Poll: Stem Cell Research Your opinions, please?

[MajesticTreeFrog 0]

this "documentary" sounds like anti-stem cell propaganda to me. Stem cells should be self replicating if managed correctly, the idea is that you won't have to have a second baby, but instead once stem cells have been harvested and studied enough, we will be able to produce them in whatever ways are needed.

[Nathan1405241474 0]

My opinion is that all research is better than nothing, and for all those against it, they should think of the sufferers

[hajime 0]

For. But not bcoz of the advantages.Hmm, as all have said, the advantages outweight the disadvantages, but I think thats juz bcoz we dun really know what the disadvantages are maybe?? But tat dont matter.Example, atomic research. No one would predict that an atomic weapon would be built and dropped on Japanese soil. Although personaly I think that even if anyone did it wouldn't matter coz ultimately moral/ethics/politics are not gonna stop us from doin it. If the research is banned, somewhere someone is gonna start up the research anywayz.For the stem cell dilemma, its not like atomic research is ended. So even though if a disaster is to occur due to the stem cell research, its still gonna be a mainstream research. That which doesnt kill u makes u stronger. As long as its a research that doesnt (seem to) have the capacity to wipe out all humans, its good for our civilisation.

[Mastermund 0]

Stem cell research is a good idea because it's not pre-emimently violent. For all of you who believe that steam cell research could harm people, remember that just about anything could be used to harm people -- heck, if you look around you there are probably a million things that could be possibly harmful. Just because something is new doesn't mean it's dangerous. If that were true then we never would have gotten past inventing the wheel!

[pixelsmack 0]

One question that needs to be asked is will the benafits outweigh the negatives. As can be anticipated at the moment the technology that could come from extensive stem cell research is of far greater good to humanity than bad. There are negatives to the research not just economicaly for the short term but as well as moral issues and issues that will test peoples faith. even though there is a long term prospect of very good things in medicine messing with the foundations of life will cause some people to be morally outraged, wheather we feel this is right or wrong faith is still something that must be respected. However to the same degree people with a faith must respect the need for development and the benafits that could be given by stem cell reseach. The latest stats suggest that about 6000 people a day die from aids in africa, if this can be slowed cheaply via this research then it is something that is very important to look into.

[KonVicKt 0]

I voted for, but definantly there are things that COULD happen, yet in everything we do something bad could happen. Like surgery, it could save your life or take it, does that mean that we should outlaw surgery?People say that there are too many risk, they are so quick to say this, because they are not ready for change, they keep thinking about all the things that could go wrong, instead of how much it could help the world.

[Jguy101 0]

I voted for, because I have no problem with stem cell research in general. However, I am VERY against Embryonic stem cell research.

 

I really don't get why people are so fascinated with embryonic stem cells; not a single treatment--much less a cure-- has come from it. On the other hand, stem cells from sources such has embylical cord blood have been sued to treat or cure dozens of diseases. Even if it would be possible to find treatments and/or cures with embryonic stem cells that would be much better than with stem cells from other sources, you would need an insanely high amount of cloned embryos to treat just one person.

[twitch 0]

I believe that if goes towards making us more and more resistant and unaffected by everyday problems, then so be it. Evolution is not depicted anywhere that it MUST be natural. Human intervention is going to happen sooner or later, and why not sooner. People who babble on about "we were made this way for a reason" is *BLEEP*. Why do you think mother nature wipes out a species every so often and replaces it with a better one.My niece was born with some very rare syndrome - Cornelia DeLange. It affects her in so many ways that it is very disturbing. If stem cell research were to go ahead fully with the backing of eveyone, then these very rare genetic disorders can be prevented, letting the people live as normal lives as possible.People often say that it will lead to designer babies. In my eyes, I see nothing wrong with this. If a couple (married or not) want a baby that has blue eyes, green hair and sixty legs, then so be it. It is just another step in the evolution process. However, this may lead to secondary problems and such, by tampering with the genetic coding, so it is ill-advised at this moment in time.

