I didn't say that study was the breakthrough. The breakthrough was the previous trial on which that study is basing it's work on. Please learn to read. The previous trial can be found here.
Human Embryonic Stem Cell-Derived Oligodendrocyte Progenitor Cell Transplants Remyelinate and Restore Locomotion after Spinal Cord Injury
I'm pretty sure the fact that that trial was able to restore locomotion after a spinal cord injury would be a breakthrough.
So name these people who have publicly gone out and said this.
Maybe the bias lies in your selection of sources?
My selection of source is are the people who vocally go into public and state their opposition.
Your characterization of people that disagree with you as whiners indicates you wouldn't be receptive to the position anyway. Perhaps you've heard of it but dismissed it because it doesn't fit with your "insightful" strawman?
Again, you use this term strawman but don't seem to know what it means.
So keep the egg and sperm separate.
So you want them to separate each individual egg and sperm? That is an impractical amount of work which is why they just do it en masse. You have fun separating the millions of sperm from each other from a sample of semen and see how practical what you state really is.
That brings up a further ethical dilemma, create a new Octomon producing 8 kids at once, or abort the other ones that took to benefit the preferred embryo(s).
It's her body she can do with it what she will.
That's your OPINION
Which is based on science.
You can't back it with science since it is more of a philosophical question. I'm an atheist and yet I maintain that life begins at the moment of conception based on science as well.
Then please link to this science that shows this.
Which proves that they were already overcreating them.
Please see above. Doing what you claim is just outright impractical.
What happens, if there is a run on ESC research and clinics begin to run out? Deliberate creation of new embryos for research?
If people consent to have their eggs and sperm being used to create more ESCs then sure.
You were putting words in the mouths of the people that disagree with you.
Nope, just describing the ultimate consequences of your position.
You might not wish to accept it, but you were. You were arguing your view of their position ("they'd rather...") neglecting to state any opinion of your own. Hence, you were putting words into the mouths of others.
Well considering that the fertilized eggs are going to be thrown away or incinerated because the clinic doesn't have space to keep them, if you object to the research you are in effect saying you'd rather have them destroyed then put to good use.
Pretending that there are only two choices IS creating a strawman. It deliberately ignores other choices to make it seem like they don't exist.
Nope, that would be a false dichotomy or false dilemma. Get your logical fallacies right please.
No, I didn't tear anything down.
I know you didn't. You failed to do anything at all but repeat more Religious Right bullshit.
Gee, why wasn't I surprised that some nobody that no one has ever heard of would say this?
The Roman Catholic Church is probably the biggest "embryonic stem cell whiner" there is, and THEY predicted this development of reproductive research back in 1976 (Humanae Vitae, encyclical of Pope Paul VI).
But their objection is over it being the "murder" of the ball of cells not a complaint that "too many are being made".
Which is why for Catholics, IVF is as big a sin as abortion (and is in fact the same sin).
Wow, then you are even more backwards and stupid than I thought.
They're trying to prevent dead fetuses from developing monetary value.
No they aren't. If that was what they were doing why do they never say that? It's always about preventing the "murder" of an undifferentiated ball of cells.
Though I agree that they're not listening to reason, I wouldn't quite phrase it the way you did.
The way I phrased it is the ultimate consequences of their actions. Ban their use for research and they get thrown out.
I guess you failed reading class as well: "The tests could begin by summer, said Dr. Thomas Okarma, president and CEO of the Geron Corporation." You can't restore locomotion in patients from a test that hasn't been done yet.
Did you read what I posted? This study was being done based off the work of a previous trial. Here is the trial that was done that precedes the FDA-approved study.
Human Embryonic Stem Cell-Derived Oligodendrocyte Progenitor Cell Transplants Remyelinate and Restore Locomotion after Spinal Cord Injury
Way to fail.
And you're a real idiot if you think that the base work in embryonic stem cells has led to anything other than cancer.
OR maybe we think that the embryos shouldn't have been created in the first place.
Well then it's amazing that not a single one of the embryonic stem cell whiners have ever publicly stated this.
Only take what you need for the in vitro fertilization and no more.
But one doesn't know how many are going to be needed which is why they make and freeze so many. If you knew anything about how in-vitro fertilization works you'd know that there are usually a very small likelihood of successful implantation which is why they have to create so many.
Then you don't have an ethical dilemma about whether to kill them by throwing them in the garbage or kill them to experiment with ESCs.
There is nothing to kill. These are just clumps of undifferentiated cells.
