The Shrine

Amazing

http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/02/11/he ... index.html

But God doesn't like stem-cell research. Can't possibly be a solution to pursue for future viability

It is amazing, but make sure you read enough to know why this is not a good option for everyone with AIDS/HIV.

But its a huge step towards a better option.

Zeus wrote:But God doesn't like stem-cell research. Can't possibly be a solution to pursue for future viability

I am not really sure on the religious viewpoint. On the biological side of things many consider it unethical to use embryos to obtain stem cells. The situation of a willing donor is completely ethical biologically; on the religious side, I am not sure. It is possible that there are still people against everything that could possibly disprove something in their faith.

People extending their life spans by any means is questionable. If you're going to have surgery or something else I'm sure GOD IS ANGRY!

I'm glad that Bush is out of office and Stem Cells are being pushed forward again.

Anarky wrote:People extending their life spans by any means is questionable.

Question them:

Seraphina wrote:But its a huge step towards a better option.

Maybe not! That's the nature of research. A 10% solution won't necessarily extend to a 100% solution.

Come on, guys. If you're going to speak to religious views, at least know what you're talking about. I know it's difficult. Yes, I'm sure there are some people who are religious and are against all kinds of stem cell research. However, the majority are only against embryonic stem cell research. And they are only against it because of the method of recovering the stem cells (it usually results in the descruction of the prenatal).

The article said that the surgery used a "stem cell transplant from a donor carrying a gene mutation" so I doubt most religious people will have an issue with it.

And, yes, this is very cool.

You know, if that mom killed off some of those embryos, we wouldn't be up in arms about that bitch with 14 kids. Fucking irresponsible! New rule: If you want to have in vitro implantation, you have to be pro-choice!

SineSwiper wrote:You know, if that mom killed off some of those embryos, we wouldn't be up in arms about that bitch with 14 kids. Fucking irresponsible! New rule: If you want to have in vitro implantation, you have to be pro-choice!

New rule: to be implanted for a child you need to first prove you can properly provide for it (ie. at least have the funds to do it and not need to set up a website to ask for donations).

Kupek wrote:

Seraphina wrote:But its a huge step towards a better option.

Maybe not! That's the nature of research. A 10% solution won't necessarily extend to a 100% solution.

No, but that at least opened some doors for further research/discussion. I mean, having at least some kind of remission is HUGE in terms of battling this disease. It is a major step forward considering they've had zero up to this point

They haven't had zero steps forward: AIDS antiretroviral drugs have been successful in delaying onset of symptoms.

And his cure for aids:

Kupek wrote:They haven't had zero steps forward: AIDS antiretroviral drugs have been successful in delaying onset of symptoms.

Only subdued. This one actually cured it?

No, it's not a cure, but I still consider it progress.

Kupek wrote:No, it's not a cure, but I still consider it progress.

True. It only removed traces in certain areas. They still think it's hiding out somewhere else.

Progress yes and maybe gives some hope to the future. Still the best news I've heard in terms of the path to a cure