany…
No, we think you guys enjoy abortion.
Posted by: rosie at November 26, 2007 10:20 AM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Seek help.
“I wonder if this news is disappointing to the abortion supporters?”
Are you serious? Give abortion supporters a little credit. You act like all people who support abortion think… “oh damn, now less embryos/fetus’/babies are going to die. What will we do?!?”
The thing about this that scares all of you PCers and Proaborts is that this is just one step closer to the acceptance of human life begining at conception and that that life deserves our protection and respect.
Quite frankly, I doubt most PCers or “pro-aborts” care because now it’s not an issue. We’ll get the “embryonic” stem cells needed for research and stuff will finally get done. No need to get upset/pissy about things getting done, that’s probably why nobody has gotten “upset” or “scared”.
Jiminy.
Are you serious? Give abortion supporters a little credit. You act like all people who support abortion think… “oh damn, now less embryos/fetus’/babies are going to die. What will we do?!?”
Well, maybe not people like you, Jm, but I certainly do think that there are people who do feel this way, whether they say it in so many words or not.
“but I certainly do think that there are people who do feel this way, whether they say it in so many words or not.”
That’s kind of sad, really, that you have that little faith in people with differing opinions from yourself. Disappointing actually. :(
Well, maybe not people like you, Jm, but I certainly do think that there are people who do feel this way, whether they say it in so many words or not.
Posted by: Bethany at November 26, 2007 11:15 AM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Uh, I can NAME “pro-lifers” who think that pregnancy, childbirth and childrearing is perfect punishment for whores.
I have to believe that they’re a freaky fringe element, and probably just bitter about their own personal failures. (Remember the “unusual” Pentacostals who formed a prayer circle around my car when I was at work? Two of them were members of the “punishment” clique…)
I heard about this a few days ago, and I’m super excited!
Pro-aborts,
I wouldn’t feel too bad about this, your killing centers are still open and legal…..
What will PP do now with all of the lost $$$ from fetal harvesting??? The end is near!!! I can just feel it!!!
The skin cell reprogramming announcement has no effect at all on PP. The embryos in question were never the product of abortions, but rather unused extra embryos created in the process of in vitro fertilization, IVF. As Laura pointed out earlier in the thread, the unused ones are frozen until the parents decide they are no longer needed, at which point they are flushed.
Stem cells were never about abortion…they were about IVF, and the sensible use of embryos which would otherwise be destroyed. If the same thing can be accomplished with skin cells, great! But those unused embryos are still out there, and if you antis oppose their creation and destruction, then it is the “Fertility Centers” that you should be going after.
“then it is the “Fertility Centers” that you should be going after.”
And people like my parents.
What the heck (I would have used a stronger word here) are you people thinking? Stem cell research and abortion are two separate issues. Just because we are pro-choice doesn’t mean we seek every opportunity to end pregnancies.
God, freaking idiots.
(guess what movie that is from.)
Ray,
10. Do stem cells come from aborted fetuses?
One potential source of stem cells comes from early fetal tissue recovered during a narrow window of development. In development, an embryo is called a fetus at about 7-8 weeks following fertilization. At about 4-5 weeks of development, embryonic germ cells, the precursors to the egg and sperm cells, are found in the developing ovary or testis, structures only about 2 mm long.
In 1998, the isolation, culture and partial characterization of embryonic germ cells were reported. The cells were derived from human aborted tissue. When isolated and cultured, these germ cells were shown to have properties similar to stem cells isolated from the inner cell mass of blastocysts.
However, some evidence has suggested that embryonic germ cells may be more limited in their ability to become many different cell types because they are isolated from tissue that is further along in development (several weeks as opposed to only 4-5 days). More research will be required to understand the properties and behavior of these cells to determine their usefulness for future cell therapies. Because of various discrepancies in federal regulations, stem cells taken from fetuses are subject to different rules that stem cells derived from embryos.
source: http://www.isscr.org/science/faq.htm#10
BTW, That’s from the International Society for Stem Cell Research’s website)
Now when did PP ever care about “rules” anyway???