ESC research could actually induce fertilization clinics to make MORE embryos than they need, knowing they'll be used for research as well.
And yet they don't need to since the fertilization clinics already had way more than they can use even before embryonic stem cell research started.
But it's nice of you to put words in the mouths of people like me to tear down to benefit your argument.
I didn't put in words into anyone's mouth. I was just describing the ultimate reality of what happens when the frozen embryos aren't allowed to be used for research. They are incinerated or simply thrown away.
You could call it a strawman.
Outlining the consequences of what happens when the embryos aren't allowed to be used isn't a strawman.
Congratulations on the insightful mod since that strawman was pretty tough to tear down.
You didn't tear anything down. You just basically repeated the wacko nonsense that comes from the religious right.
I already told you what the breakthrough was. They were able to successfully restore locomotion using embryonic stem cells in people with spinal cord injuries.
I also did a google search and didn't find much that was successful, though there are hundreds of breakthroughs using adult stem cells.
Which are all using as a base the work of those working on embryonic stem cells. Anyone who thinks that none of these breakthroughs were based off of any work done with embryonic stem cells is just plain ignorant.
Yep, it's amusing that they'd rather have the embryos thrown away in the garbage or incinerated rather than be used to actually further medical science.
Aborted fetuses aren't used as a source of stem cells since all the cells would be dead. The embryonic stem cells are harvested from leftover frozen embryos from people doing invitro-fertilization that would normally just be thrown out.
In fact, I am not sure that there has been even one single break through that wasn't from adult stem cells.
That's due to your own ignorance not any actual facts. I found one example just in 2 seconds of googling. This FDA approved study was based on a previous trial that was able to successfully restore locomotion to those with spinal cord injuries. It is not even the only example just the first one that I found.
Except that when the DMCA was enacted, it was to ratify the WIPO treaty which was being pushed by American media companies and therefore "normalization" didn't really happen
Those WIPO treaties were being pushed by the American media companies to normalize with the more stringent copyright laws that were passed in the EU.
Which would still make them non-analogous to the case at hand because the hosting company involved in this case was knowingly involved in setting up these illegal operations if the allegations are correct.
Are you referring to the thing where pages 1-6 of a discussion will be the same, then finally on page 7 you get page 2? At least that seems to be what is happening.
Yep. It's a well-known bug that has plagued Slashdot for years that they now refuse to fix since they went to the new Web 2.0 dynamic discussion.
They overstepped their bounds in regulating companies here in that they shut down an ISP.
They didn't shut down an ISP. They shut down a hosting company of these websites that is alleged to be directly involved in helping set up these illegal operations.
'Pricewert LLC,' a Northern California based hosting provider.
An ISP that was NOT behaving irresponsibly to its customers.
Sure, only if they aren't directly involved in helping to setup the illegal activity which is what is alleged in this case. Did you even read the summary?
The fact that their customer's customers were involved in criminal activities is NOT their problem beyond complying with legal orders.
Of course it's not. It becomes their problem because it's alleged that "3FN/Pricewert was directly involved in setting up spam-spewing botnets, among other illegal activities". Do you happen to see a difference?
They are NOT responsible.
If they were directly involved as it is alleged they are responsible.
Certainly you could go after the programmer here-but that would require evidence in a court of law with proper jurisdiction. Shutting down the entire ISP goes way beyond the authority of the FTC.
Again, they didn't shut down an ISP. They shut down a hosting company that was directly involved in helping to set up a whole host of illegal operations including illegal pharmacies and investment scams (which would fall under the FTC's regulating authority).
It's got to be a joke, there are plenty of sections of the law that make ISP's not liable for such things.
Sure if they were unaware of the activity, but that is not the alleged case here. In this case the company gone after is alleged to be directly involved in the illegal activity.
Slashdot Mirror
It was in RATS!
So what?
And they had to inject them within 7 DAYS of the injury!
Which is pretty typical of initial trials. I never said this was a full-blown, ready to use treatment.
Human Embryonic Stem Cell-Derived Oligodendrocyte Progenitor Cell Transplants Remyelinate and Restore Locomotion after Spinal Cord Injury
I'm pretty sure the fact that that trial was able to restore locomotion after a spinal cord injury would be a breakthrough.
Funny, I know quite a few people that have.
So name these people who have publicly gone out and said this.
Maybe the bias lies in your selection of sources?
My selection of source is are the people who vocally go into public and state their opposition.
Your characterization of people that disagree with you as whiners indicates you wouldn't be receptive to the position anyway. Perhaps you've heard of it but dismissed it because it doesn't fit with your "insightful" strawman?
