|
||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
Topic Review (Newest First)
|
| Jan 16th, 2004 04:23 PM | ||
| kellychaos | That made me think of a rally funny Simpson's episode. Unfortunatlely, I don't think that I furthered this discussion in any relevant way by this recollection. | |
| Jan 15th, 2004 06:39 PM | ||
| theapportioner |
Quote:
One can also combine someone else's ES cell or an egg with a nucleus from one of your own cells, to have all the differentiated cells be of the same genetic code as yours. If it works, it would get around problems of donor rejection. Unfortunately, this technology, known to science as somatic nuclear transfer, is often called 'cloning'. |
|
| Jan 15th, 2004 06:25 PM | ||
| kellychaos | Well, the medical world's spin is to say that doctors would only be using the stem cells of those babies that were going to be aborted anyway. Conspiracy theorists would have you believe that the need would force some immoral doctors to "make" abortions of otherwise healthy babies ... sort of a Michael Palmer anxiety disorder. | |
| Jan 15th, 2004 06:07 PM | ||
| ziggytrix |
Can you harvest embryonic stem cells without abortions? If not, then it breaks down into another choice argument, and I'm about as sick of those as a person can get. |
|
| Jan 15th, 2004 05:26 PM | ||
| Buffalo Tom |
Re: stem cells Quote:
No problems here, either. I mean, unborn chickens grace millions of greasy breakfast plates every day. It's a natural progression to start exploiting unborn humans. |
|
| Jan 15th, 2004 05:13 PM | ||
| Brandon | No problems here. | |
| Jan 15th, 2004 05:12 PM | ||
| theapportioner |
stem cells Should we or shouldn't we? I work with them so it's clear where my thoughts lie... |
|
