Slashdot Mirror
US Finalizes Stem Cell Research Guidelines
An anonymous reader writes with an excerpt from Cosmos Magazine, to wit: "The US government unveiled final rules for embryonic stem cell research, laying out ground rules for 'ethically responsible, scientifically worthy' studies eligible for federal funds. The new rules, which go into effect today, follow President Barack Obama's March 9 executive order lifting a ban on embryonic stem cell research, an order that went into effect under his predecessor, George W. Bush. ... The US National Institutes of Health's (NIH) guidelines are slightly less restrictive than those outlined in a draft document released in April in that they allow the use of existing stem cell lines, in addition to new ones derived from IVF procedures. ... The NIH received some 49,000 comments from patient advocacy groups, scientists, medical groups, and other interested parties before issuing the guidelines."
Which, for more than a few labs or research centers, was effectively a ban.
While some locations were able to get private funding (and thus get around the relatively useless lines approved by the Bush govt), this sort of blue sky health research has generally seen a lot more money from the government.
Because of that ban, for example, DARPA couldn't effectively spend money on research into experimental treatments for spinal cord injuries involving stem cells. Now they can. And, quite likely, will.
I like you, Stuart. You're not like everyone else, here, at Slashdot.
Actually, with IVF, many embryos are normally grown simultaniously, with only the best two or three candidates considered for implantation.
Given the inherant dangers of the egg harvesting procedures, it is unlikely that any ethical doctor would purposefully subject a woman to that, just for the purpose of additional stem cell lines.
I like you, Stuart. You're not like everyone else, here, at Slashdot.
The anti-stem cell research, anti-abortion, and anti-sex education positions of conservatives is primarily motivated by sin.
Is there a fallacy of stereotyping? Doesn't matter. Let me give you some advice: If you don't know what you are talking about, shut up. As a conservative, allow me to correct you and alleviate your ignorance.
Some of us conservatives are against embryonic stem cell research because it is killing human life for research purposes. I know, it's only a few cells, so it doesn't count right? So, tell me then, when do human beings earn the right to not be destroyed and experimented on? Is it at birth? Is it after the first trimester? How about voting age? Don't have an answer? Me neither. That's why I'm "conservative" in my answer and simply say, "NO RESEARCH ON HUMANS WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT, PERIOD!"
Is the right to not be experimented on so unimportant that you guess when people get this right?
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.