Stem Cells - The Hope and the Hype

zer0skill writes to mention a CNN summary of a Time cover story. The Truth about Stem Cells deals with an increasingly politicized area of scientific inquiry, and likens the fight to those over global warming and evolution. From the article: "Five years after Bush announced that federal money could go to researchers only working on embryonic stem cell lines that scientists had already developed, Democrats hope to leverage the issue as evidence that they represent the reality-based community, running against the theocrats. States from Connecticut to California have tried to step in with enough funding to keep the labs going and slow the exodus of U.S. talent to countries like Singapore, Britain and Taiwan."

Comments

Re:Evolution, Global Warming, and Stem Cell Resear

[Stoutlimb]

"Evolution is a theory."

By saying that, you confuse "sound scientific theory" with "just a theory" or "cockamamie theory", which is what the public thinks when you say "It's just a theory". It's strong enough of a theory that it might as well be fact for all intents and purposes. Quit giving ammo to the luddites.

Re:Why has nobody explained...

[LordLucless]

As I understand it, embryonic stem cells are better to do research with because they are less differentiated than adult stem cells. An embryonic stem cell can progress into any other type of cell; skin, hair, bone, muscle, whatever. Adult stem cells have a more limited range of cells they can develop into, based on where they were harvested. Embyronic stem cells have a greater potential. I have also heard that because of this, they are easier to perform research on. It may be possible to discover something more quickly researching on embryonic cells, and then translate this discovery over to adult stem cells for use in therepeutics.

However, in current therepeutic terms, adult stem cells are better. For one, embryonic stem cells have had a tendancy to develop into tumors. For another, adult stem cells can be harvested from the patient himself, meaning there is no chance of the patients immune system rejecting the therapy. Since current techniques for harvesting embryonic stem cells involve the destruction of the embryo, its not likely you'll be able to be treated with cells from yourself.

For the record, I disagree with embryonic stem cell research.

Re:If we can just show...

[StikyPad]

Well, I didn't read the CNN version, but TOFA from which the CNN summary was written had an unsavory little tidbit:

Extracting knowledge from embryos that would otherwise be wasted is one thing, but scientists admit that moving forward would require a much larger supply of fresh, healthy embryos than fertility clinics could ever provide. And once you start asking people about creating embryos for the purpose of experimenting on them, the support starts to slow down.