Is the stem cell research just another false issue to divide Americans?
968242
I think so.  I live in California and the problem here is not the research, it is the funding for the research.  Most of the people I have discussed it with seem to think that it is a legal or illegal issue.  They don't understand that it is the source of funding that is in question.  \n\nIMO when you start throwing tax dollars at things like research, it is nothing but a black hole.  There is absolutely no incentive to operate the research in an efficient manner since there is no real limit to the funds available.
757631
Stem cells are cell in the humane body that have not yet been defined. meaning they have not developed to the point of of becoming an organized mass called tissue such as muscle tissue  or skin tissue or nerve tissue. This is important because researchers are investigating ways to coax stem cells into developing  into specific types of tissue  within the body  to aid in the cure of injuries and disease. For example if someones spinal cord was cut and you could get stem cells to develop into spinal cord tissue to repair the damage . this has actually been demonstrated in mice. now this is somewhat of an oversimplification but you get the idea.\n\nNow as stated by previous answers there are 2 types of stem cells Adult and Embryonic. The controversy is over the use of Embryonic stem cells. there are several ethical debates that arise from embryonic stem cells..\n1.Obviously by their nature they are derived from embryos or fertilized eggs. Now those believing that life begins at inception (such as myself) think that is destruction of viable life and object on these grounds.. Others say there are thousands of embryos created for in-vitro fertilization and many go unused and likely will never be implanted so why not get some good from them. To better illustrate my position let me paint a slightly different picture. Let say one person had a unique  immune system that created antibodies that would attack and destroy all types of cancer.. Obviously these cells would be useful to curing those afflicted. Now would it be ethical to pass a law requiring that individual to donate blood and tissue against his will so that thousands could be cured. Worse yet would it be ethical to require that individual to submit cells for cloning  so even more could be cured. this brings us to the second Issue\n2. The second way to to get embryonic stem cells is by cloning and harvesting the stem cells before the embryo develops into  a fetus. The moral and ethical implications here are obvious. you might call this the production line approach and the very idea is intolerable to many people.\n3. Lastly, Once use of embryonic stem cell is deemed acceptable would it be legal to sell ones eggs much like people sell plasma today.Currently there is no prohibition on the practice  and it would likely be used. Realizing that the female body produces a finite supply of eggs determined at birth the use of financial incentives to induce women likely poor woman to donate raises it's own ethical questions \n\nCurrently federal funding for embryonic stem cell research on new embryo's is banned. the government has made an exception for a few strains of cells that were developed prior to the funding ban. This ban is not on research but on federal funding the private sector as well as state funding wholly with state dollars is still legal\nAs far as Adult stem cell research goes there are no restrictions I know of\nSo there you have the debate in a nutshell as for yourself you have to decide on your own ethics. I have tried to give as unbiased a coverage as I can detailing the pertinent facts.
83841
Women are going to have abortions. Whether it's right or wrong to do so, they are going to do it.  Why shouldn't we as a society utilize this stem cell resource?  We're more than willing to destroy the rain forests and other resources for chemical "cures".  We'll pump ourselves full of chemicals and endure side effects worse than the disease we're trying to treat when stem cells offer cures, not just symptom cover ups.
472005
You know, most people try to avoid controversial subjects. Something controversial is stem cell research, if you ask me.
390978
If you're asking if embryos should be created then destroyed just for experimentation, then, no.\n\nBut if you're asking if stem cell research using existing embryos and non-embryonic stem cells should be used for good instead of just destroyed, I'd vote "yes".\n\nIf you're asking if stem cell research could some day lead to return of the eugenics movement (selective breeding, euthanasia of the handicapped--that sort of thing) my answer is that it's a chance I'm willing to take.
969469
I support stem cell research.\nI vehemently oppose Federal Funding (taxpayer) for stem cell research.  There is no more important right on this planet than private property rights (my money).  There will always be some worthy cause that politicians will use to spend "federal funds", and the slow erosion of private property rights for "worthy causes" will only make things worse.\n\n.
1063970
Its more of misinformation. Unfortunately people assume that we can only get stem cells from aborted fetuses; the blatently ignore the fact that you can remove embryonic stem cells with out hurting the fetus.\n\nIts stupidity.