(here’s some more info, if you’re interested:)
http://www.nrlc.org/Baby_Parts/NE_research.html
http://www.prolife.com/HarvestingAbortedBabies.html
http://www.nrlc.org/news/1998/NRL1.98/doer.html
Hey, to all of you PC’ers out there getting really ticked off because we may not understand your total thought process on abortion, here’s some news for you: Stem cell research does have something to do with abortion…I have some links waiting in limbo for you, but here’s one while you’re waiting:
10. Do stem cells come from aborted fetuses?
One potential source of stem cells comes from early fetal tissue recovered during a narrow window of development. In development, an embryo is called a fetus at about 7-8 weeks following fertilization. At about 4-5 weeks of development, embryonic germ cells, the precursors to the egg and sperm cells, are found in the developing ovary or testis, structures only about 2 mm long.
In 1998, the isolation, culture and partial characterization of embryonic germ cells were reported. The cells were derived from human aborted tissue. When isolated and cultured, these germ cells were shown to have properties similar to stem cells isolated from the inner cell mass of blastocysts.
However, some evidence has suggested that embryonic germ cells may be more limited in their ability to become many different cell types because they are isolated from tissue that is further along in development (several weeks as opposed to only 4-5 days). More research will be required to understand the properties and behavior of these cells to determine their usefulness for future cell therapies. Because of various discrepancies in federal regulations, stem cells taken from fetuses are subject to different rules that stem cells derived from embryos.
http://www.isscr.org/science/faq.htm#10
BTW, that’s from the International Society of Stem Cell Research.
Stephanie said, “Just because we are pro-choice doesn’t mean we seek every opportunity to end pregnancies”
No, just the “unworthy” one’s, right??? However, I am glad that you chose the word “pregnancies”.
Oh, look, here’s another one:
How are stem cells obtained?
Current research projects have obtained stem cells from tissue which has been removed during terminated pregnancies or from embryos produced by in-vitro fertilization clinics. Once isolated, the cells can be grown up in the laboratory and stored for future use. Each reservoir of cells, derived from a single embryo, is known as a cell line. A more reliable supply would be obtained by copying or cloning embryos specifically for their stem cells.
source: http://www.newsbatch.com/stemcells.htm
Now, it’s just a theory of mine, of course, but if you time the death of Ronald Reagan from Alzheimer’s, and the death of Christopher Reeve, to the Dem’s screaming about the need for stem cell research, and the building of mega PP’s in various cities in the U.S. (supported by the Dems: i.e., Obama’s statement re: the opening in Aurora), coincidence??? I say not!!!
You know? Instead of whining about how embryonic stem cells used to be obtained and then calling out the “pro-aborts” on their general “ass-hattery” for a lack of a response, why don’t you all just instead just be bloody grateful that science has given a solution to a nagging problem and that “embryonic” stem cells are now going to be obtained in a moral, more ethical manner for study.
I think focusing on the positive would be more beneficial than ragging on the “opposition’s silence”.
Besides, ragging on the opposition is petty and it makes you look immature.
*done*
Now, it’s just a theory of mine, of course, but if you time the death of Ronald Reagan from Alzheimer’s, and the death of Christopher Reeve, to the Dem’s screaming about the need for stem cell research, and the building of mega PP’s in various cities in the U.S. (supported by the Dems: i.e., Obama’s statement re: the opening in Aurora), coincidence??? I say not!!!
Posted by: AB Laura at November 26, 2007 1:13 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What are you trying to say?
Rae,
Nope! I’m just gloating (maybe a bit early) about the demise of PP!!! (not other abortion clinics, though, just PP!!!!)
Laura,
I’m not “saying” anything…I was simply making an observation. What I’ve learned from life, is that everything immoral always comes down to the love of $$$…not once will it ever involve the caring or love of another human being. You cannot serve two masters.
Laura,
I’m not “saying” anything…I was simply making an observation. What I’ve learned from life, is that everything immoral always comes down to the love of $$$…not once will it ever involve the caring or love of another human being. You cannot serve two masters.
