Does it matter that adult stem cells have more promise than embryonic stem cells?
831390
no it does not matter, while everyone is ok with adult stem cell, the liberals attack the republicans because they are not for embryonic stem cell research being paid for by tax dollars)\n\nThey merely make it sound like we are against all research which is not the truth, only the funding for embyonic
736228
stem cell research itself isn't bad. What's bad (many agree) is where the stem cells are harvested. Stem cells are unique cells in that they have the capability to "become" almost any other type of human cell. They are used to help regenerate injured or diseased tissues in many areas of the body. Stem cells can be found in several areas, including bone marrow. Bone marrow stem cells have been used for many uses, such as helping subjects rebuild muscular proteins. The stem cells join with and become the cells they are partnered with.\n\nWhat makes many people upset is when stem cells, which are readily available from adult bone marrow (including the subject's own bone marrow), are, instead, harvested from aborted embryos. This practice has led to many arguments over sanctity of life, when life actually begins, etc. Many suggest that rather than enrage the controversy and destroy embryos, the stem cells should be taken from the vastly more available adult bone marrow in a process which is much less damaging to human life.
896374
Mainly because embryonic stem cells proliferate (multiply rapidly) for a year or more in the laboratory without differentiating, but most adult stem cells cannot.  Scientists cannot have not determined why this is so but it works to their advantage.
429174
i`m not sure...\nbut i think so...\n\nthere should be differences between exoderm, endoderm and mesoderm cells...
466384
Adult stem cells are cells that can differentiate into different types of cells that in the same family, but cant differentiate into different types of cells that in different family. For example, bone marrow cells can become red blood cells, white blood cells,.....(generally blood cells). Bone marrow cells cant become brain cells or heart cells.\nAdult stem cells is used for transplant. For example, a person has hemophilia, he or she can be cured by transplanting healthy bone marrow cells.
805439
I'm sorry, but some of the answers on here are utterly wrong in terms of science - there is a very big difference between stem cells from embryos, and stem cells from places like bone marrow.\n\nTHERE ARE INFACT TWO TYPES OF STEM CELL undergoing medical research: Embryonic Stem Cells (ESCs) and Adult Stem Cells (ASCs). \n\nASCs are taken from a human adult (eg from bone marrow), and usually either transplanted to another part of the body, or artificially encouraged to grow to greater numbers. ESCs are taken from human embryos which have been created artificially. Under the right conditions, these cells can then be grown in a lab, and if given the appropriate chemical signals, can be manipulated to become virtually any type of cell imaginable. In either case the aim is to replace tissues lost through disease.\n\nThose opposed to the use of ESCs strongly advocate the use of ASCs. However, many scientists believe that ASCs are ultimately less useful medically, as they cannot replace all types of cells. Blood stem cells can only become blood cells. They exist in very small amounts and are therefore hard to find, and in extremely limited supply if wanted for transplantation on a large scale. They are also difficult to grow in culture. By contrast, ESCs are easy to isolate, grow and manipulate, and have a greater variety of uses. Thus, they are favoured by scientists as a medical tool. \n\nAs ASCs come directly from the adult patient, there is essentially no controversy, as there are no life-issues at stake. It is the use of ESCs which is the cause of the debate, as it involves artificially creating a human embryo, harvesting the cells and then destroying the embryo. The moral objections to this revolve around a fundamental question - when does a group of cells constitute a human life? Put simply, are we playing God, and it is morally acceptable for us to do so? There has been no definitive conclusion, and the argument continues.\n\nThe variety of diseases which can potentially be treated with ESCs is huge, ranging from degenerative disorders such as Parkinson’s disease, and even cancer. If successful, it could be the greatest reliever of human suffering since the introduction of antibiotics. To give some examples: A univeristy research team in America is close to creating a CURE to diabetes. Stem cells can be encouraged to produce insulin. These can then be transplanted into the patient, and they will never have to inject themselves with insulin again!! Another research team, in the UK, has managed to get stem cells to grow into liver tissue. This tissue can be used to test new drugs, so removing some of the need for animal testing - something I think most people would like to see! In the future, we will be able to grow whole organs for people!!\n\nI would like to point out that aborted babies are NOT used for stem cell research. The embryos are created in the lab, and growth is stopped when it reaches 8 cells. This way, all the cells are still stem cells, and so useful. Babies which have been aborted are far too large and devoloped to be useful in this way.\n\nHowever, the moral arguments surrounding their use do not look set to be resolved any time soon. Regardless, the immense potential medical benefits cannot be ignored. It is my view that the research should be allowed to continue, as it could help people in so many ways. Those who are opposed do not have to make use of the treatments once they become available, like Jehova's Wittnesses, who refuse blood transfusions because it against their beliefs. But I belive in giving people the choice.
