New Stem Cell Source - Your Bone Marrow

BoogieChile writes "ABC News is reporting that a team of researchers from Cedars-Sinai Medical Centre in Los Angeles, lead by Dr John Yu, are aiming to extract renewable stem cells from bone marrow - extracted from the patient him/herself - for a source of neural stem cells for treatment of brain cancers, Alzheimers and other neurological disorders. Problem solved! Yipee! New spinal column, anyone?" 'Course the story has no details - post anything else you can find below.

Comments

Who cares?

[Necromancyr]

This has been known for a LONG time. The problem is the cells are no where near as effective as fetal cells because of their inability to diferentiate as well (meaning they can't become as many 'body parts' and when they can, they are normally inferior because of the way in which stem cells in the body are retained during aging).

Also, other countries are already advancing with fetal stem cells. Take a look at annoucements from all over the world - countries that we're decades behind us are already passing us because of the religiously based rules imposed upon science by the 'Moral' politicians/lobbying groups. The cloning issues are progressing the same way. China and India are already advancing past us - and some of the most valuable scientists in the field are LEAVING the Unites States because of the limits that are being put on their research.

All I know is people are going to have abortions - be it medically or with a coat hanger - whether I, you, the president, god, etc., agree with it. They always have, they always will. We might as well use them towards some good. Unfortunately, some people feel it's better that we say "No, its bad. I won't listen." and let the already doomed fetuses be simply thrown away. At least, until their loved one dies and they realize they could have been saved with methods derived from stem cells.

The fact of the matter is this is the equivalent of saying "Well, we have diamons...but, take a look at this cubic zirconium...we shined it up real nice and it might be as good as a diamond." Except its NOT. Unfortunately, we're not allowed to make 'fake diamonds' (clone/in vitro fertilize) because that would be wrong too.

(And, apologies for spelling errors...I tried to look it over, but I know I must have made a few...maybe...)

Re:Great news for Health

[CommieLib]

are so quick to make that decision, do you want the mothers who cant afford their kids, or know they will be unable to raise them, to bring them to your door to pay for / love / raise them as your own??

What if his answer is yes? Can't we agree that at least some women choose not to abort because they know that an adoptive family can be found?

My sister in law found herself in this situation (someone who reads my posts regularly is starting to be able to piece together her life story together by now ;)). The choice is a deeply personal one, so it's not right for me to say one way or another why she made the choice she did, but I would like to think that it was influenced by the promises (made and delivered upon) that the rest of the family would help her raise the baby without the assistance of the scumbag father.

The real point here is that what you're accusing the other fellow of is hypocrisy. Even if he is, that doesn't make him wrong; if I say murder is wrong, and then kill someone, that doesn't make murder right.

Consider the fact that murder of a two year old solves the problem of a mother who can't afford her kids as well as abortion of a 6th month fetus solves the same problem. Simply because an idea solves a problem doesn't make it right either.

As far as the anybody else's damn business business, you're begging the question that the baby is a separate life. Clearly you don't think so, and he does, and so that's the point of debate.