see if you support 08 stem cell research

See if you support in 08 supports stem cell research :
Joe Biden- voted in favor of federal funding for stem cell research in 2005
Sam Brownback- opposes embryonic stem cell research, voted against federal funding but says there shoudl be research on adult stem cells.
Hillary Clinton- Co sponsored a bill in favor of federal funding for stem cell research
Christopher Dodd- Supports embryonic stem cell research in situations where the embryos would be destroyed otherwise
John Edwards- wants to expand federal funding for embryonic stem cell research
Rudolph Guiliani - Has not taken a definitive stance but is infavor of "loosening restrictions"
Mike Gravel- Supports stem cell research including embryonic.
Mike Huckabee- supports stem cell research on existing lines but does not want to create new ones
Duncan Hunter- Supports research on adult stem cells. Voted against federal funding in 2005
Dennis Kucinich- cosponsor of a new bill on stem cell research. Is a major advocate for all types of stem cell research.
John McCain- Supported bills that woudl give federal funding for adult stem cells, Is in favor of using embryonic stem cells that would be destroyed.
Barack Obama- Voted for federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.
Ron Paul- Does not oppose stem cell research but opposes federal funding of it.
Bill Richardson- Wants federal funding for stem cell research. As governor proposed a state funded stem cell research facility.
Mitt Romney- Supports using leftover embryos but opposes federal funding. Has voted for stem cell research in past years but has gotten increasingly opposed to it.
Tom Tancredo-voted against any type of stem cell research. Says embryonic stem cell research is morally reprehensible.
Fred Thompson- Supports adult stem cell research. Opposes embryonic.

By ols23
Posted October 5, 2007 at 11:16 pm
Report post

I am really interested in this stem cell research for there is this hope in me that it will be a great help to a lot of people suffering. As to embryonic stem cell, as someone mentioned that as long as the embryo to be used is one that is just to be destroyed then why not use it to improve life.

By janeandVicky
Posted September 12, 2008 at 11:38 am
Report post

Great discussion and information. I want to add to this a more direct piece of info. You can access stem cell therapy in china by going to www.businessweek.com and an article called Stem Cell Refugees. Feb 12 2007 printing. You can contact Nanshan Hospital in Shenzhen City in Southern China and ask for Dr. Hu. They are working on Spinal cord injuries. You can contact www.stemcellspuhua.com for stem cells concerning degenerative brain disorders at Tiantan Puhua hospital in Beijing.

By walkagain
Posted September 13, 2008 at 8:01 pm
Report post

I am in full support of adult strem cell use, blue shark stem cell use...there was a paralyzed man resently where they grew stem cells from his belly fat. Another from inside the nose.

I am a T-7...I know what this does to my family...I know what it does to other families. My life is devoted to walking again. I started a non-profit organization called the Walk Again Foundation. (http://www.walkagain.info)

There is nothing more that I want but to walk again and to see others walk. However, I a not willing to have another life die just so that I can have the privledge to walk again.

There are other ways...ways more effective than killing a human life...read my site for more info.

By LDeB
Posted September 14, 2008 at 12:16 pm
Report post

Someone needs to help me with this.

No matter what your position, it is important to keep in mind what embryonic stem cell research is, and where the embryonic stem cells come from.

1. Those working on embryonic stem cells get the cells from the few lines that have been approved by the federal government, or generate their own.

2. Generating a line of embryonic stem cells generally requires the destruction of an embryo (although recent developments are proving there may eventually be other ways that do not).

3. Those in the U.S. who generate their own lines get the embryos from fertility clinics.

4. Couples trying to conceive a child sometimes try in vitro fertilization -- the creation of an embryo in a lab setting, which is then implanted into the womb. It is a difficult process, and not every try is successful. For this reason, in the in vitro fertilization process, multiple embryos are generated with the hopes that one will become a successful pregnancy and be carried to term. Sometimes several embryos are implanted at once, and others are saved for implantation at a later point in time (in the event the couple wants to try again).