Posted by: AB Laura at November 26, 2007 1:27 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
No amount of money could have helped Ronald Reagan and Christopher Reeve, and Planned Parenthood has nothing to do with embryonic research.
I guess I’m just not getting what you’re trying to say.
RAE!!! *tacklehug*
Seriously, this is awesome…now that we’ve got the best of both worlds (the pluripotency of embryonic stem cells without the controversy, and the exact genetic matches that people need to ward off organ/tissue rejection), we can get down to biological business and START THAT RESEARCH. woooooo hooooo!!
I’m excited about this on a scientific level. I have no reason to be disappointed about anything- a scientific breakthrough was made!
Lyssie wrote:
Seriously, this is awesome…now that we’ve got the best of both worlds (the pluripotency of embryonic stem cells without the controversy, and the exact genetic matches that people need to ward off organ/tissue rejection), we can get down to biological business and START THAT RESEARCH. woooooo hooooo!!
Something to ponder about the recent breakthrough:
http://jivinjehoshaphat.blogspot.com/2007/11/reactions-to-todays-stem-cell-news.html
This scientific miracle was encouraged by our President’s “hardline” position against unrestricted funding for ESCR. If Dubya had let the federal $$$ flow freely — as pro-ESCR people wanted him to do — there would have been no incentive to seek non-embryo stem cells, and this breakthrough might never have happened.
Right now, Bush looks to have the wisdom of Solomon. Not bad for a “Chimp”! ;)
I’m sorry I offended you, Rae, but we pro-lifers have tried so hard to bring home the fact that adult stem cells have the potential to be pluripotent for years now, and no pro-abortion supporter would ever listen or care. They did not want to go that route (the “no kiling” route, no matter what information was out there about the potential risks, and the non-potential for heping disease.
We pro-lifers already knew, years ago, that the potential was in adult stem cells, not embryonic, but abortion supporters were fine with killing unborn children in order to try to more quickly gain results (at least, what they thought was more quickly), even though that isn’t how it happened. AND even though there was plenty of evidence that the embryonic way would be more destructive, not only to the embryos but also to the people with diseases that they were trying to treat(remember the studies on mice which resulted in large tumors and other such studies?)
The results were in the non-destructive method, not the destructive method. Regardless of the fact that there were NO cures ever being produced from embryonic stem cell research, abortion supporters continued to applaud it and remained adamant that it was the one to go with, even though cures were already happening with adult stem cells. They demonized us on the pro-life side as haters of people with disease, people who wished death on others, when the opposite is true, Rae!
For years, pro-abortion supporters have tried to make US feel guilty, because we don’t support embryonic stem cell research, telling US, that we didn’t care about people with various diseases. This is why it angers me. Because we are made out to look like the bad guys when we are actually trying to help people without killing people to do it…then the pro-abortion supporters who did NOT support adult stem cell research as the means of treating diseases, want to pretend they are happy when a breakthrough happens which proves they were wrong after all? How many times did we tell them …how many times did we show them the evidence? They KNEW the potential was not in embryonic stem cells, and yet they wanted to continue killing. For what reason? Money? Pride? I don’t know. All I know is that when it came down to it, they preferred the killing method to the non-killing method. And that is why I say that some people will be disappointed by this.
If you find an article by Planned Parenthood, NARAL, etc though, saying how pleased and excited they are by the fact that adult stem cells, as opposed to embryonic, are curing people, then please do let me see it.
then the pro-abortion supporters who did NOT support adult stem cell research as the means of treating diseases, want to pretend they are happy when a breakthrough happens which proves they were wrong after all? How many times did we tell them …how many times did we show them the evidence? They KNEW the potential was not in embryonic stem cells, and yet they wanted to continue killing. For what reason? Money? Pride? I don’t know. All I know is that when it came down to it, they preferred the killing method to the non-killing method. And that is why I say that some people will be disappointed by this.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That was some of the most warped reasoning I’ve run into EVER.
Very well said, Bethany.
@Bethany: It’s okay, I understand that you’re happy about this. I’m not offended, just disappointed in some of the things said here…that’s all.
