Stem Cell research and Fertility Clinics.

[yeartolate]

Usage of adult stem cells is more promising.

Can you quote a source??

 

[yeartolate]

My understanding is the issue is more about creating embryos for the sole purpose of using/destroying them for research. IMO, I do not think this is appropriate, moral, or good for the donors.
.

I actually think the assumption is that most will come as a byprodct of IVF (unused embryos that have been donated).

 

[seven dwarfs]

Again, where is the line. Once you make it ok to use 'unwanted embryo's' then what. Then you say embryo has no value. Then you have those who will produce them for this reason. And while we are at lets make only boys or only girls. Once you cross that line the whole thing becomes much bigger.

 

[Caradana]

Galahad, I volunteer @ Planned Parenthood regularly and I often counsel unintentionally pregnant minors seeking prenatal care. It's a tremendous organization that fulfills a social need, especially for poorer or non-English-speaking women. Trust me on this one.

 

[BuckNaked]

Again, where is the line. Once you make it ok to use 'unwanted embryo's' then what. Then you say embryo has no value. Then you have those who will produce them for this reason. And while we are at lets make only boys or only girls. Once you cross that line the whole thing becomes much bigger.

This is where people on your side of the argument lose me. If an "unwanted embryo" (and let's not play the semantics game, we know what we're talking about here) are going to be DESTROYED ANYWAY, why not harvest stem cells from them BEFOREHAND so that some good can possibly come from the loss of the embryo?

 

[yeartolate]

Exactly, Buck.


But my it is my turn in the "what is next" game. What is next, forcing the unused embryos into a womb? I am picturing the reproductive police tracking women down, cuffing them and saying "now spread 'em. Charging any woman leaving an embryo behind with child abandonment? NCLB will now be called NELB . (how did I do in the what is next game?)

 

[FlyingBelle]

Ok - don't flame me

“We were all an embryo at one point, and we ought to as a society be very careful about being callous about the wanton destruction of embryos, of life,” Karl Rove said. He said research shows “we have far more promise from adult stem cells than from embryonic stem cells.”


AP - Associated Press
Updated: 1:47 p.m. CT July 11, 2006

 

[yeartolate]

Aside from questioning the wisdom of taking your scientific facts from Karl Rove ..........

It only makes sense that embryonic sem cells have more promise.

Can adult stem cells do everything embryonic stem cells do, but without controversy?

Unlikely.

All stem cells have certain capabilities. They can divide and renew themselves for long periods; they are unspecialized (which means they are not a specific type of cell); and they have the ability to give rise to specialized cells.

Embryonic stem cells are obtained from human embryos. They have the capacity to turn into any cell type in the body. Adult stem cells have been found in some mature human tissues, including the brain and bone marrow. There is a scientific debate over whether their ability to become specialized is limited to their tissue of origin, or whether they can turn into other types of tissue.

Adult stem cells have proven their value to medicine. For example, bone marrow transplants are routinely used to treat some cancers and blood diseases. But it's unlikely that bone marrow stem cells can replace all of the different types of cells that are damaged by disease. Embryonic stem cells are the only ones that are likely to do that.

 

[jgmklmhem]

I define life beginning as a stable heart beat since for most purposes that is when death happens as well. So in that case I obviously oppose abortions past that point of gestation but have no problem with stem cell research, morning after pills, early early abortion, IVF etc. Past that point I do start to have issues.

I do somewhat have an abstract problem with just making the embryos for only research purposes. Ones that were going to be destroyed anyways is fine, but I guess I just do not want to start seeing research only donations. Having read this thread and another on these boards recently I do wonder how long though the woman would have the choice. I mean could not imminent domain play a role. I mean all these frozen embryos that you thought were yours now become property of the govt because it would benefit the greater good (for research purposes)...sort of like the ceasing of private property for similar goals

 

[yeartolate]

I think I asked this earlier.

I have only heard of eggs donated after IVF. Is there a venue for women to donate for the sake of pure research?

 

[Saxsoon]

I don't agree with abortion, or the destruction of embyros. Not really a religious reason, I just have a very strong belief in unwasted life. But as the embryonic cells that aren't used will probably be destroyed anyway, better put them to good use. It is a bittersweet thing I guess.

Btw, I believe that life does begin at the moment it is concieved. And if it is not, it will eventually become life. I don't think anyone can argue that point.

 

[jgmklmhem]

I think I asked this earlier.

I have only heard of eggs donated after IVF. Is there a venue for women to donate for the sake of pure research?

I do not believe so yet, but I could see it happening if stem cell research became more main stream.

 

[Cool-Beans]

I think the reason fertility clinics aren't attacked and abortion clinics are is that the purpose of the fertility clinic is to create life and the purpose of the abortion clinic is to end it.

Stem cells CAN be acquired from other places - new places all the time. They found them in the pulp attached to a baby tooth when it fell out. However, the scientists (who know more about science than the government guys) say that the "younger" stem cells are better for them. IMHO, as is very often the case, the polititicians should get out of the way of they guys who know what they are doing.

Stem cells are miraculous things. They tried to see if they could fix part of a pancreas with stem cells...and the little buggars went and made a WHOLE NEW PANCREAS!!!! They did a study with men who had had massive heart attacks with major damage - basically beyond repair or hope. For the first time EVER, 6 weeks later, the hearts were GOOD AS NEW! Well, good as pre-heart attack, anyway. The first time in the history of the world that cardiac tissue was repaired!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

They are on the verge of curing leukemia and working on many other diseases.

