CTH Public Relations

• Torture by CO2HOG [May 02, 2012, 10:19:42 PM]
• China by CO2HOG [March 31, 2012, 02:24:13 PM]
• Global Warming Watch by TonyBlair [October 09, 2011, 06:41:37 PM]
• Solar Panel Doubts by TonyBlair [September 02, 2011, 08:25:23 AM]
• Barack Hussein Obama, Emp... by TonyBlair [August 10, 2011, 08:57:54 PM]
• National Debt Clocks and ... by Counter [August 08, 2011, 10:30:42 AM]
• Scanner or Pat Down? by Vocal Observer [June 28, 2011, 01:09:51 PM]
• Rise of the Police State by Vocal Observer [June 28, 2011, 01:01:03 PM]
• Who can we trust? by Vocal Observer [June 08, 2011, 01:07:59 PM]
• Anthony Wiener's wiener i... by CarolinaBuckeye [June 01, 2011, 11:29:22 PM]
• Democrat's Culture of Cor... by TonyBlair [May 18, 2011, 06:55:46 AM]
• Hey Obama..You want Taxes... by Vince the Fox [April 21, 2011, 03:12:25 AM]
• Obama Policy Watch by TonyBlair [April 20, 2011, 06:56:14 AM]
• George W. Obama by TonyBlair [April 19, 2011, 06:11:57 AM]
• The Religion of Peace Upd... by TonyBlair [April 12, 2011, 06:43:20 AM]

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

Members

• Total Members: 329
• Latest: boborians

Stats

• Total Posts: 40602
• Total Topics: 5158
• Online Today: 17
• Online Ever: 252
• (April 10, 2011, 07:49:21 AM)

Users Online

Users: 0
Guests: 19
Total: 19

EducateWorthington.org

The 912 Project - Glenn Beck

912 Group of Central Ohio

Please let me know if you'd like your link added

After reading this research I was shocked at how the Democrats have made this a National issue. This is definitley a topic for the Internet Skeptic. Embryonic Stem Cells are only 1 out of possibly thousands of different stem cell types. They don't even know all the stem cells that exist, and the Democrats have found a needle in a haystack to make a National issue. Just ask yourself this question, If Michale J Fox took an embyonic stemcell, which because he is an adult requires it be from someone else, and implanted it in his brain, what would likey happen? It would either be rejected, or because the cells are foreign, may develop a tumor. Why would you ever take someone else's embryonic stem cell, turn that stem cell into a brain stem cell, and then hope it grows when you can simply take a Michale J Fox brain stem cell and do the same thing without the fear of rejection? None of this stuff makes sence, why use embryonic stem cells, when you can get stem cells directly from the patient?

http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/basics1.asp

I heard a similar argument against partial birth abortion yesterday.

To wit, if it's about the safety of the mother, then which is safer? To insert a sharp object into the woman to get the job done or to simply induce birth, and kill it 20 inches away? Clearly the second option is safer for the mother, but then it's considered murder. So why isn't it murder only 20 inches away back in the womb?

Silliness. Tragic, horrible silliness.

Peter, your wisdom is monumental, and evidence why you need to keep posting on the forums. Your input has been missed.

Peter, that is a great point the more I think about it. Just exactly what kind of pregnancy risks the life of the mother at delivery, where the head is in the right position? From my understanding the head is crowning and they kill the baby at that time. There isn't much distance between that the the birth, so how much addition harm is done? Unber both cases the baby is delivered through the norman delivery process, just that one has a head and the other  has an empty sack. While the head is the largest part of the baby, it isn't that much larger than the pelvis and chest. This is a very marginal reason to kill a child. You would have to expect that if the mother is in that much danger, most would die from the delivery anyway, becasue the partial birth abortion only solves a small part of the problem, because the child is still delivered.

The patient, who would have to take drugs to stop the cells from being rejected by the body, could go home the same day. After two to three weeks, vision should start to improve.

It is not yet known how long the effects will last but the patients who had transplants of their own cells are still benefiting from the treatment which took place two and a half years ago.

While the patches are most likely to benefit those in the early stages of AMD, the researchers believe it should be possible to adapt them to treat those in later stages.

It is hoped that the technique might also benefit those who have lost their sight as a complication of diabetes.

Consultant surgeon Lyndon da Cruz
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...in_page_id=1965

Simple switch turns cells embryonic
Technique removes need for eggs or embryos.
David Cyranoski
 
Research reported this week by three different groups shows that normal skin cells can be reprogrammed to an embryonic state in mice1, 2, 3. The race is now on to apply the surprisingly straightforward procedure to human cells.

http://www.nature.com/news/2007/070604/full/447618a.html

 

Scientists Create Embryonic Stem Cells Without Destroying Embryos
Thursday, June 07, 2007

 E-MAIL STORY PRINTER FRIENDLY VERSION
NEW YORK  —  In a leap forward for stem cell research, three independent teams of scientists reported Wednesday that they have produced the equivalent of embryonic stem cells in mice using skin cells without the controversial destruction of embryos.

If the same could be done with human skin cells — a big if — the procedure could lead to breakthrough medical treatments without the contentious ethical and political debates surrounding the use of embryos.

Experts were impressed by the achievement.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,278612,00.html

[This is definitely a topic for the Internet Skeptic...if he is interested]

This is definitely a topic for the Internet Skeptic...if he is interested

I think Internet Skeptic will find mountains of evidence that the "science" of embryonic stem cell research is false, mostly driven by abortion rights advocates who want embryonic stems cells to be the "cure", as it secures the position that embryos are NOT human life.  

