Using stem cells from umbilical cord blood and bone marrow, researchers have apparently cured a fatal genetic disease in a 2-year-old Minneapolis boy, which could open the door for other stem cell treatments.
For the first time in his life, Nate Liao is wearing normal clothes, eating food that has not been pureed, and playing with his siblings.
“Nate’s quality of life is forever changed,” said Dr. John Wagner of the University of Minnesota Medical School, who performed the treatment. “Maybe we can take one more disorder off the incurable list.”
The last time I checked, Sen. McCain actually supported stem cell research. But as we know, there is an entire library of things John McCain used to support or oppose before he started pandering to the far right of his party.
Sen. Obama supports stem cell research.
Okay, I honestly don’t know much about this topic, but I thought this was the type of stem cell research (not using fertilized embryos) that almost everyone supported.
Could you please show me where all those evil conservatives are against using stem cells from umbilical cords and bone marrow? The big hangup is embryonic stem cells, which are nowhere to be found in this story, or in this cure.
So … what’s the big deal?
SaveFarris: “McCain maintained his support for embryonic stem cell research ….” That’s from Jan of this year.
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=11558
So the distinguishing factor reconciling McCain’s anti-abortion beliefs with his pro-embryonic stem cell belief is whether the embryo is in a woman or if it’s soon to be owned by a pharmaceutical company.
The woman must carry the embryo to term regardless of her situation. The business can abort it and make a few bucks.
Straight talk!
McCain thought it was “stern” Cells. Which he is totally for. Putting floating torture cells in Naval vessels so the US can secretly hold and torture even more terrorists or wrong place wrong time brown people is very important to McCain.
McCain seems to be threading the needle quite well with the stem cell issue saying that he opposes research on stem cells from embryos created for scientific research. This allows the right wing to misread it as being opposed to embryonic stem cell research when in actuality his position is quite open to the use of embryonic cells taken from embryos created for in-vitro fertilization and then not needed.
from: http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/95b18512-d5b6-456e-90a2-12028d71df58.htm
Addressing the Moral Concerns of Advanced Technology
Stem cell research offers tremendous hope for those suffering from a variety of deadly diseases - hope for both cures and life-extending treatments. However, the compassion to relieve suffering and to cure deadly disease cannot erode moral and ethical principles.
For this reason, John McCain opposes the intentional creation of human embryos for research purposes. To that end, Senator McCain voted to ban the practice of “fetal farming,” making it a federal crime for researchers to use cells or fetal tissue from an embryo created for research purposes. Furthermore, he voted to ban attempts to use or obtain human cells gestated in animals. Finally, John McCain strongly opposes human cloning and voted to ban the practice, and any related experimentation, under federal law.
As president, John McCain will strongly support funding for promising research programs, including amniotic fluid and adult stem cell research and other types of scientific study that do not involve the use of human embryos.
Where federal funds are used for stem cell research, Senator McCain believes clear lines should be drawn that reflect a refusal to sacrifice moral values and ethical principles for the sake of scientific progress, and that any such research should be subject to strict federal guidelines.
Nice tiptoe from McCain, there. I’m not completely up on the facts here; could somebody let me know what percentage of these fetuses being used were “created for scientific research” and which were actually created in the hopes of producing offspring but then donated later to science?
SpiderJ says:
I’m not completely up on the facts here; could somebody let me know what percentage of these fetuses being used were “created for scientific research” and which were actually created in the hopes of producing offspring but then donated later to science?
jeff says:
Small quibble but embryonic stem cells are derived from embryos not from fetuses (embryos become fetuses after the 9th week following fertilization, stem cell lines are typically derived from embryos 4-5 days after fertilization) To answer your question though it would appear that all available stem cell lines were created from IVF (in vitro fertilization) embryos that were going to be discarded. The NIH has a listing here: http://stemcells.nih.gov/research/registry/ . Click on table of cell characteristics to see the origin of each cell line.
Nels Nelson, it is. In fact, it’s because science is working so well on cell that don’t have to destroy a fetus that many people oppose embryonic stem cell research.
Oliver here just proved that side right despite apparently trying to do the opposite.