Posted on 04/15/2005 9:35:21 AM PDT by Kaslin
In 2000, a woman donated the blood from her newborn daughter's umbilical cord (search) so scientists could pull precious stem cells from it and freeze them. Two years later, those donated cells saved Kathy Conway's son from leukemia.
"It came to us in this unassuming little syringe, from a mom who had no idea what she was truly doing," said Conway of Poland, Ohio, whose son Daniel is now a healthy 16-year-old.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
I wonder why they don't just skip the controversy involved in fetal tissue and go straight for the readily available umbilical cord? I don't get that. Is it that not as many things can be done with umbilical cord stem cells?
Good question
Please correct me if I am wrong but, I believe Adult Stem Cell therapy has documented proof as to cures and treatments whereas Embryonic Stem Cell therapy has none.
It is all about abortion-on-demand...
Well, duh, that would mean the baby would actually get to live, and we can't possibly allow that. [/demented liberal sarcasm]
There's no moral to this story. The gal had some luck, plain and simple. It could just have well turned out that her son could have developed something NOT curable by cells.
Exactly how far are we willing to go to prevent "life" from happening? We're not going to cure death. Our bodies tell us we're dying well before we actually die these days. I know folks are afraid of the actual death part of dying, but how far do we want to go?
Many hospitals work with the cord blood companies and women can donate the umbilical cord blood. All you have to do is check with the hospital ahead of time. I am sure if a woman wanted to donate and got in touch with a cord blood bank, they could work something out also. We banked our children's cord blood and pray that we will never have to use it. They are the stem cells that let everyone live.
I am wondering if you read the beginning of the article? The woman donated the blood her newborn daughter's umbilical cord , which otherwise would have just been thrown away.
Please correct me if I am wrong but, I believe Adult Stem Cell therapy has documented proof as to cures and treatments whereas Embryonic Stem Cell therapy has none.
Do you have any links to this info? And, welcome to Free Republic!
Adult Stem Cells: It's Not Pie-in-the-Sky
This seems to contradict your statement...
Here is the application of umbilical cord blood and a spinal cord injury.
http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp/2004/11/29/umbilical_cord_stem_cell_therapy_successful_paralysed_patient_walks_after_19_years.htm
I think I might be ready to go to Glory after about 250 years or so. My great great grandchildren could wheel me around on a hand truck.
It sure isn't about abortion on demand because that exists already. :-)
It sure isn't about abortion on demand because that exists already. :-)
I stand corrected.
Should be a :(
You asserted, "No it's the other way around. Embryonic cells have proven applications while adult stemcells are more tricky." You wouldn't like to porve that lie would you?... Post two cures using stem cells harvested from embryo-aged humans ... and I'll post twenty using adult stem cells, okay?
You asserted, "No it's the other way around. Embryonic cells have proven applications while adult stemcells are more tricky." You wouldn't like to prove that lie would you?... Post two cures using stem cells harvested from embryo-aged humans ... and I'll post twenty using adult stem cells, okay?
Actually, it is about abortion ... the advent of cloning for designer cells and tissue will necessitate the aborting of the humans cloned for their body parts, and that's abortion on demand by my calculations.
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.