And guess what? When I was more “pro-abort”, I was never fond of embryonic stem cell research. I thought it was a waste of time and lead to nothing more than annoying, time-wasting debates when cures could be brought about through less ethically-troubling means. I always said figure out how crap works with the adult stem cells and get as many cures out of that (because I think umbilical-cord stem cells and adult stem cells are more practical) before even bothering to wade into the embryonic debate (in hopes that that whole shindig could be avoided by breakthroughs like this).
:)
No hard feelings really, just some disappointment with the…gloating and what not because quite frankly I don’t understand why there is a need to gloat and what not.
And for the record, what NARAL and Planned Parenthood think is irrelevant. Who cares what they think? In the long run, they don’t matter too much (nor does the NRLC apparently with the whole Thompson fiasco).
Naaman,
To be completely honest, I had hoped that adult stem cells would be researched further to determine if they could be pluripotent. I thought that cells retrieved directly from the patient would provide much better therapy, due to the fact that no anti-rejection medication need be used. Considering I lost an aunt because her kidney from her transplant was rejected, I was not keen on pursuing an option that would require immune-suppressing drugs.
Still not a Bush-ophile though…There were still scientists interested in the potential that adult stem cells had (I’m one of them, hoping I can eventually get into medical research like that later on after I graduate), and I seriously doubt that no federal money would have found its way into the coffers of those studying them. Wisdom of Solomon? Bush may have gotten THIS one right, but we’ll see how right he is about other things. Even a blind squirrel gets a nut now and then. :)
Rae, I’m sorry if I was gloating. I admit, I do kind of feel like, “I told you so!”, but at the same time, I am just relieved that more people are realizing that you don’t have to take lives to save lives. So at least we can agree on that…and I’m glad we can also agree that it doesn’t matter what Planned Parenthood thinks! lol
Hi Lyssie.
These cells also intrigue me, but in a way not commonly thought of. A while back (@15 yrs), a in utero fetus-baby of a couple had abnormal DNA and would be born with a hereditary condition so severe not one child born with it survived 18 months. On a whim, a researcher at a Chicago U hospital injected adult bone marrow into the fetal bones to ‘teach’ the developing baby’s cells what was proper. The child upon celebrating her 5th birthday, was pronounced ‘cured’.
The researcher thought that this technique could assist many children with DNA (inherited) abnormalities.
John,
Thus eliminating the need for any type of embryonic tissue for the treatment of DNA-related abnormalities?
‘ve never quite understood why you people thought it was better to dump them down sinks than to use them for research.
No, we think dumping them down sinks is wrong too. We don’t support that either. Most of us support embryo adoption for those who will not be used elsewhere.
Posted by: Bethany at November 26, 2007 10:29 AM
……………………..
Embryo adoption? The mind boggles. Hmmmm. Designer Petri dishes. I can make a mint.
Hey Laura,
this technique is really fascinating. There is much hype about stem cell use, but altering the structure of DNA itself is still a pipe-dream. I think one of the reasons for its efficacy, was that that the intervention was at a development stage when DNA was ‘open’ to change … at birth and maybe post-birth 2 yrs, but after this it remains ‘closed’ to significant alteration.
John,
VERY fascinating, indeed! With the flame of escr out, maybe it will be lit on this one, too! It sounds very promising!
From what I’ve seen, the Democrats are usually saying that it’s great, but that embryonic stem cells were necessary to create the breakthrough and we shouldn’t suddenly abandon the research now. Although many say that they want strict ethical guidelines surrounding it..
I haven’t done a whole lot of research, though, on what they are saying.
PIP,
Oh, to be a fly on the wall……….
There’s new research out right now talking about how menstrual blood apparently harbours cells that in some way can be used to act as stem cells. I’m not thoroughly versed in the intimate science of SCR, but it sounds wonderful. What I care about is helping cure diseases as soon and as effectively as possible. I don’t care about what kind of stem cells they use, I care about stopping suffering of sentient people.