933757
No, there are different types.  \n\nFor example, there are adult and embryonic stem cells.\n\nAdult stem cells can be extracted from your bone marrow.  There has been more success with them when used in your own body since there is a lowered risk of rejection.
748163
I had been watching the election updates all night. I live near St. Louis. \n\nI'm not entirely sure about my stance on embryonic stem cell research. However, it's helpful in other ways.\n\nThe scientists and doctors who have been researching it have been under threat for the past several years from bills that people have been trying to pass in Jefferson County and elsewhere. The governor of Illinois was trying to take advantage of that by trying to persuade some of Missouri's best doctors and other researchers to come work in Illinois where stem cell research isn't under threat. \n\nBy the stem cell initiative passing, it has taken a weight off of the shoulders of some of Missouri's best doctors and those who were considering a doctoral career in Missouri. Now, our best doctors can stay in Missouri and continue doing their research and attempts by people of other states to exploit Missouri's flaws to get them to leave Missouri and work in their states will be a lot less tempting.\n\nTherefore, the stem cell initiative's passing has helped ensure that Missouri can continue to have some of the top health care professionals and reasearchers in the country and the people of Missouri will continue to receive top quality health care from highly trained professionals.
10520
All you need to know is at:\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cells
943443
Stem cells don't come from babies, they come from blastocysts.\n\n"Embryonic" stem cells is actually a misnomer. These cells come from blastocysts. which are developmentally younger than embryos.\n\nStem cells are derived from blastocysts that are left over after couples have had children using in vitro fertilization. For couples using in vitro fertilization, the woman has eggs harvested, which are then fertilized by sperm in a dish in the clinic. Eggs that are successfully fertilized are allowed to divide for 3-6 days, forming tiny balls of a 100 or so cells called blastocysts. These are frozen, and when the couple is ready, a few of these are implanted in the woman's womb.\n\nAfter the couple has conceived, they must decide what to do with the left over blastocysts. Some couples pay to keep their remaining blastocysts frozen, but most left over blastocysts are simply discarded! These discarded blastocysts, numbering in the hundreds of thousands, could be used to derive stem cells. The lines that are approved by the Federal government were created when couples donated their unwanted frozen embryos to research.\n\nThe blastocysts are like tennis balls, solid on the outside, but hollow in the middle. Stem cells are found in a little lump inside that hollow ball. Researchers have found a way to crack the ball in half and remove the stem cells.\n\nStems cells removed from the hollow ball can never develop into a human. The hollow ball contains the instructions or blue print to create a human from the stem cells. Without the instructions, a human can never form.\n\nOnce the stem cells are removed and placed in a dish in the lab, they continue to make exact copies of themselves, called daughter cells. They will only make exact copies of themselves and nothing else until a researcher adds different chemicals, or molecular signals, that tell the stem cells to become something else. Once we understand what makes them become what ever cell type, be it heart, pancreas, liver, or spinal cells, we have exquisite control over the repair process, being able to replace the cell type we want with more of the tissue derived from stem cells.
307361
Heck yes. I'm doing it right now, the future may not need me but I need the future. I just harvested some of my stem cells and put them in the window beside the Wife's plant cuttings ( we have a garden ) and voila, before I new it there was a fully grown me in the kitchen helping myself to a second piece of pie. For some reason the Wife seems pleased about it as well. Thank you for asking this question, I had a good laugh and I hope you got something out of it too!
