Hopefully the stem cell research ban will be lifted in the United States and clinical trials can begin on growing and replacing damaged lung tissue in PWCF. For those of you who may be interested, there is an upcoming CFRI (Cystic Fibrosis Research Inc.) Annual Education Conference at the Sofitel Hotel, in Redwood City, California, were CF Researcher Dr. Richard Mollard, PhD of Monash University, in Melbourne, Australia will discuss Stem Cells and CF and Growing New Lung Tissue to Repair Damaged Lungs.The conference will be in 4 days. For those interested in more information, you can go to http://www.cfri.org
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Stem Cell Research and Lung Tissue Replacement
- Thread starter anonymous
- Start date
As much as I'd like a cure for cystic fibrosis, I don't support stem cell research. I'm pro-life, anti-abortion; therefore, as great as stem cell research is, it goes against my basic belief that all life is sacred and not to be discarded, even for noble causes. Just my personal opinion <img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif" border="0">
this will sound far fectched and in no means am i attacking anyone or trying to be mean, just putting some thoughts out there that i have heard before and my opinion please do not take it personally or get mad at it. i am not pushing my views on to you just stating them. as i know you all are as well. if stem cell research was to continue using fetuses in the long run it wouldn't be weird for the researchers to pay women to have abortions so they can have fetuses to study with. far fetched maybe maybe not. i agree with the other poster as well. I don't believe in abortions if you just don't want to have the kid. i think it is ok if the life of the mother is in danger and can also put the babies at high risk as well....its a difficult subject. i just don't like it when women have an abortion just because they didn't want the baby at the time....yes there are other circumstances involved with abortion and thats totaly different.....like i said before mothers life at risk or rape things like that.i won't get into the politic end of this because that always stirs up trouble no matter how civil anyone tries to be it eventually gets out of hand. and the post can as well. so lets try and keep the peace. we can all share our opinions and views jsut try not to attack one another. just be glad we can state our own opinions and learn from one another. you never know what you may learn, you may even have a new repspect for a view you never even thought of before.thats allme
Wouldn't it be nice if one could be injected with stem cells and within weeks have their own pancrease, lungs and heart functioning at 100%. The Rejuvinating capabilities are astronomical and countries like Singapore, India and even Germany are making great strides. Too bad stem cells are a sin and against God's (the United States) divine plan to make those with Cystic Fibrosis, Parkinsins, Diabetes and other disease's suffer.
I had asked my doctors but thought I would ask again. Would it be beneficial for me to save the cord blood of my baby to be born with CF in case they do come up with some promising research in the future or b/c the CF already affects this baby would someone else's cord blood (with stem cells) be of more use to my baby? My doctors have told me b/c of the CF we would not want to save this babies cord blood. Just wondering if anyone else out there has heard differently. Thanks. PaulaMom to Jameson - 3.5 no cf and Bennett - to be born next week with CF.
My own diatribe, please don't take this as affront to anyone personally.In the early 1900's, it was concievable that if man continued to use aircraft that someday, somewhere, someone would realize they could be used as flying missiles. In hindsight, should we have banned commercial airplanes right from the start? Stem cell research has the hope of being a means to self-replicate good CF genes and be the true cure for CF. Face it, CF is a terminal disease that effects the innocent. I guess I just believe people alive should not have their lives discarded. If the religious right in America wants to be REALLY "Pro-Life" and vote as such, why don't they get outraged at the lack of funding for the Orphan diseases like CF, the AIDS epidemic in Africa, or the hordes of uninsured children in America or the poor throughout the world and stop using abortion as some silly litimus test.Brad
Brad,I guess you could call me part of the "religious right" so I'll respond. Actually, I am VERY concerned about the uninsured, research for "orphan diseases", the AIDS epidemic, starving people worldwide, and all people suffering no matter where they are located geographically or what stage of life they are in. I also very much would like to see cures for many diseases (cf among them but most definitely not the only one). I also believe that life begins at conception, is sacred, and should not be discarded at any stage - before birth or later. I also don't believe that the above poster is being far fetched in saying that down the line woman may become pregnant and abort for money if there are not controls in place on stem cell research. 30 yrs ago most people probably didn't think there would be "paid" sperm donors or "petri dish" babies (not making a statement on the morality of either of those, just making a statement that things that seem far fetched at one time are usually reality at a later date...) I guess my point is that just because I am very much concerned for the life of the unborn does not mean that I am not also very concerned for everyone else. I agree wholeheartedly with you - we need more money for research and we need to be more responsible for the plight of all people everywhere. I'm also opposed to tax breaks for the very wealthy, if they had less tax breaks, we'd have more funding for all projects<img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif" border="0"> And, for what it's worth, most of my friends who would also be considered "religious right" have similiar views as mine. Abortion is only one of MANY important causes...I'm not trying to start a debate or judge anyone else or their views, just expressing mine<img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif" border="0">
I agree with the last poster. I am too part of the "religious right." I believe at conception a baby begins to grow. Therefore, I am against using stem cells for research, even if it leads to a cure. I have two kids with cf. I don't their life is more important than all of the babies that would be used as research in order to find a cure for their disease.