5. Couples sometimes do not use all of the embryos created during their treatment -- either because the couple that generated the embryos during the course of their treatment now has all the children they want, or because they have ceased treatment. This leaves a number of excess embryos that will not be used in the fertility process.

6. Generally, one of four things happens to the unused embryos: either they are (i) donated for research by the couple who created them, (ii) left frozen indefinitely, (iii) occasionally, "adopted" by other couples, or (iv) discarded. Most excess embryos are left frozen indefinitely or discarded.

7. The embryos scientists use to generate embryonic stem cell lines are the unused embryos that were either donated to science by the couple that created them, or those which were otherwise going to be, quite literally, thrown out.

I respect those who consider the destruction of an embryo to be the destruction of a human life. WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND is how one can object to the destruction of an embryo for purposes of carefully regulated scientific research that stands to benefit so many, when these embryos were otherwise going to be discarded anyway (which no one hears anyone objecting to). Isn't it more respectful of human life to try to use these excess embryos to try to develop treatment for the sick and suffering, rather than watching them get thrown out as trash, or stay in a freezer forever (where they will never grow into a fetus or child, or, in other terms, see their "potential" for life realized)?

Embryos - which, physically, are little clusters of cells - are getting destroyed every day. My position is that as long as this is the case, we owe it to ourselves to try to make some good come out of that. Anything less, in my opinion, is hypocritical.

Until those who oppose embryonic stem cell research ALSO oppose the (perfectly legal) discarding of excess embryos and the fertility treatments that create them (and I think few people, deep down, would honestly oppose a process that helps a couple trying to conceive their own child do just that), I think they need to get on board, or step (or, in the case of quads like me, wheel) aside.

I encourage you to support stem cell research of all kinds, and those candidates who do the same.

By michaelsdad
Posted September 15, 2008 at 2:23 pm
Report post

I whole heartedly agree with LDeB's post. It does not make sense to me that it is apparently ok to destroy these embryonic blastocysts, but not okay to use them for research. How is destroying the ones that are not used any different from abortion. Should we outlaw in vitro fertilazation since these excess cell cluster are destroyed, I sure don't think so.

By mikey
Posted September 15, 2008 at 11:58 pm
Report post

LDeB and Michaelsdad have done a good job
in framing the argument for embryonic stem cell
research. But I think we have to leave abortion
out of the equation. True in both situations there
is no desire for a human life, but the issue here
is to make use of the embryo in such a way so
that humanity can benefit as opposed to the embryo
being discarded.

As medicine progresses there are going to be
more ethical issues. Sometimes the issues will
present tough dilemmas but as society progresses
it is incumbent to do whatever we can in order to improve people's lives.

Fertility clinics are a good thing and as opposed
to DISCARDING the excess embryos they should be
used for the betterment of mankind.

By SickOfBeingSick
Posted November 1, 2009 at 1:04 am
Report post

I was so interested to read this list. I would love to see an updated list.

I'm not paralyzed, but I have a genetic immune disorder. Stem cells collected from the umbilical cords of newborn babies have been SUCCESSFULLY used to treat babies and young children born with the severe form of my disorder, saving their lives.

Collecting cord blood is really cheap and easy to do. I am astounded that people are so uninformed about the availability of this important source of stem cells and I am even more astounded that the medical community doesn't do more to collect umbilical cord blood.

I don't really know much about the differences between stem cells taken from cord blood and from embryos, though. It just really bothers me that there is no public awareness and that people think all stem cells come from embryos. I would love to hear more from people who have done the research about the differences between embryonic stem cells vs. cord blood stem cells.

Cathy

By Rehana
Posted November 1, 2009 at 12:43 pm
Report post

My grand baby Hana Rehan is sufering from spinal nurve injury during surgery in May 2009 not by hiting some thing only because of reaction of anithesia or some thing else during surgery After surgery she has lost her all m,ovements under neck area but now she is recover and her arm and legs are working better
but between neck and hips area (spinal cord area) she has no control she move her neck full face
How stem cell support this we want right way

Welcome to Inspire!

Explore topics in this discussion:

16 replies

Add to the discussion

Group leaders

You