443274
it isn't.  the country isn't split 50/50 over pedophilia, it isn't split over vigilante killing, it isn't split evenly over whether line-cutting at the supermarket is acceptable.  \n\nwhat you are talking about is the prominence given to issues that are undecided.  the simple reality is that individual behaviors are informed by social mores.  social mores are developed through multiple means, but in a purportedly democratic society, manifest consensus of opinion is necessary.  what you are referring to is the natural conflict of a society essaying to define the consensus on certain issues where social mores are ambiguous.  in response to the ambiguity and ambivalence, crusaders of a partisan agenda rally support for their cause in an effort to turn the tide.  as this happens on both sides in an ambiguous issue, conflict occurs.\n\nas for the definition of life issue--the force of the conflict results from the fact that many of our accepted values are actually in conflict, and this issue brings that fact into sharp relief.  it's kind of like doing a puzzle and realizing that you have a piece that cannot fit given the way the other pieces have been connected.  quite simply, averring the universal value of any biological entity expressing a particular genetic pattern does not mesh with the value placed upon creating harmony and reducing conflict within a social system (quite similar to the conflict evident around capital punishment).\n\nwhat has happened is that for thousands of years societal systems have insisted on the distinct, sancrosanct "specialness" of human beings in order to increase our survivability, and now we are beginning to learn that we are just a part of a larger system--a system whose survivability vastly exceeds our own in precedence.\nsince most individuals in our society are currently incapable of deconstructing the complex interplay of causality implicit in this theme, they mediate the conflict by relying on emotional judgments--which serves to further heighten the tension.
381101
"Adult" stem cells can be isolated from tissues in living people, however these cells are not considered "pluripotent", meaning they cannot become ANY cell but are confined to generation of a single tissue, etc.  For example, the reason that bone marrow transplantation works to treat diseases like leukemia is because blood stem cells in the marrow are able to regenerate the spectrum of blood cells in a chemotherapy patient.  There is little ethical concern for these types of stem cells and government funding is available.\n\nPluripotent (or "embryonic") stem cells, as their name suggests, must be collected from embryonic tissue, such as a fertilized blastocyst, and currently this involves destroying the embryo.  Aborted fetal tissues, particularly late-term, are not good sources of embryonic cells, since many of these cells have already differentiated into tissue-specific stem cells.  Thus, researchers have tended to use discarded eggs from fertility clinics that have been kept frozen at the blastocyst stage.\n\nRegardless, this is where the moral delemma begins.  Since many people believe that life begins at conception, this fertilized blastocyst is a human and destroying it is therefore murder.  Based on this argument, the US government has halted funding of research to create new embryonic stem cell lines, but will allow researchers to use cell lines generated by this method prior to the government's decision.  This leaves a handful of available lines, each of which has its own limitations technically or experimentally.\n\nThe flaw in this argument, in my view, is that fertility clinics are allowed to dispose of frozen eggs with the consent of the donors (often following successful IVF treatment), but these same cells cannot be used by doctors for legitimate medical research purposes, even with consent of the donors, without their destruction being labeled "murder".
827911
If you want actual facts, Planned Parenthood, is your best bet.  The best place for basic stem cell facts is the Christopher Reeve Foundation.\n\nForget that abortiontv.com site.  It's completely right-wing religious based with a lot on inaccurate information.
820294
Go with the controversial stem cell research!
1122171
They have proven that the stem cells found in the cords at the time of delivery provide just as much genetic material and supply for testing and research. \n\nI think they should use those cells, and not those they collect from cultured embryos.\n\nThere is always a way to test and research that doesnt involve the use of lives without voices. Such as the unborn or animals. I think those should be sought after and explored.
821302
I assume you are refering to embryonic stem cell research, which has shown no real promise or potential of success and healing like some people would like you to believe.  \n\nThe website below lists the various embryonic stem cell lines that have been studied by several groups for years now and without any hint of success.
942133
I have to agree with you.  It is an abominable practice.  I find it comparable to the Japanese tradition of drowning newborns just because they were not the prefered sex.  \nAlso, fetal stem cell research has been going on for many years, with no promising results at all.  How can anyone argue that any of these "lofty goals" are ever going to materialize?  I have no problem with research involving adult stem cell, which by the way, is showing much more promise.
22799
I am for it. Esp if it can help cure diseases that we can not prevent with any other alternative method. Why wouldnt anyone want to spend more time with the ones they love. I do understand that stem cells come from aborted fetuses. But if we can use the stem cells that are collected to better help everyone then we should do what we can with what we have. But lets not start creating abortions to just harvest stem cell. I am healthy.
1018496
Yes, 60% in fact.\nAnd your facts are right.\n\nThere is obviously a huge emphasis on 'freedom' and democracy in 'America'.\nAnd yes, this also includes murdering little babies.\nIt is sad that such a number of Americans are inclined to believe in this.\nThere has been 70,000 acts of disruption at abortion clinics since it started in America. I would burn all of them down if I had the choice.
238795
Stem cells are primal undifferentiated cells which retain the ability to differentiate into other cell types. This ability allows them to act as a repair system for the body, replenishing other cells as long as the host organism is alive.\n\nMedical researchers believe stem cell research has the potential to change the face of human disease by being used to repair specific tissues or to grow organs. Yet as government reports point out, "significant technical hurdles remain that will only be overcome through years of intensive research."\n\nThere are three types of stem cells: embryonic, adult and cord blood. Right to life and many religious groups have ethical problems with embryonic programs because it involves destroying surplus embryos from IVF programs.