Yes, the "science" of manmade global warming, and embryonic stem cell research have a lot in common...mostly that they are not good science!

I think Internet Skeptic will find mountains of evidence that the "science" of embryonic stem cell research is false, mostly driven by abortion rights advocates who want embryonic stems cells to be the "cure", as it secures the position that embryos are NOT human life.

That is exactly why I started this thread. It is all political, not scientific. Using embryonic stem cells makes no sense. Embryonic stem cells will always risk rejection, adult stem cells won't. Given the two, why focus on embryonic? Adult stem cells can undergo transdifferentiation and you can create almost every stem cell that you can imagine. The focus on embryonic stem cells is purely political.
 

'Dolly' Scientist: Make Human Stem Cells From Animal Eggs
By Dave Mosher, LiveScience Staff Writer

posted: 12 June 2007 09:03 am ET

Share this story
 Email Stem cells from human embryos are seen as the future of medicine, but a major ethical question surrounds the research: Should federally funded scientists be allowed to extract the cells from embryos, a process which destroys them? Current U.S. laws clearly say “no.”

http://www.livescience.com/health/070612_animal_embryos.html

AdamSmith's Occult Sources of Knowledge

Last Wednesday, three teams of researchers said they had found a way to get ordinary skin cells to act like the embryonic cells in mice.

"This is what we were looking for people to explore because it may provide all the advantages of embryonic stem cells without the moral problem,"

--Richard Doerflinger, deputy director of pro-life activities for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

"We have a long way to go…."
--John Gearhart, Johns Hopkins University researcher.
The advance does not mean that research that involves getting stem cells from human embryos should now be abandoned.

"We simply don't know which approach ... will work the best,"
--researcher Konrad Hochedlinger of the Harvard Stem Cell Institute, who led one of the three teams.

Scientific research into embryonic stem cells “is all political, not scientific.…. The focus on embryonic stem cells is purely political.”
“Should federally funded scientists be allowed to extract the cells from embryos, a process which destroys them? Current U.S. laws clearly say “no”.”
--AdamSmith

Researchers cannot yet say which types of cells will work best. According to the National Institute of Health “whether the recipient would reject donor embryonic stem cells has not been determined in human experiments.” <http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/basics5.asp>

AdamSmith, however, knows. She has her own secret source of knowledge, i.e., occult knowledge.
(Occult knowledge 1. a. Not disclosed or divulged, secret; kept secret; communicated only to the initiated.-- OED)

 

IS, one thing for sure:
1) Adult Stem Cells pose 0% rejection possibility
2) Enbryonic Stem Cells are almost 100% certain to be rejected
3) Adult Stem Cells are believed to be "plastic" or have the ability of "transdiffentiation."

Monkey may fly out of my butt, but I don't think we should be wasting money trying to prove it. Embryonic Stem Cells are by definition the ones with the least possible potential due to them being foreign bodies. Don't you think a prudent researcher should first demonstate promise with the stems most likely to show results? Reason vs Politics. You lose IS, again.

I heard a similar argument against partial birth abortion yesterday.

To wit, if it's about the safety of the mother, then which is safer? To insert a sharp object into the woman to get the job done or to simply induce birth, and kill it 20 inches away? Clearly the second option is safer for the mother, but then it's considered murder. So why isn't it murder only 20 inches away back in the womb?

Silliness. Tragic, horrible silliness.

C Sections make all this mute anyway. Modern medicine pretty much elimiates all these claims.  

[the risk of death from medication abortion — about one out of 100,000 — is about the same as it is from miscarriage — about one out of 100,000 higher than it is from early vacuum aspiration abortion — about one out of one million lower than it is from carrying a pregnancy to term — about 10 out of 100,000]

Health Risks of Abortion

First-trimester abortion is much safer for women than giving birth. But there are risks associated with any medical procedure. Your overall health may affect you risks of complications.

Medication Abortion
Possible risks include

incomplete abortion — the embryo and other products of conception are not entirely expelled from the uterus
allergic reaction
infection
very heavy bleeding
undetected ectopic pregnancy, which can be fatal if left untreated
in extremely rare cases death is possible from very serious complications — the risk of death from medication abortion — about one out of 100,000 — is
about the same as it is from miscarriage — about one out of 100,000
higher than it is from early vacuum aspiration abortion — about one out of one million
lower than it is from carrying a pregnancy to term — about 10 out of 100,000

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/birth-con...ide-effects.htm


LOS ANGELES -- A Caesarean delivery more than triples a woman's risk of dying in childbirth compared to a vaginal birth, according to a new study from France.

The risk is still quite small, but many developed countries have seen a dramatic rise in the number of Caesareans performed each year as more women elect to avoid a vaginal delivery.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2...9/1/91707.shtml
 

Big Step Forward in Stem Cell Treatments for Parkinson's Disease
By Brandon Keim June 12, 2007 | 12:32:54 PMCategories: Brain, Medicine & Medical Procedures, Stem Cell Research  
 For the first time, researchers have used stem cells to treat Parkinson's disease in primates. The results were mixed: rather than growing new neurons, the treatment protected damaged cells against further deterioration, and the effect wore off after four months.

http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2007/06...tep_forwar.html