“There is much hype about stem cell use, but altering the structure of DNA itself is still a pipe-dream. I think one of the reasons for its efficacy, was that that the intervention was at a development stage when DNA was ‘open’ to change … at birth and maybe post-birth 2 yrs, but after this it remains ‘closed’ to significant alteration.”
@John: Sounds very “Star Trek: Deep Space Nine”. :) That technology reminds me of something that was done to my favorite DS9 character. :)
“There’s new research out right now talking about how menstrual blood apparently harbours cells that in some way can be used to act as stem cells.”
I heard about that! It is so new however the website I got was extremely vague.
Lyssie wrote:
Wisdom of Solomon? Bush may have gotten THIS one right, but we’ll see how right he is about other things. Even a blind squirrel gets a nut now and then.
Yeah, okay, you got me. The “wisdom of Solomon” quip was a bit of a dig at the Bush-haters in the audience. Sorry about that…. ;)
I don’t think that Bush has the wisdom of Solomon. On the other hand, I don’t think he’s as stupid as the dKos crowd and other BDS sufferers claim. A moron simply can’t be elected President, in spite of the dark rumors about rigged voting machines and stolen elections.
Anyway, to get back on-topic: My point is that pro-lifers — and Bush specifically — were 100% right about this issue. We said over and over that the ethical choice was to pursue research with adult stem cells and any other stem cells that didn’t require killing human beings. ESCR advocates screamed about how anti-science and heartless we were. As others have already written, pro-lifers — and Bush specifically — were targeted with a cornucopia of horrible accusations. And yet … we were right.
Now, because we stuck to our guns, we have this breakthrough that both satisfies the demands of morality and is actually superior to ESCR. This breakthrough simply would not have happened — at least, not as quickly — if we had chosen to follow the ESCR will o’ the wisp. If we had listened to the ESCR advocates, we would have focused our research there, and adult stem cell research would have been shortchanged or ignored.
You’re welcome. :)
Naaman, when did I ever say that you weren’t right? Even I said that I preferred putting money into adult stem cell research because of the option of genetic matches. That was the ideal situation for me. :D
I work in a genetics lab at my college. I think it’s fascinating stuff. :) My research paper on stem cells last year led me to prefer adult stem cell research much more than the ESCR option. For the love of Pete, I agree with you! :P I’m glad this research was fought for, because I agreed with it (even though my reasons differed). Can you accept that even though I acknowledge that you guys supported it all along, I still don’t love Bush? ;)
Naaman-
ESCR was used to discover these stem cells, and the main scientist involved does not want to discontinue it.
We don’t all love him either, Lyssie. :)
PIP said, “ESCR was used to discover these stem cells, and the main scientist involved does not want to discontinue it.”
Can you please document the source for this? I’m not questioning your comment, I am just VERY interested in this, and all information that I get is extremely helpful..
thanks in advance!
:)
Lyssie wrote:
I work in a genetics lab at my college. I think it’s fascinating stuff. :) My research paper on stem cells last year led me to prefer adult stem cell research much more than the ESCR option. For the love of Pete, I agree with you! :P I’m glad this research was fought for, because I agreed with it (even though my reasons differed).
Well done. Good for you! :)
Can you accept that even though I acknowledge that you guys supported it all along, I still don’t love Bush? ;)
As I said, the “praise Bush” stuff was mainly a dig at the Bush-haters in the audience. If you really must know, I don’t love Bush either. I think he’s right about a number of things (Life, terrorism, and lower taxes), but I also think he’s wrong about a number of things (immigration, NCLB, and out-of-control spending). I think Bush was very wise about his handling of the ESCR controversy, and very foolish about his handling of Iraq. All in all, a decidedly mixed bag.
Laura-
These stem cells are not derived from embryonic. However, without ESCR we wouldn’t know that these skin cells are capable of performing the same functions. The scientist, Thompson, was the pioneer fro ESCR.
Here is a short description of what I was (probably not eloquently) trying to say:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Thomson_(cell_biologist)
Without his research it is unlikely this would have been found.
Nice lookin’ sheep.