It would be nice if the government would use our money to pay for this. They use it to pay for so many worthless things. I'd like to see it used to end suffering. But if they don't, it won't make much difference. There are private donations coming in. As long as they don't make it downright illegal, where the scientists have to scurry and hide to make advances, the advaces will happen.

And we aren't the only country doing this anymore. Israel is working on it and our doctors are going there. Even Europe is in on this. America, even if she decides to no longer be a leader in the scientific community, cannot stop progress all over the world.

 

[Cool-Beans]

I think I asked this earlier.

I have only heard of eggs donated after IVF. Is there a venue for women to donate for the sake of pure research?

If there is, I haven't read about it.

But 5 years ago, scientists in Virginia announced that they had created human embryos for the sole purpose of reaping and researching stem cells. That is when the bomb that Arthur Caplan talked about in 1986 or 1987 went off. Back then he said that, "the use of fetuses as organ and tissue donors is a ticking time bomb of bioethics."

He wasn't just whistling Dixie.

Clinton managed to not make any decision and Bush managed the same thing until the VA boys pushed it.

Personally, I think President Bush has made the wrong call. Of course, if they'd just let us keep our money then we could fund whatever we wanted, but that's another thread, I guess.

 

[noodleknitter]

Any advancement in technology that helps us live longer should be embraced imo.

I would disagree. Any advancement that leads to a higher quality of life. Been to a nursing home lately?

 

[Galahad]

Galahad, I volunteer @ Planned Parenthood regularly and I often counsel unintentionally pregnant minors seeking prenatal care. It's a tremendous organization that fulfills a social need, especially for poorer or non-English-speaking women. Trust me on this one.

Oh, I do. But after you've counselled them, don't you refer them to an OB outside of PP?

BTW, I have no complaint against PP. I haven't stated one in these posts either. When we were first married DW got here BCP's there etc.

I think - and this is not directly related to your post I quoted - that many of the other women's clinics with a different bent the PP are also valuable. DW, for example, never does elective abortions, but also NEVER tries to counsel a woman against them. I think that is more the norm than the exception.

 

[Disney Doll]

It doesn't make sense for the Catholic church to be opposed to IVF. Don't Catholics seek medical treatment? If someone gets cancer, does that mean God wants them to have cancer and they shouldn't treat it? Sounds again that people are picking and choosing what they care to believe in.

Which is about the same as people who pick and choose what they "know" about the Catholic Church.

FWIW, the Catholic Church's opposition against fertility treatments and clinics is that God is the only one who should be able to create life.

Treating a life (such as a cancer patient) is not creating it. It is "fixing"(hopefully) a life that is already here.

This is, of course, a simplified version of the "rule".

BTW, I am a Catholic who underwent many years of fertility treatment, so I am pretty well-versed in both the religious and medical sides of the issue.

 

[Disney Doll]

First of all, I thought it was a given that written permission was needed to donate the embryos. I never in my wildest dreams thought that they could just be given away.

Second of all, most of the people I know who have undergone IVF have had to clearly sign papers about what their options were. Most (that I know) have made an active decision NOT to have others adopt their frozen embryos. It was more than disconcerting to them to have full sisters and brothers running around. I totally support a family's willingness to adopt out their embryos, but I can understand the conflict.

If a clinic is not educating the woman with leftover embryos on their disposition, I think they are falling short of thier duty.

Most women that I know that have gone through IVF have totally educated themselves prior to commitment . They seemed aware of the issues if they had a sucessful pregnancy on the first cycle.

This is all true. At least it is true with regard to the medical practitioners that I used during my infertiltiy treatments.

And I would agree that any clinic that is not apprising its patients of all of this is doing them a disservice.

 

[Disney Doll]

1) Read my subsequent post.
2) I did not say they encouraged anything, but in practice people do not go to planned parenthood for prenatal care. Planned parenthood may provide some initial screening but they will refer the patient out to other OBs. They will not follow a pregnancy.
3) Your second paragraph seems to want to paint a picture of its own that might indeed be an exaggeration.

When we were 17, I took my best friend to Planned Parenthood for pre-natal care. Her daughter is now a lovely, accomplished 27 year old woman.

 

[FlyingBelle]

FWIW, the Catholic Church's opposition against fertility treatments and clinics is that God is the only one who should be able to create life.

Don't want to get into a religous debate here, but I'm a Christian (not Catholic, but my in-laws are), I got an undergraduate degree in Bible, and my OB referred me to a RE at a fertility clinic to help us concieve.

My beliefs are... doctors can do everything possible to create the best scenario to help you get pregnant, but ultimately it is God who creates the life.

I happen to be short on a few hormones that are required to allow an embryo to emplant. Even with the right "cocktail" of hormones, I believe it is God who is given us this child that is growing inside me, not the doctors.

My DH and I spent a lot of time considering if we would do IVF, if it came to that. Our main concern is the issue at hand here - what to do with the "extra" embryos. Thank God we didn't have to make that decision... it would have been very difficult, and I can't judge anyone who has because I haven't been in their shoes.