No Benefits To Embryonic Stem Cells? Wrong

[Kytro]

Originally Posted by 7960

He made the comparison with donating your body to science. If that's the way this is going to work then I want to see a consent form signed by an embryo.

Which is like asking a brick for it's consent to be part of house. The fact it is alive is meaningless when there is no intelligence or any reasonable chance of it.

One can make decision about your own body primarily due to having the ability to reason. Rights of those without that ability, but have a reasonable chance of obtaining it are also protected, to varying degrees.

In this case there is no ability to reason, or a reasonable chance.

[Diamond Cross]

After further research I withdraw my statemement and offer my apologies.

However, I still feel that embryonic stem cells need more research. There may be more benefits that have not been discovered yet. There is too much that is unknown that needs to be known.

[7960]

Originally Posted by Kytro

Which is like asking a brick for it's consent to be part of house. The fact it is alive is meaningless when there is no intelligence or any reasonable chance of it.

One can make decision about your own body primarily due to having the ability to reason. Rights of those without that ability, but have a reasonable chance of obtaining it are also protected, to varying degrees.

In this case there is no ability to reason, or a reasonable chance.

Everything you said applies to a 1 month old, too. Are we gonna start dissecting them, too, for the benefit of everyone else?

[Kytro]

Originally Posted by 7960

Everything you said applies to a 1 month old, too. Are we gonna start dissecting them, too, for the benefit of everyone else?

How so? There a gulf between frozen cells to be destroyed an a living being such as baby. Even between a developing embryo and a frozen one that is to be destroyed a large difference exists in value the way life is valued.

[7960]

Originally Posted by Kytro

There a gulf between frozen cells to be destroyed an a living being such as baby.

To you. But ok, then are you saying there's no difference between "frozen cells" and an in-utero 35 week fetus?

Even between a developing embryo and a frozen one that is to be destroyed a large difference exists in value the way life is valued.

Again...to you. There are also a lot of religious AND non-religious people who believe that once it's fertilized it's on its way to being a baby and that it shouldn't be destroyed just for its cells. There's a massive controversy about this subject but there is absolutely zero controversy about adult stem cells, they work, and there a lot of evidence that they're less harmful than embryonic stem cells.

[Kytro]

Originally Posted by 7960

Again...to you. There are also a lot of religious AND non-religious people who believe that once it's fertilized it's on its way to being a baby and that it shouldn't be destroyed just for its cells.

Which is somehow worse than destroying it for nothing at all? I would say that there is a difference between on it's way to being a baby and frozen and to be destroyed. I agree many people do not see this distinction, primarily due to black and white being easier to handle than shades of grey.

Originally Posted by 7960

There's a massive controversy about this subject but there is absolutely zero controversy about adult stem cells, they work, and there a lot of evidence that they're less harmful than embryonic stem cells.

The more research that occurs, the more we will learn, and we shouldn't limit research just because is happens to annoy a segment of society. That path limits our understanding. I'm also not opposed to taking into account how people feel, and try to work around that, but not by shutting of entire research paths based on religious or otherwise unprovable beliefs.

[7960]

Originally Posted by Kytro

.....or otherwise unprovable beliefs.

What unproven beliefs?

Sperm meets egg = on it's way to being a baby.

Whether you stop the process 8 days or 8 weeks or 8 months later is there a difference? Two things are important here......

1. there are enough people who believe (for religious and personal reasons) that there is no difference that we need to take them into account

2. there are viable alternatives that are proven to work and haven't been investigated as much as they should be because scientists are acting like fuggin babies.

[Kytro]

Originally Posted by 7960

What unproven beliefs?

Sperm meets egg = on it's way to being a baby.

Not when it is frozen and marked for destruction it's not.

Originally Posted by 7960

Whether you stop the process 8 days or 8 weeks or 8 months later is there a difference? Two things are important here......

1. there are enough people who believe (for religious and personal reasons) that there is no difference that we need to take them into account

I never said they shouldn't be taken into account, just that there is more to consider.

Originally Posted by 7960

2. there are viable alternatives that are proven to work and haven't been investigated as much as they should be because scientists are acting like fuggin babies.

All paths should be investigated - and increasingly they are. Knowledge builds on knowledge.