Again, you use this term strawman but don't seem to know what it means.
So keep the egg and sperm separate.
So you want them to separate each individual egg and sperm? That is an impractical amount of work which is why they just do it en masse. You have fun separating the millions of sperm from each other from a sample of semen and see how practical what you state really is.
That brings up a further ethical dilemma, create a new Octomon producing 8 kids at once, or abort the other ones that took to benefit the preferred embryo(s).
It's her body she can do with it what she will.
That's your OPINION
Which is based on science.
You can't back it with science since it is more of a philosophical question. I'm an atheist and yet I maintain that life begins at the moment of conception based on science as well.
Then please link to this science that shows this.
Which proves that they were already overcreating them.
Please see above. Doing what you claim is just outright impractical.
What happens, if there is a run on ESC research and clinics begin to run out? Deliberate creation of new embryos for research?
If people consent to have their eggs and sperm being used to create more ESCs then sure.
You were putting words in the mouths of the people that disagree with you.
Nope, just describing the ultimate consequences of your position.
You might not wish to accept it, but you were. You were arguing your view of their position ("they'd rather...") neglecting to state any opinion of your own. Hence, you were putting words into the mouths of others.
Well considering that the fertilized eggs are going to be thrown away or incinerated because the clinic doesn't have space to keep them, if you object to the research you are in effect saying you'd rather have them destroyed then put to good use.
Pretending that there are only two choices IS creating a strawman. It deliberately ignores other choices to make it seem like they don't exist.
Nope, that would be a false dichotomy or false dilemma. Get your logical fallacies right please.
No, I didn't tear anything down.
I know you didn't. You failed to do anything at all but repeat more Religious Right bullshit.
I have, hundreds of times.
Gee, why wasn't I surprised that some nobody that no one has ever heard of would say this?
The Roman Catholic Church is probably the biggest "embryonic stem cell whiner" there is, and THEY predicted this development of reproductive research back in 1976 (Humanae Vitae, encyclical of Pope Paul VI).
But their objection is over it being the "murder" of the ball of cells not a complaint that "too many are being made".
Which is why for Catholics, IVF is as big a sin as abortion (and is in fact the same sin).
Wow, then you are even more backwards and stupid than I thought.
They're trying to prevent dead fetuses from developing monetary value.
No they aren't. If that was what they were doing why do they never say that? It's always about preventing the "murder" of an undifferentiated ball of cells.
Though I agree that they're not listening to reason, I wouldn't quite phrase it the way you did.
The way I phrased it is the ultimate consequences of their actions. Ban their use for research and they get thrown out.
I guess you failed reading class as well: "The tests could begin by summer, said Dr. Thomas Okarma, president and CEO of the Geron Corporation." You can't restore locomotion in patients from a test that hasn't been done yet.
Did you read what I posted? This study was being done based off the work of a previous trial. Here is the trial that was done that precedes the FDA-approved study.
Human Embryonic Stem Cell-Derived Oligodendrocyte Progenitor Cell Transplants Remyelinate and Restore Locomotion after Spinal Cord Injury
Way to fail.
And you're a real idiot if you think that the base work in embryonic stem cells has led to anything other than cancer.
HAHAHAHAHAHA. That's a good one.
2. Adult stem cells are multipotent progenitor cells.
Sorry, but no. Progenitor cells are differentiated. Somatic stem cells are undifferentiated.
OR maybe we think that the embryos shouldn't have been created in the first place.
Well then it's amazing that not a single one of the embryonic stem cell whiners have ever publicly stated this.
Only take what you need for the in vitro fertilization and no more.
But one doesn't know how many are going to be needed which is why they make and freeze so many. If you knew anything about how in-vitro fertilization works you'd know that there are usually a very small likelihood of successful implantation which is why they have to create so many.
Then you don't have an ethical dilemma about whether to kill them by throwing them in the garbage or kill them to experiment with ESCs.
There is nothing to kill. These are just clumps of undifferentiated cells.
ESC research could actually induce fertilization clinics to make MORE embryos than they need, knowing they'll be used for research as well.
And yet they don't need to since the fertilization clinics already had way more than they can use even before embryonic stem cell research started.
But it's nice of you to put words in the mouths of people like me to tear down to benefit your argument.
I didn't put in words into anyone's mouth. I was just describing the ultimate reality of what happens when the frozen embryos aren't allowed to be used for research. They are incinerated or simply thrown away.