[iGuest 3]

I'm for it. I find it much more better than doing something like abortion and sorts. This is actually for a cause. I'm happy that the superman guy (sorr forgot his name, AGAIN >_<) had put lots of money into the research and developement of the stim cell research. I'm sure sooner or later, much more people will benefit from it, and in good ways, not like that one episode of South Park haha XD Anyways, my thoughts are that with more updates, we will be seeing a lot of development like that Korean miss you were talking about

[Jeigh1405241495 0]

Hm, dont have time to read all the responses or make a full post right now. But I did a huge research paper last year for a uni course and its an amazing field of research. I voted 'for' since I would feel bad if I ever voted against it, since stem cell research has the best hope of curing alzheimers (which my grand mother has) and if anything could cure her and help countless others, its fine in my book, even if you need to play in some grey areas of ethics on the way...

[Jguy101 0]

Hm, dont have time to read all the responses or make a full post right now. But I did a huge research paper last year for a uni course and its an amazing field of research. I voted 'for' since I would feel bad if I ever voted against it, since stem cell research has the best hope of curing alzheimers (which my grand mother has) and if anything could cure her and help countless others, its fine in my book, even if you need to play in some grey areas of ethics on the way...

1064330950[/snapback]

Well, it'sd not just ethical and moral issues; in my last post, I mentioned that for embryonic stem cell research, you'd need a rather large number of cloned embyros to treat just one person. I don't know why all the scientists want to do embryonic stem cells research, because we've already had some breakthroughs with adult stem cells, and treatment with embryonic stem cells is just impractical.

[Logan Deathbringer 0]

I'm all for it, although the techology is far from begin perfected - preventing it is greater cost for the medical advancement. Recently, a South Korea scientist perfected the techology for cloning a dog. For those of you who have little knowledge in this area, cloning dogs is a extremely painful and difficult process.

The article I was reading can be found here from Time magazine:
Time article

I actually bought the magazine and read the hard copy, so the contents are a little different. It was listed as the most amazing invention of 2005.

And now, his lab is getting barraged by the media about ethics and the consequences of his research. The way I see it - it may be unethical to use humans in live experimentation for the sake of medical science. However, does banning such research stop human's endless thirst of knowledge? Either way, this research will continune undoubtly, it's just if we'll ever hear about it on the news.

And what if one day the research is completed and stem cells are used as cures for extensive list of diseases related to spinal injuries. Would you think that the people who once voted against stem cell research will kill themselves before using the techology to save themselves? I think not... It's just a matter how the world perceieve ethnics. Eventually, that will all change. Just because humans have an evolved sense of morality doesn't give them the right to place judgement on another human's progress.

[Sarah81 0]

I'm not an expert on this subject ... but I'm also not one to be swayed heavily by feelings. So ... what I *do* know is that stem cells from placentas are being used to treat dozens of diseases and illnesses, especially in children. To that, I say, "Rock on." The placenta would just end up in the biological-waste bucket after the baby's birth anyway, so sure - harvest and use the sucker to help other people.And some new parents choose to have their newborn's placenta cryogenically preserved so that, if that kid gets sick in the future, doctors will have his or her own stem cells on hand to help treat the illness. Again: rock on. And, since that's pretty much the extent of my knowledge, I guess I'm done talking for now *grins*

[tadroptopgirl 0]

The world needs to develop on what it has.

[Vicious_AD 0]

I voted for. If the baby is already dead, then what reason is there not to make it's death meaningful? It's not using it's stem cells, so why waste them? They would have been dead anyway, so at least tribute them by making them heros. After all, they are saving lives, right? the whole "it's against god's will" thing is silly. No human knows "god's will". nor do they know with absolute certainty that there is a god. They only think they do. If you say to a religious fanatic that there is no proof to their religion, as opposed to darwinism, which has very few flaws as a theory, they will claim that there is proof to their religion, but will be unable to tell it to you. They know that they have absolutely no proof other than "faith" but they will still defend it anyway. Saying "faith" is proof of something is as ridiculous as saying "There is no such thing as gravity, because I don't think there is." You can't just make up whatever you want and pretend it's true. Some things just are how they are. Basically, they only use the "against god's will" thing as another way of saying "it's against my will" simply because they are afraid of change and are afraid that if their religion is disproved any more than it already has been, then it will cease to hold true even to them. No one wants to look like a fool when they find out they've lead a lie, right?