• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

New Stem Cell Method

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
What did he say?

@MOOT - What do the studies say about it? Are there any?

If the claim can be substantiated, I wouldn't say it's ignorant. If the claim can be refuted, then sure, it's ignorant.
 
Primary problems with this "new" method:

1) Doesn't really circumvent the primary complaints from the "I'm with Jesus but I selectively follow his teachings" crowd. Most oppose reproductive technology. So it's irrelevant that the one cell taken for genetic testing is the same one used for this new technique.

2) Success rate is likely to be low . . . very low. It's not like this idea hasn't crossed anyone's mind before. But more power to them if they can get it to work.

3) Parents have to consent for the process. May not be a major hurdle b/c it shouldn't compromise testing and otherwise there's no additional risk involved . . . I think.
 
If it doesn't kill the embryo I don't see why the pro-life crowd would have a problem with it.

____________

I'm a humble pro-lifer and see no problem with the technique. Also a huge proponent of using cord-blood which has already netted significant results rather than just potential.
 
Originally posted by: johnnobts
If it doesn't kill the embryo I don't see why the pro-life crowd would have a problem with it.

____________

I'm a humble pro-lifer and see no problem with the technique. Also a huge proponent of using cord-blood which has already netted significant results rather than just potential.
Click to expand...

:thumbsup:
 
Originally posted by: inspire
What did he say?

@MOOT - What do the studies say about it? Are there any?

If the claim can be substantiated, I wouldn't say it's ignorant. If the claim can be refuted, then sure, it's ignorant.
Click to expand...

It's ignorant because it is nothing but speculation. Research needs to be done, and these people are still using "god" to kill technology and medical breakthroughs.

I still haven't seen the proof that an embryo contains "life."
 
Originally posted by: johnnobts
If it doesn't kill the embryo I don't see why the pro-life crowd would have a problem with it.

____________

I'm a humble pro-lifer and see no problem with the technique. Also a huge proponent of using cord-blood which has already netted significant results rather than just potential.
Click to expand...

The dirty little secret is that we don't really know what the impact of the typical method may be. So using this new technique to get stem cells has no bearing on the real risk posed by IVF methods in general.

Further, if you believe life begins at conception (whatever life means) and conception begins at fertilization (most MDs believe that) then you are compelled to oppose not only genetic testing during IVF but also many forms of conception control.

For the record, pregnancy doesn't start until implantation. Accordingly, anything before implantation is not considered an abortion.
 
I still don't see how Republicans would worry about this. Like Jaskalas said, it is because of them that this was even found... personally, I think this will improve lives, and in the process, protect human dignitiy in that it will be possible to get the stem cells without killing the embryo. The bottom line to me: Everybody Wins.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top