You could call it a strawman.
Outlining the consequences of what happens when the embryos aren't allowed to be used isn't a strawman.
Congratulations on the insightful mod since that strawman was pretty tough to tear down.
You didn't tear anything down. You just basically repeated the wacko nonsense that comes from the religious right.
Ah, dude, he said breakthroughs, not research.
I already told you what the breakthrough was. They were able to successfully restore locomotion using embryonic stem cells in people with spinal cord injuries.
I also did a google search and didn't find much that was successful, though there are hundreds of breakthroughs using adult stem cells.
Which are all using as a base the work of those working on embryonic stem cells. Anyone who thinks that none of these breakthroughs were based off of any work done with embryonic stem cells is just plain ignorant.
Yep, it's amusing that they'd rather have the embryos thrown away in the garbage or incinerated rather than be used to actually further medical science.
The article doesn't go into very much detail on what the stem cells really were or how the were produced,
They weren't produced. They were somatic stem cells that were in the patients good eyes.
so I assume what they refer to as "stem cells" are really multipotent stem cells (or so-called progenitor cells [wikipedia.org])
No, you would be wrong. As the summary and the article state these are adult stem cells or somatic stem cells as they are also called.
Aborted fetuses aren't used as a source of stem cells since all the cells would be dead. The embryonic stem cells are harvested from leftover frozen embryos from people doing invitro-fertilization that would normally just be thrown out.
In fact, I am not sure that there has been even one single break through that wasn't from adult stem cells.
That's due to your own ignorance not any actual facts. I found one example just in 2 seconds of googling. This FDA approved study was based on a previous trial that was able to successfully restore locomotion to those with spinal cord injuries. It is not even the only example just the first one that I found.
Except that when the DMCA was enacted, it was to ratify the WIPO treaty which was being pushed by American media companies and therefore "normalization" didn't really happen
Those WIPO treaties were being pushed by the American media companies to normalize with the more stringent copyright laws that were passed in the EU.
beavers
Bald, hairy, or trimmed?
At least, not knowingly directly involved.
Which would still make them non-analogous to the case at hand because the hosting company involved in this case was knowingly involved in setting up these illegal operations if the allegations are correct.
Except the DMCA was passed to normalize US copyright laws with those in Europe and there is no 3-strikes rule in the US.
Being favourably disposed to something doesn't mean one think it's perfection.
Did he say so? Just because one criticizes the quality of open source code doesn't mean you think closed source code is perfection.
Are you referring to the thing where pages 1-6 of a discussion will be the same, then finally on page 7 you get page 2? At least that seems to be what is happening.
Yep. It's a well-known bug that has plagued Slashdot for years that they now refuse to fix since they went to the new Web 2.0 dynamic discussion.
They overstepped their bounds in regulating companies here in that they shut down an ISP.
They didn't shut down an ISP. They shut down a hosting company of these websites that is alleged to be directly involved in helping set up these illegal operations.
'Pricewert LLC,' a Northern California based hosting provider.
An ISP that was NOT behaving irresponsibly to its customers.
Sure, only if they aren't directly involved in helping to setup the illegal activity which is what is alleged in this case. Did you even read the summary?
The fact that their customer's customers were involved in criminal activities is NOT their problem beyond complying with legal orders.
Of course it's not. It becomes their problem because it's alleged that "3FN/Pricewert was directly involved in setting up spam-spewing botnets, among other illegal activities". Do you happen to see a difference?
They are NOT responsible.
If they were directly involved as it is alleged they are responsible.
Certainly you could go after the programmer here-but that would require evidence in a court of law with proper jurisdiction. Shutting down the entire ISP goes way beyond the authority of the FTC.
Again, they didn't shut down an ISP. They shut down a hosting company that was directly involved in helping to set up a whole host of illegal operations including illegal pharmacies and investment scams (which would fall under the FTC's regulating authority).
It's got to be a joke, there are plenty of sections of the law that make ISP's not liable for such things.
Sure if they were unaware of the activity, but that is not the alleged case here. In this case the company gone after is alleged to be directly involved in the illegal activity.
Now if we were talking about a hosting company. That might be a different thing.
And they are. Did you even read the summary at all?
'Pricewert LLC,' a Northern California based hosting provider.
Mine is now stuck on the left-hand side and when I click it I just get a black border around it.
but it comes as no surprise to me that a seemingly unrelated government agency is going after these guys.
The FTC has the authoring to go after people running "illegal online pharmacies, investment and other Web-based scams". That's part of their mission.