I think the leftists, by pushing fetal stem cell research, are just trying in vain to derive something good out the the evil genocide they whoheartedly support and encourage. Nothing good will come of evil.

But Josef Mengele would be proud of the modern American democrats for wanting to carry on the field he pioneered- using genocide victims for medical research.

If you've had a baby with type one Diabetes, this article will bring a tear to your eye.

Yes, this is a great discovery... wonder how long it will take this to be at least a US clinical trial, let alone a treatment?

Great news. But because it doesn't validate abortion you won't hear much in the msm. Now if it had been embrionic stem cells used in this breakthrough, Katy bar the door!!!!! It would be trumpted from mountaintop to mountaintop.

The democrats have hitched they're horse to embrionic stem cells and won't accept anything else. It would probably be a failure if they join the adult stem cell fight anyway. Their record isn't too good when they do two things at once. They got the brain dead P.C. rants and Racism mixed up and now it's impossible to day anything without offending someone or some race.

Embrionic stem cell research has now became the dhimmi's search for billions of dollars for their own bank accounts. Mark it down, soon there will be another big flap about 'where the billions went'. Yes folks, WE are still providing billions for embrionic stem cell research from the tax payer kitty. No positive result but they want more. "oil for food anyone"? The hype otherwise is simply more lies by the democrat party in they're quest to destroy the United States. The simple minded that shouldn't be allowed on the street without an excort buy the democrat BS. You know who you are, but think you're in such a hole you can't back out, so you keep digging hoping to come out on the other side of the world.

It's funny to see the opponents of hESC research trot out all these abortion objections as if they were relevant.

There are thousands upon thousands of unused embryos from IVF clinics which can be used for research (and have been donated for such). This has nothing to do with abortion. You can't abort what has never been in the womb to begin with.

A hypothetical question for such opponents: You are in an IVF clinic which is on fire. On one side of the clinic is a 3 year-old child, on the other are 100 blastocysts. You only have time to save one or the other. Which do you choose?

Regarding Kim's contentions (and no doubt misunderstandings) about embryonic vs. adult stem cell application, it is much easier to develop applications for adult stem cells quickly for two primary reasons: the cells are coming from the patient being treated, so the issues of host rejection that hESC applications have do not apply (the hESC issues could be overcome through therapeutic cloning, but that's even less accepted than hESC research), and secondly, there has been much more funding for adult hSC research than for embryonic, and much of the funding for embryonic research is yet unused due to restrictions preventing labs that receive any federal funding from performing such research, even if the research itself is not federally funded.

The fact remains though that adult stem cells are limited in their potential applications in ways that embryonic stem cells are not. We will see applications eventually. Both types of research should be aggressively funded.

Potential cures (always ~5 yrs. away) for type 1 diabetes have been heralded every few months for as long as I can remember--much longer, I'm sure. And a small number of people have been insulin-free for short periods of time after, e.g., pancreas transplants, islet cells injected into their livers, etc. But there's always a caveat, such as the transplants not being available to patients who don't also need a kidney transplant, because of the need for immunosuppressants, and the "cure" being temporary. The demonstration that the immune system might be retrained is good news for future patients, and fortunately (adult) stem cells don't have the scarcity problem that islet cells have. I doubt this approach would be approved for trials in the US anytime soon, though.

They are interested in the stem cells that can only be harvested by killing life at its earliest stage but aren't bearing any fruit.

False. I think they're interested in ALL stem cell research.

But embryonic stem cell research is the type of research which the academics and politicians have latched on to and will not let go of, even if adult stem cells actually provide cures.

They have committed to ESC, even if nothing comes out of it, because darn it...they're committed to it. The millions and billions of taxpayer dollars they allocated to ESC can't be taken back now. The goodies to ESC academics are being scooped up. You think any politician would dare to cut off funds or re-allocate them to research that is NOT the darling of academia? If they did, you'd have massive protests by the Left regarding 'Academic freedom' and the 'chilling effect' this has on researchers.

But embryonic stem cell research is the type of research which the academics and politicians have latched on to and will not let go of, even if adult stem cells actually provide cures.

They both have treatment development potential. Academics have "latched on" to both kinds of research. That politicians have decided to make it an either/or proposition is unfortunate, but that game is being played on both sides of the debate.

As far as the academics are concerned, who do you think performed the study Kim linked? Oh, researchers from the Univ. of Sao Paolo and Northwestern. Gee, those academics sure are ignoring adult stem cells, aren't they?

"However, adults stem cells, which these same politicians and activists virtually dismiss..."

Back this up please.

