So now that Mr. Bush has vetoed the stem cell bill, I have a question

[Kytro]

Originally Posted by motivez

I think if you asked Bush (or anyone who really opposes this on some 'moral' grounds) that it is about ethics, since they see this as killing human life.

I don't think that is something that should be determined on how you feel about it. Everyone has an opinion, that does not mean it's well-informed or even reasonable.

It is obviously "human life", that does not make it a person. Unless Bush is imply that these embryos have 'souls', another religious belief which should be kept out of law.

Originally Posted by motivez

I don't think there should be 'harvesting' or 'selling' of frozen embryos, so it's not a business to get an abortion, but I think ones that are going to be discarded and thus "wasted" anyway.. wouldn't be wasted if they were used to help further science.

At this pont in time there is no need to even consider harvesting or selling.

My concerns lie with the fact that the president just seems to be making a decision about how he personally feels about something and not on any real objective basis.

[Thorgrim]

To really think we'd be anywhere we are today in terms of technology without NASA is...laughable

I'd like to find some anti-NASA article that says it wasn't really worth it and private business would have done the same eventually

Also, the idea that "well theres competition, so the good company would win the business!" is wrong, companies either get the patent, file lawsuits, lobby congress, or use other under-handed tactics to keep the best products from being available on the market because it would hurt profits in the long term, see

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by motivez

I think the question of funding really relies on profit to be made.

Would private funding rather search for a cure to a disease, or something that would allow people to live with it as long as they continue purchasing their product for the rest of their life?

i believe cures are more profitable.

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by beez

but if some little biotech firm out of nowhere comes with a cure then your business plan is pretty much fucked.

and that's exactly what i want to do

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by motivez

So work torwards developing one but don't release it if it ever happens?

I mean, that sounds kind of conspiracy theoryish, but these companies spend billions of billions of dollars in R&D to come up with these drugs.

I don't doubt for a second that they would prefer to make money by selling people pills they have to take daily for the rest of their lives rather than a single pill or treatment, or even something more prolonged.. but that ends at some point.

there are too many other drugs to worry about than to do this...this is just too much work for one drug.

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

i believe cures are more profitable.

So something that people could take maybe one time to cure them is more profitable than something they may need to take their whole lives?

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

So something that people could take maybe one time to cure them is more profitable than something they may need to take their whole lives?

sure. they could charge a little more for the cure, but you also have to think worldwide, not to mention that diseases these days aren't eliminated as much as they once were. what i mean is that the diseases we're tackling these days (and i assume are probably the targets of this discussion...ie cancer) are not ones you can simply give a vaccine for. they will always be around. a cure will be very popular, and there will always be a market for it. at this point i think people are hesitant about some treatments, they aren't always productive, etc. it's just my personal opinion. i personally, as a wannabe biotech entrepreneur, want to be the company known to provide a cure for a disease, not a company that just provides simple solutions to the symptoms. of all the scientists i know, i feel that all of them want the cure.

[motivez]

I don't think the question is really the scientists doing the "grunt work" of actually coming up with cures and science, but rather the management.

I think a vaccine would probably be more profitable than a cure or a "treat the symptoms" thing, since you could innoculate the entire planet instead of simply the people who happened to come down with [whatever it was]

[beez]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

and that's exactly what i want to do

Let me know if you need any Natural Language Processing help