General Medicine

» P_Al - Stem Cell Debate

It is understandable that some persons may take offence to the use of human embryos for research. Even though there is great potential for embryonic stem cells in facilitating the investigation of various diseases, acquiring these cells involves the destruction of the embryo. Some equate this with the destruction of human life.
However, I think that the recent isolation of stem cells from amniotic fluid circumvents this objection. This procedure does not require the destruction of human embryos and seems poised to pave an ethical path for stem cell research.
--

-- posted by P_Al

» P_Al - Stem Cell Debate

In response to Stem Cell Debate posted by P_Al:
The stem cell debate may take another interesting twist with the news today that scientists have developed a technique to produce stem cells (from the skin of adult mice), which are indistinguishable from embryonic stem cells. See link - http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/healthne...
Others are now trying to replicate this feat in humans.
.
This comes at a time when the US house has approved a bill to lessen restrictions on federal funding for stem cell research. The majority however is below that required to overcome an expected veto from President George Bush.

-- posted by P_Al

» redback - of mice and men

In response to Stem Cell Debate posted by P_Al:

A similar Bill passed our House of Representatives a few days ago and despite a tougher ride, is expected to pass the Seante later this month. A conscience vote is allowed in both Houses. The passing of the Bill is despite Australia's Catholic Archbishop Pell strong warning reminding Catholic politicians of the church's position and suggesting they may be denied...or should not seek, Holy Communion if they voted in favour. There was a cheeky Stem Pell Debate suggested instead.

"...In Australia, legislation states that no embryo may be created for the purpose of this research or to generate stem cell lines. The embryonic stem and germ cells are obtained from either donated embryos not required for an IVF procedure that would otherwise be destroyed, or from pregnancies that were terminated for medical or social reasons...."
http://www.biotechnologyonline.gov.au/hu...

What could or should happen to the placenta following the birth of the child? Who knows where the real boundaries of this are? A baby is conceived with a secondary(??) purpose of being an organ donor for their genetically ill sibling. Should "excess" embryos be transferred against the wishes of the donor? Is this the thin edge of the wedge to be later enable the 'reproductively cloning' of thousands of Archbishop Pell etc to wreak havoc on us all? Or my clone collects my superannuation?

Those who hold deeply held convictions should ponder whether they not access new treatments discovered as a result? This won't happen because advances will be embedded in new technologies.

Life creates many interesting dilemnas and the word 'procrastinate' wasn't invented for nothing.

-- posted by redback

» P_Al - of mice and men

In response to of mice and men posted by redback:

I think the debate is going to get even more interesting. The hugh potential of this area of research is mounting and may have an increasing impact with time. However, science may actually circumvent the dilemma! I have already written an article on the use of amniotic fluid to harvest stem cells, which have multi-lineage potential - http://cancer.suite101.com/article.cfm/s...

In addition as I mentioned above - "scientists have developed a technique to produce stem cells (from the skin of adult mice), which are indistinguishable from embryonic stem cells". It is going to be interesting to see how politicians opposed to stem cell research approach these new developments.

-- posted by P_Al

» redback - of mice and men

In response to of mice and men posted by P_Al:

"However, science may actually circumvent the dilemma!"

By which time a new 'dilemna' will surface. This is like law and true justice concepts trying to keep up with our expectations VS us trying to balance our selfish expectations with the greater good.

Poor Archbishop Pell has been accused of contempt of Parliament ergo 20+ years jail. A political stunt but he may have to face a parliamentary committee to explain his exhortations to MPs to vote against the Bill or face religious consequences.

All this side tracks, delays, advances in medicine that may benefit the loudest naysayers. Next with the mice, will come complaints about a developing genetic love of cheese?

-- posted by redback

» P_Al - of mice and men

In response to of mice and men posted by redback:

I found a link to the issue here - http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200... (was not aware of this one). There are many who call for the separation of church and state. I really wonder how possible this is. Moves like this demonstrate how intertwined both are.

-- posted by P_Al

» redback - A wee winner

In response to of mice and men posted by P_Al:

A runner-up in the 2007 Smart 100 here and its Young Achiever winner, is Prue Cowan, a PhD, cancer researcher, co-author of a research paper for 'Nature Methods'. She was an "integral" part of the team that made the breakthrough of growing human prostate tissue from an embryonic cell. Full credit where it's due...Monash Institute of Medical Research, Melbourne.

The Bulletin award review went on to say nearly all men over 50 will be affected by benign prostate disease and up to 90% will suffer discomfort by age 90. I'm not sure if this is indicative evidence I WILL live to 90?

Re intertwining comment. The lines ARE blurred. But then, what single act would push a borderline example one way or the other? Some call this the thin edge of the wedge. Our federal Health Minister is a devout Catholic I'm sure I mentioned earlier. He's not borderline, he's a manifest example.

-- posted by redback

» tinuviel - A wee winner

In response to A wee winner posted by redback:

Let's not forget that we have been shown alternative methods of harvesting these cells--the skin of rats, was it? And from amniotic fluid. I hope that scientist won't forget these less deadly (and most likely less controversial) methods as we seem to from time to time. Let us also hope that these guys can pull off the same brilliance using these other types of stem cells.

Of course, devout people have been known to put forward objections for many things. How did this Australian medical team get past the Catholic Health Minister with that particular embryonic stem cell research? Do they do these things in hiding, or is it that because it's "just" research it doesn't matter?

I, of course, differ from you two in my opinion concerning embryonic stem cell research. Which is why I am elated that they have found alternative methods of harvesting stem cells and hope that the scientific community will keep its eye fixed on this element of true progress that has been made in this area.

Half-hearted congratulations to Prue Cowan Ph.D. and her team.

(You're probably dismayed to find a prude on the site...) Well, in the words of the great urban poet Tupac, "I ain't mad at ya."

-- posted by tinuviel

» P_Al - ?Alternate Sources

In response to A wee winner posted by tinuviel:

I agree. The focus should probably be shifted to developing these new potential sources of stem cells. Amniotic fluid-derived stem cells appear to have wide differentiating potential. They could therefore represent a true alternative to embryonic stem cells which have significant advantages for human disease research, compared to adult stem cells.

I hope that those divided on this issue can see beyond their previous disagreement and deal with the new research at hand. I can't see a real argument (moral, ethical) against using cells derived from the amniotic fluid which certainly were not destined to be a separate human being.

-- posted by P_Al