Best
81 Comments
Post
  • #1
    !
    Stem cell research is the next great breakthrough in medicine. It could mean cures for cancer. It could mean restoring movement to people who are paralyzed. The possibilities are endless. Government and religion needs to step out of the way and allow science to improve healthcare for everyone.
  • #5
    !
    Government (taxpayers) need to stop funding it. Big-Pharma should fund it since they will reap whatever financial returns,if any come from it.
  • #35
    !
    @bsking you obviously know little of taxpayers $'s are spent. 70% of new drug R&D is via big pharm. Gov. R&D is on diseases that occur with relative infrequently and there fore are not worth a company spending millions to develop No ROI for shareholders.
  • R Load more replies

  • #29
    !
    Look ...the churches do not want cures to horrible disease because they LOVE suffering! Do not believe the LIES they tell like "ohhhh that microscopic cell is a little baby" blah blah...they supposedly love life sooooooo much.....but at the same time they love wars? HELLO?

    Stem cells- not babies!
    Wars- kills actual peoples live babies!

    Religion is consistently the enemy of knowledge and progress, and I for one am completely SICK of it doing so.

    And oh yes, it is RELIGIOUS beliefs that is retarding stem cell research. The religious (christ-tards) are afraid and fearful and well you know the old saying "misery loves company".

    Bill Maher- "hey I know stem cells aren’t babies....how do I know? Cause they FREEZE them!, And Im no expert on babies....but I know you cant freeze'em!"
  • #16
    !
    I think that it is ironic that a group who stonewalls medical research due to spurious religious arguments has named itself the "Alliance Defending Freedom".
  • #28
    !
    All of those embryos will be killed regardless.
    Furthermore, embryos don't have brains. When an adult suffers brain death they are legally dead.
    Similarly, "brain birth" should be used to determine the start of personhood.
    Even then personhood doesn't mean "ban abortion" because doing so is similar to forcing people to donate their kidneys to save lives. Once a way is found to remove the unborn alive at any point in the pregnancy and place it in an artificial womb then legal abortion should stop when brain development begins, and at that point you place it in an artificial womb.
  • #17
    !
    Everyone isn't a quality state college or university educated Biologist so the ignorance of some who take the word of ignorant self styled moralists is understandable. By using human stem cells to heal and prevent death is most commendable.
  • #4
    !
    Stem cells do NOT have to come from embryos anymore. In fact, the need for human embryos is pretty much nullified and has been for a few years now. It's about time the US got back on track with this, the potential is far too great to throw aside because of ignorant, uneducated fear-mongering..
  • R Load more replies

  • #73
    !
    God gave people a brain with the ability to think analytically. God expects man to use it. Stem cell research is now part of science.
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • #66
    !
    Pharma stopped funding embryonic stem-cell research because it is a dead end. Adult stem-cells is where all the breakthroughs are happening. The government needs to stop wasting taxpayer money.
  • #41
    !
    Obama's allowance in funding for limited research has merit. The downside in this "Pandora Box ", is the inevitable availability as it trickles down to the consumer in cosmetic form in the future. Most assuredly, just as abortion, hair implants, plastic surgery, skin lift, fat suction, eye color, surrogate's etc.... where there's a buck to be made, those who can afford it, will abuse it.....;.
  • #32
    !
    Stem Cells are pretty small so a large debate around one would require some rather tiny brains.... Oh wait they were thinking of the people in the White House discussing it.... plenty of room for THEM.
  • #25
    !
    While I have no moral implications with stem cell research and I also recognize the huge scientific value it will be to mankind why does the tax payer need to fund it? The pharmaceutical companies will just turn around and charge anyone receiving these treatments into oblivion so why should I pay for it for them to profit from it?
  • #37
    !
    Pharmaceutical companies make drugs... think of stem cell research is not a drug therapy, think of it like a heart transplant or bone graft. If the government does the research... it is any medical company will have a much harder time trying to charge a lot for the treatment because it doesn't own a PATENT on the treatment (since it didn't do the research itself).

    As for your main question... it kind of goes to the heart of what some people wonder what a government should be doing? I believe fundamentally a government's job is to do the big expensive, difficult, annoying things that "most" people agree we as a people need... but don't want to do it themselves... building/maintaining highways and bridges, printing and controlling the flow of currency, educating children, training and maintaing a military force sufficient to defend the country from invaders, and promoting/protecting the health of the populace. I think you wold agree that these things should not be completely abandoned by the government and left to "private companies" to manage - although I am sure everyone has a different opinion on how far the government should go to do these tasks so as not to unnecessary waste resources, but I think that is a slightly different question (more of efficiency than goal).
  • #74
    !
    @Pragmatist That sounds really good and where that the case I would agree with you. Big pharma is most definitely interested in stem cell drug development so unfortunately that isn't the case and I submit my evidence here directly from Pfizer
    http://www.pfizer.com/research/research_clini...

    "With compelling evidence from this research, Pfizer has begun to explore accessing drug development technology from leading academic, biotechnology or pharmaceutical partners around the world, who also have experience with currently-available, human embryonic stem cell lines that meet the highest ethical standards set by leading scientific authorities. This Pfizer Stem Cell Policy guides the company's research activities and its exploration of new external partnerships. The policy summary follows:"
  • #75
    !
    @Buzzfriendly To me, that little webpage comes off as mostly a PR blurb... like a car company saying it is committed to fuel efficiency and doing research into electric vehicles.

    I checked and Pfizer committed less than a quarter of a percent (0.22%) of it's research budget into stem cell research over the past 5 years and is now actually cutting a tremendous amount of its research budget (perhaps including stem cell research).

    http://upstart.bizjournals.com/news/wire/2009...
  • #76
    !
    @Pragmatist I think you are operating on wishful thinking. Make no mistake big pharma will find a way to profit to ignore the promise stem cell research will be corporate suicide.
  • #81
    !
    @Buzzfriendly Maybe.... but that is the nature of medical research, it is all wishful thinking until a true breakthrough is made. I would rather use government funds to help guide stem cell research towards treatments that will help more people... than just let pharmaceutical companies dictate it by simple pursuing what looks more profitable (that is their prerogative). In the end, I have no doubt that pharmaceutical companies will make a profit ... but that point is not to stop them from gouging customers (that is the American way of free markets economics... else we cold switch to the Swiss price control system). The point is use money in the most effective way to help improve quality of life and save lives.
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • #18
    !
    I find it interesting here how many denigrate others beliefs stemming from religious convictions and conscience...it is called freedom of speech and freedom of conscience and freedom of expression and freedom of religion which we are all entitle too...perhaps a little more respect for the side you disagree with? That being said...there other means to the same research...and better in many respects...what is the matter with those? The same people here would justify and defend abortion to no end...the respect of life...the valuing of life has eroded significantly in our day...
  • #34
    !
    I'm anti surgical abortion with the exception of incest, rape,mother's life and advocate for the morning after pill as a reasonable alternative. But you're comparing apples and whales.
  • R Load more replies

  • R Load more comments...
Post