Stem Cells
July 28, 2016 at 4:25 p.m.
By -
When proponents of Embryonic stem cells say, as Hillary Clinton said at a "Super Tuesday rally; "We will allow scientists to do stem cell research." They are really saying, "We want federal tax dollars by the billions to go to embryonic stem cell research." Which involves harvesting human eggs from donors and creating an embryo in which to harvest stem cells from. Which involves many eggs, for example, if we were to treat diabetes each patient in the U.S. would require 50 to 100 eggs at a cost of $100,000 to $200,000 per patient.
Now here's the rub ... Adults stem cells come from the afflicted's own body, that means that they are not rejected because the cells originated in the same body. What the other side of the fence wants to do is harvest an egg (from an "at-large donor, infuse it with DNA from the afflicted's skin cell zap it with electrical pulses till it generates into a blastocyst and then harvest the stem cells and destroy the blastocyst. This is way better than creating an embryo, but with so many extra steps my feeble mind says, "that's gonna cost way more." Not to mention the fact that this research is still 10 years from application.
Why so hell-bent on embryonic stem cells when ... cord (embryonic) stem cells can be harvested with little risk to the donor, can become several if not all the tissue types found in the human body, plus the harvested stem cells are taken from inter-relational blood lines, (your fam. man!) Which means no cell rejection or mal-functioning in generations. Cord stem-cells have treated 6,000 patients and cured 66 diseases. Adult stem cells have successfully treated stroke victims in Brazil to the point of regaining brain function and motor functions after paralysis from the stroke.
*On top of all the evidence to support adult stem cell use and cord stem cell use, is the evidence of embryonic stem cells causing tumors in recipients and the massive cost involved with the many steps of embryonic stem cell harvesting, ie., many eggs per patient to be harvested from donor, created embryos, harvest stem cells, destroy embryos, hope that recipients benefit or at least don't get a tumor. In a cathy phrase "embryonic is moronic.
Is this the type of informed leadership we want to give our tax-dollars to? Or, is this the type of "health-care" that will be provided under the enlightened leadership of big government. Stop the slide down the slippery slope of throwing money at stuff that doesn't work, by voting informed. Change in some area, is not good, but bad and costly.
*source: necathcon.org
Randy Gill
Syracuse
[[In-content Ad]]
When proponents of Embryonic stem cells say, as Hillary Clinton said at a "Super Tuesday rally; "We will allow scientists to do stem cell research." They are really saying, "We want federal tax dollars by the billions to go to embryonic stem cell research." Which involves harvesting human eggs from donors and creating an embryo in which to harvest stem cells from. Which involves many eggs, for example, if we were to treat diabetes each patient in the U.S. would require 50 to 100 eggs at a cost of $100,000 to $200,000 per patient.
Now here's the rub ... Adults stem cells come from the afflicted's own body, that means that they are not rejected because the cells originated in the same body. What the other side of the fence wants to do is harvest an egg (from an "at-large donor, infuse it with DNA from the afflicted's skin cell zap it with electrical pulses till it generates into a blastocyst and then harvest the stem cells and destroy the blastocyst. This is way better than creating an embryo, but with so many extra steps my feeble mind says, "that's gonna cost way more." Not to mention the fact that this research is still 10 years from application.
Why so hell-bent on embryonic stem cells when ... cord (embryonic) stem cells can be harvested with little risk to the donor, can become several if not all the tissue types found in the human body, plus the harvested stem cells are taken from inter-relational blood lines, (your fam. man!) Which means no cell rejection or mal-functioning in generations. Cord stem-cells have treated 6,000 patients and cured 66 diseases. Adult stem cells have successfully treated stroke victims in Brazil to the point of regaining brain function and motor functions after paralysis from the stroke.
*On top of all the evidence to support adult stem cell use and cord stem cell use, is the evidence of embryonic stem cells causing tumors in recipients and the massive cost involved with the many steps of embryonic stem cell harvesting, ie., many eggs per patient to be harvested from donor, created embryos, harvest stem cells, destroy embryos, hope that recipients benefit or at least don't get a tumor. In a cathy phrase "embryonic is moronic.
Is this the type of informed leadership we want to give our tax-dollars to? Or, is this the type of "health-care" that will be provided under the enlightened leadership of big government. Stop the slide down the slippery slope of throwing money at stuff that doesn't work, by voting informed. Change in some area, is not good, but bad and costly.
*source: necathcon.org
Randy Gill
Syracuse
[[In-content Ad]]
Have a news tip? Email [email protected] or Call/Text 360-922-3092