NoDayButToday
New member
I consider all life sacred; and am pro-choice- meaning that I feel that the government should not be able to tell a woman what to do with her own body. Anyway, because I consider all life to be sacred, I support stem cell research. Stem cells are not life; they are not capable of feeling emotion, pain or anything of the like. They are cells in the way the keyboard I am writing on is made of cells. I am, however a life. People with CF, Alzheimer's, diabetes, Parkinsons, etc. are already very much alive and feel emotion and pain. These diseases are taking countless lives, because people (ie, the government) refuse to allow promising research to occur. In in-vitro fertilization, not every potential embryo gets implanted. Should these stem cells sit forever in some freezer, no one doing anything with them? The stem cells are there, and would be better used to help others as opposed to sitting untouched for all time. No matter what the laws on stem cells are, women will continue to get abortions. Since they have already terminated the pregnancy, and the fetus will never become a child, why not use it to help those already alive? If it did come to a point where women could be paid to have abortions for the fetus' stem cells; well that's why there are ethics laws in place regarding medical research. Stem cells hold the potential to cure many diseases, save countless lives, and change the world of medicine. Why aren't we pursuing such a promising treatment?
My point was that Stem Cells have great promise for mankind but man can abuse them just like every other technological development that has come down the pike. Nano-technology could conceivably cause uncontrolled electro-mechanical self perpetuating bacteria, Gene therapy can possibly create wild free radical and cause cancer, tanker trucks can be used as incindiary devices, lord knows what we can do with nuclear power, and the list goes on. Should we ban these because if handled recklessly and treated as toy they can be dangerous, of course not. We just need to regulate them and set up professional guidelines in a sane reasonable way.We were given the option to abort Brinly when we were first told she had CF. We believe in life even with challenges and we chose life. But I thank God, we are in a country that give us our right to express our values over ourselves rather than have someone impress their values upon us.BradBrinly's Dad
Embryonic stem cells are the important ones, these come from the core of a blastocyst - a fertilized egg after about 5 days (when it implants in the uterus).How many women get abortions at the day of implantation? None. In fact, a really good source of ESC would be... fertility clinics. People undergoing IVF (including sterile CF men looking to have kids) end up having extra embryos. Why not instead of discarding these cells (which is going to happen anyway) - let them be donated to medical research.I am very pro-choice, and the prolife extremists frighten and disgust me (we just had the "Truth Trucks" and "Truth Airplanes" fly pictures of mangled fetuses around town, it is dangerous and disgusting).By the "life begins at conception" arguement, anyone seeking IVF (those WANTING CHILDREN) are terrible, awful "baby" killers. I'm sorry, I just don't buy that logic.
I agree completely with Brad about stem cell research and Coll--you are a clear and great writer at 15 or any age. I find the current administration repressive in ways we could not have imagined 4 years ago. I wonder if there IS a specific group supporting Kerry around this crucial issue...maybe we should contact Ron Reagan, JR.