I'm doing Stem Cell Research and I need Information about the freezing and impantaion of the embryo ...?
913209
the links below might help you...
907045
Well the BBC tells us, in the UK scientists have applied for permission to create embryos by fusing human DNA with cow eggs.   That's interesting.\n   National Public Radio has an interesting article on the value of pomegranates, in which I learned new data.  NPR's All Things Considered program had an article called "Does Red Wine Fuel the Fountain of Youth?"  regarding testing wine consumption on mice.\n  The way sunshine changes human's lives is a subject newsworthy as well as well documented.  SAD (Seasonal Affective Disorder) affects a huge population and is especially newsworthy now due to the change from daylight savings time.  I've attached a link from the National Mental Health Association, but a dogpile.com search brought up lots of credible sources.  Good luck - if you have internet or library access you have the path to a paper with "Excellent" written in red across the top!
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.
406585
Scientists are leagues away from using stem cells to produce organs.  Below are a few sites that will help you understand where the field is now, and how far we have yet to go:\n\nhttp://www.bioteach.ubc.ca/Bioengineering/StemCells/\nhttp://www.stemcellresearchfoundation.org/About/FAQ.htm
332835
an embryo is a mass of cells dividing and whatnot.  a fetus is when signs of life are discernible
161491
stem cell research\nalot is in the paper and online news
833587
An embryo is a multicellular diploid eukaryote in its earliest stage of development.\n\nAt the end of the 8th week in humans, the embryonic stage is over, and the fetal stage begins.
105264
You should visit www.geron.com, it is the website of the top stem cell company in the U.S.  It has a great deal of information about what they have been doing in that field.
730714
1)  EVERY advance gained from stem cell research has come through adult stem cells\n\n2)  ZERO advances have come through embryonic.\n\n3)  When ZERO advances come along, private funding for research dries up.  Who wants to throw money at a losing proposition?\n\n4)  Stem cell research is not illegal.\n\n5)  The push for stem cell research is a veiled move to push for public funding for FAILED avenues of research.\n\n"To date there is no evidence that cells generated from embryonic stem cells can be safely transplanted back into adult animals to restore the function of damaged or diseased adult tissues. The level of scientific rigor that is normally applied (indeed, legally required) in the development of potential medical treatments would have to be entirely ignored for experiments with human embryos to proceed. As our largely disappointing experience with gene therapy should remind us, many highly vaunted scientific techniques frequently fail to yield the promised results. Arbitrarily waiving the requirement for scientific evidence out of a naive faith in "promise" is neither good science nor a good use of public funds."
104817
http://www.cellsalive.com/cell_cycle.htm\n\nThis is a neat interactive website! Check it out and let me know how it works for you!
1115957
Not with current freezing techniques. Too much cell damage. In the future I think that a process will be possible. Will it be ethical or moral in a rapidly overpopulating world will be the ultimate question.
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.
278302
Since stem cells are abundant in the blood remaining in the umbilical cord after delivery, there does not need to be a moral trade off... I favour harvesting of stem cells from donated cord blood and see no reason at all why embryonic cells are needed at all in order to do the research that holds such incredible promise.\n\n\nAdded after reading the answer below...WOW! Now, this is interesting...I am pro choice and the person below is clearly not, and yet on this issue we are in agreement... If a "Pro Lifer" and a "Pro Choice Advocate" are both saying, in essence, "Hey, you don't need to create embroyos for this purpose, there is another perfectly viable source of stem cells, use it." we have to be right, because usually we probably wouldn't be able to agree that water is wet.
809963
Here is a good website to get you started http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell_research and there are some good links there as well.  \n\nGood Luck!!!
538564
It won't be easy. You could try using a desk lamp and an thermometer to monitor the temperature.The temp need to be between 99.5 and 100.5 F. Even a degree to high or low can hurt the embryo. You can reduce the heat by about 1/2 a degree after the first five days.
628469
Catholics and many other Christians believe that a soul is placed in a human at the point of conception. This is why the Church celebrates on March 25 the feast of the Annunciation when Mary said "Yes!" to God and Jesus was conceived. Life is sacred and a gift from God. \n\nIn most in vitro fertilizations, more than one egg is fertilized. Several embryos are then placed into the mother's womb. The remaining embryos are either destroyed or frozen. Destroying human embryos is abortion and freezing them with an unknown future hope of ever being born is not respecting the dignity of human life.\n\nLater if and when the embryos begin to grow in the mother, all but one or two are usually aborted, again killing sacred human life.\n\nWith love in Christ.
976355
How about the fake cloning (see below): you could cover how other scientists were conned - and how it impacts science and research.\n\nScientists fretted Friday that a spectacular cloning fraud that hid in plain sight has set back legitimate stem cell work around the world. \nCloning experts and stem cell scientists said research in the potentially revolutionary field of regenerative medicine will continue unabated. But they said public confidence in their work had been weakened by a sham branded by experts as the most visible case of scientific fraud they could recall.\n\nScientists also struggled to explain how they didn't earlier catch the charismatic South Korean veterinarian's claim in a Science paper published in May that he cloned 11 human embryos to produce stem cells.\n\n"That's a difficult one,'' said Keith Campbell, the University of Nottingham researcher who helped clone Dolly the sheep in 1997. "Scientists are asked to referee a lot of papers and to a certain extent we have to believe each other as to the validity of the data.''\n\nA disgraced Hwang Woo-suk resigned from Seoul National University on Friday after the school said the researcher fabricated groundbreaking cloning and stem-cell research that had raised hopes of new cures for hard-to-treat diseases.\n\nWhen Hwang published findings in February 2004 and again in May, it was believed he had developed a new cloning method that enabled him to accomplish something no one else had.\n\nHwang chalked up much of the success to South Korean government support and dedicated researchers working around the clock. He also credited his workers' dexterity with chopsticks; stem cell researchers visited from around the world and rushed back to their labs to try the new technique.