[Falcon4.0]

"harvested embryonic stem cells from blood taken from umbilical cords"

Here's the secret of this story. If the cells can be taken from the umbilical cord, there's no reason to kill the baby.

[WileyC]

Here's the secret of this story. If the cells can be taken from the umbilical cord, there's no reason to kill the baby.

Exactly! Also, and I've said this for years, there is far more value in learning how to create stem cells from mature cells (so that one can use them without fear of rejection) than from using stem cells from another person.

[taxesareforever]

"harvested embryonic stem cells from blood taken from umbilical cords"
Here's the secret of this story. If the cells can be taken from the umbilical cord, there's no reason to kill the baby.


Right on. I wonder if John Edwards has received notification of this?

[alwaysconservative]

If the cells can be taken from the umbilical cord, there's no reason to kill the baby.

Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner here! I read that if they saved the "embryonic stem cells" from the umbilical cord (and maybe placenta, but I don't know), they would have all the lines they need for ANY and ALL stem cell research as well as banking for future medical needs. No reason to kill babies to "harvest" these stem cells.

[lepton]

Here's the secret of this story. If the cells can be taken from the umbilical cord, there's no reason to kill the baby.

These are, by definition, adult stem cells. The author is redefining words to confuse the issue.