Posted on 06/25/2004 7:24:41 PM PDT by Salvation
Code: ZE04062523
Date: 2004-06-25
Adult Stem-Cell Success Stories Hailed
Meanwhile, a Son of Reagan Assails Use of Embryos
WASHINGTON, D.C., JUNE 25, 2004 (Zenit.org).- A press conference focused on two women helped by adult stem-cell treatment, and a bishops' aide hailed their examples as "a powerful witness against the embryonic research PR machine."
The press conference Thursday, conducted by U.S. Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas, featured the women whose severe spinal cord injuries have been treated with adult stem cells.
Laura Dominguez was a quadriplegic at 16 after a car accident severely damaged her spinal cord, but after treatment using her own olfactory sinus stem cells she can now walk with the aid of braces.
A car accident also left Susan Fajt paralyzed, but she, too, can walk with braces today because of experimental new adult stem cell treatment.
"These brave young women give a human face to the fight for ethical stem cell research," said Cathy Cleaver Ruse, a spokeswoman for the U.S. bishops' Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities.
Adult stem cells and other ethically acceptable alternatives have already helped hundreds of thousands of patients, and new clinical uses expand almost weekly, the bishops' conference said on its Web site.
In fact, non-embryonic cell therapies have quickly moved forward to perform many of the tasks once thought to be possible only with embryonic stem cells.
"These and other inspiring breakthroughs in the area of adult stem cell research show the power of ethical research -- and its beauty," said Ruse.
"There is an ugliness to embryonic stem cell research that even its proponents cannot hide," Ruse added. "When we decide to subjugate one vulnerable class of human beings for service of another, we are all diminished."
Meanwhile, Michael Reagan, a son of former President Ronald Reagan, insisted that his father was firmly opposed to embryonic stem cell research.
"I'm getting a little tired of the media's insistence on reporting that the Reagan 'family' is in favor of stem cell research," Michael Reagan writes in an editorial posted by the weekly Human Events.
"The truth is that two members of the family have been longtime foes of this process of manufacturing human beings -- my dad Ronald Reagan, during his lifetime, and me," he states.
"The media should keep in mind that we are also members of the Reagan 'family' and my father, as do I, opposed the creation of human embryos for the sole purpose of using their stem cells as possible medical cures," Michael Reagan continues.
He adds: "Moreover, using the widely promoted and thoroughly discredited junk science argument that stem cell research can lead to a cure of Alzheimer's disease, the media and proponents of stem cell research have suggested that had the research been done a long time ago, my dad might have avoided the ordeal he endured. This is junk science at its worst."
thanks, Coleus!
**Michael Reagan ROCKS**
Indeed!
Thanks for the links, too!
Wow! All 95 pages!!
FReegards...MUD
FReegards...MUD
The cannibalism of an even more vulnerable human than the one wanting new cells, should be stressed.
If I could get in on a phone call when Nancy does appear sometime, I'd ask something like, "Do you support the use of the embryonic stem cells were another Ronald Reagan and he would no longer be allowed to grow into his full stature affecting not only you, but the entire world for good?"
To borrow an analogy I posted on another thread, suppose a vehicle gets a flat tire on a little-used road near an unoccupied shed. The vehicle does not have a usable lug-wrench. One occupant suggests breaking into the shed to see if there's a usable lug wrench inside.
Which of the following would be a better argument against such a course of action:
Presently, those who advocate "research" with embryonic/fetal stem cells are claiming they only want to use embryos that would be discarded anyway. But is there any plausible way that any treatment developed using embryonic/fetal stem cells could be put to practical use without creating large numbers of embryos specifically for the purpose of cell harvesting? I would really like a stem-cell-research proponent to answer that question.
I'd also like someone to explain either where my understanding of research protocols is flawed, or why stem cell research shouldn't follow them. In particular, my understanding would be that before experimental biological treatments which could cause harm are attempted on humans, they are first tested and refined on animals. Although a procedure's success on animals will not always imply success on humans, animal testing can often give researchers some pretty good idea of the things that can go wrong and what to watch out for.
Following this principle, it would seem appropriate and logical to perform experiments with stem cells extracted from embryonic rats, mice, or other lab animals; only after therapies were developed that worked well in rodents should any tests be done on humans. To the best of my knowledge, though, there has been a desire to push ahead with human testing for protocols that have not yet been validated with animal testing. I'd like someone to explain to me either where I'm mistaken in thinking this is unusual, or else why--despite being unusual--it is appropriate.
Your Post #15 is a keeper!!!
Here is the problem:
We need to find out what can be done with stem cells.
It is much easier to do tests with a strain that is known and studied.
When they find an application that can benefit from stem cells, there is no doubt that the stem cells from the person being treated would, in most cases, be a much better fit.
They have shown great promise for spinal injuries, some certain kinds of brain problems, cardiac function, and most likely, in the future, multiple sclerosis.
NO RESPONSIBLE RESEARCHER would propose a woman have an abortion to provide stem cells.
BTTT!!!!!!
From my experience in the past as a medical secretary, the profession sometimes suppresses information. They suppress information about alternative treatments which work and supress information about experiments which go horribly wrong. It's done for prestige, power and the money that goes with it.
Thanks for the ping. Nothing starts the day off better than some good news. BTW (time to brag) I took a gold, silver and 2 bronze at the National Veterans Wheelchair Games in St Louis. Being confined to a wheelchair isn't the end, just a different path to explore.
The Catholic church has medical schools and teaching hospitals - and a lot of money as these things go - I hope, but I have not heard, that the Church is funding research into morally acceptable alternatives to embryonic stem cells.
Mrs VS
Bump for Michael Reagan!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.