699943
Opposition to stem cell research is almost entirely ethical/moral.  There are two major concerns, both of which turn on the sanctity of life and the slippery slope argument.\n\nThe first is that if any gains are realized from this research, that scientists will begin to farm human beings a la "The Matrix".  The basic fear is that even though scientists currently intend only to use cells from embryos that were going to be destroyed anyway, they will begin to create babies for the sole purpose of harvesting their stem cells.  In essence, it's a more sinister form of abortion.\n\nSecondly, many of those people who oppose cloning are against stem cell research because the methodology of conducting stem cell research is that of small-scale cloning.  More specifically, legislation legalizing stem cell research may be written such that full-on cloning would also be legal, although this is a somewhat tenuous argument.\n\nIf you want to know any more, I would suggest you look at most any Right-to-Life website.  They will likely have talking points to better explain these and other arguments.\n\nBest of luck with your speech.  Arguing against your own beliefs can often refine your own debate skills and understanding of your real position.
871453
To one of the posters before me, I can only say that some people need to get educated before telling others to check their facts!  Most embryonic stem cell research is done on the stem cells of embryos that would have been discarded anyway; fertility clinics routinely thrash embryos that aren't showing satisfactory growth rates suitable for In vitro.  So the embryo dies no matter what!  Might as well put the tissue to use so that the death isn't in vain--who knows how many lives the research on one embryo could save?  And as far as grouping OTHER stem cell research into this whole "morality" issue... I'd hope these soapbox preachers realize that blood cells come from stem cells that are produced by bone marrow--and we all have 'em.  No lives (other than cellular) are lost for research--and many bone marrow transplant patients owe their lives to what's been done so far.  Blood stem cells aren't capable of forming anything other than blood cells, while embryonic stem cells have the potential of becoming any of the body's tissues.  Honest to goodness, do a little research!\n\nNOW, to answer the question asked... yeah, I think he'll veto it.  He'll kick himself if he or someone he loves becomes ill with a disease that might have been curable if he'd have actually helped the research.  But for now, I'd see him standing on the Biblewagon and doing whatever he can to make sure nothing useful happens.  (Kind of like he's been doing from day one, eh?)
107590
They are like little baby cells that don't really know what they want to be yet (unless they are already adult stem cells) You can put them in with a bunch of cells of the same kind and they will grow into that type of cell.
711160
A stem cell is a basic cell that hasn't quite decided what to become yet.  It is like a cell on standby waiting for orders from the body.  Once the cell gets orders, it goes where it is needed and becomes whatever type of cell the body needs.\n\nWhen a fetus is developing, stem cells become whatever the infant needs based on the DNA code that the mother and father provide.  They become the bones, organs, muscles, brain, hair, etc.  Later in life, stem cells work to repair damage to the body such as bone breaks, cuts, torn ligaments, etc.  This does not mean that aborted fetuses are the primary source of stem cells; it's just one of the most visible ways of seeing how stem cells are used.\n\nMost of the advancements in stem cell research are actually being done with bone-marrow or umbilical cords.  By getting stem cells from adults or umbilical cords, no infants or fetuses need to be harmed.\n\nThe applications of the research are vast.  Scientist hope to be able to repair damaged nerves to cure blindness, deafness and crippling injuries.  There are also ways of using stem cells to stunt the growth of cancers or repair damage to organs.\n\nI hope that was elementary enough.  Stem cell research is really not as bad as everyone makes it seem.  Think about it--if we can cure breast cancer without harming a single child (born or unborn), isn't it worth considering?
67593
Stem cells are remarkable in that they can develop into all sorts of other specialised cells.\nOnce a cell is specialised it cannot change.\nStem cells therefore have the potential to replace cells that have been damaged by disease or injury.\n\nLook here:
352857
Genetic engineering can help many disorders that result from genetic misorders and mutations.  The controversy surrounds the use of cloning to produce "identical organisms" where the clone's cells can be used to produce talor made tissue.  I do not believe cloning is necessary to get stem cells to carry out genetic engineering.  THere are sources in the body to retrieve stem cells.  The problem is obtaining cells that have not specialized.  The less specialized the easier to make the cell transform into a specific cell for tissue growth.  Also, all cells contian the same copy of DNA.  I think it is only a matter of time before engineeris can stimulate a cell into changing into another cell.  Other than that there is nothing really controversial about genetic engineering.