Mantis,
"The fact remains though that adult stem cells are limited in their potential applications in ways that embryonic stem cells are not. We will see applications eventually. Both types of research should be aggressively funded."

Please. I do happen to work in the field, and I can quite assure all that there are far more limiting factors to what is labled "embryonic stem cells" than there are to what can be called "differentiated cells" (I am refraining from using more technical terms, thus sacrificing some detail, but that's a limit of forums such as this).
It takes no more than a few minutes' research at one's local library to reach a better understanding of the topic.
Respectfully,
J

"Please. I do happen to work in the field, and I can quite assure all that there are far more limiting factors to what is labled "embryonic stem cells..."

If you are referring to research, than you are correct. Embryonic stem cell research has many obstacles to work through before implementation in medicine.

However, if you are referring to potential for scientific progress you are dead wrong.

Hey- let's have a Democrat injected with some fetal stem cells- just for the heck of it.

This would be a good time for the left to see just what a teratoma looks like.

I can quite assure all that there are far more limiting factors to what is labled "embryonic stem cells" than there are to what can be called "differentiated cells"

Excuse me, I should have been more specific. I was referring to limitations on potential applications, rather than difficulties in development. I'm assuming you aren't claiming that pluripotent cells would have fewer potential applications than differentiated cells.

I am simply stating that "cells" (again, keeping it simple) from one stage of a given organisms development are not relevant (in purely an application aspect) to cellular structures found in later stages of a given organisms development. I hope that's simple enough.
BTW, this is well documented and is one of the keys in our understanding of the development of multicellular organisms.
Respectfully,
J

The key limiter to this new development is that it was done in Brazil. I don't suffer from "not-invented-here," syndrome, but many in the medical and pharmacological R&D community seem to. It was developed in Brazil because U.S. law doesn't easily allow for the testing and research on humans that the brazilian team did.

Being cynical I would surmise a secondary factor to being done in Brazil is that it was kept under the radar of the major drug companies. Diabetes treatment is a multi-billion dollar industry and some companies might be reluctant to support a cure for it or support such research.

We will see cures for many diseases in the next few years--all using ADULT stem cells. The ESCR will not produce anything tangible for decades. The politicians and left wing charletons have been lying their asses off about this. ESCR causes the worst kinds of cancers, and they develope quickly. The cells attempt to form an entire body in the afflicted area--it is not a pretty sight.

Why the progressives have to lie about this, I'll never know...

BTW: Dr. Jim Willerson has done some incredible stuff using bone marrow-derived stem cells in the treatment of heart damage--also done in Brazil. Regenerated up to 70% of damaged cardiac tissue.

Anyone notice how slanted this article is? For example by reading this:

"But research using the most versatile kind of stem cells -- those acquired from human embryos -- is currently opposed by powerful critics, including President Bush.

The JAMA study provides the first clinical evidence for the efficacy of stem cells in type 1 diabetes. Sufferers of the chronic condition, which normally emerges in childhood or early adulthood, have to inject themselves at least four times a day. "

You would never know that these stem cells have nothing to do with the funding debate what so ever as they were taken from the patients themselves!
DKK

You would never know that these stem cells have nothing to do with the funding debate what so ever as they were taken from the patients themselves!

Unless you, I don't know, read the damn article:

They enrolled Brazilian diabetics aged between 14 and 31 who had been diagnosed within the previous six weeks. After stem cells had been harvested from their blood, they then underwent a mild form of chemotherapy to eliminate the white blood cells causing damage to the pancreas. They were then given transfusions of their own stem cells to help rebuild their immune systems.

Anyone notice how slanted this article is? For example by reading this:

"But research using the most versatile kind of stem cells -- those acquired from human embryos -- is currently opposed by powerful critics, including President Bush.

That's slanted only if you think that stem cells acquired from human embryos aren't the most versatile. In fact, they are.

That said, one can still believe that there is a compelling reasons for NOT using the more versatile cells.

We will see cures for many diseases in the next few years--all using ADULT stem cells. The ESCR will not produce anything tangible for decades. The politicians and left wing charletons have been lying their asses off about this. ESCR causes the worst kinds of cancers, and they develope quickly. The cells attempt to form an entire body in the afflicted area--it is not a pretty sight.

Of course, this is a prediction, and an unsubstantiated claim. It COULD become a self-fulfilling prophesy----if funding and restrictive rules hamper ESCR research.

Thank you both for pointing out that this:
""But research using the most versatile kind of stem cells -- those acquired from human embryos -- is currently opposed by powerful critics, including President Bush."

Has nothing to do with the cure they are reporting on.
DKK

Stem Cell Code of Silence