Wednesday, April 11, 2007

Diabetes Cured by Stem Cell Research? Why Does Joe Knollenberg Oppose Such Breakthroughs?

Joe Knollenberg consistently opposes any efforts by the Federal government to fund embryonic stem cell research.

The importance of this type of research cannot be overstated.

The London Times has an article describing how stem cells have been used to cure diabetes Type I in children! This is a remarkable medical advance.

Can you imagine what medical breakthroughs we could accomplish if scientists in the U.S. weren't so restricted by federal regulations?

Yet Joe Knollenberg continues to support severe and unnecessary restrictions on stem cell research.

Stem Cell Research. Another area where Joe Knollenberg
is Out of Touch with his constitutents.
Joe Knollenberg is too extreme for Oakland County.


Chet said...

Oh. Wow. You just made the pro-life, and a pro-Knollenberg, case on adult stem cell research.

From your link:

"The results show that insulin-dependent diabetics can be freed from reliance on needles by an injection of their own stem cells."


Read that again.

The pro-life movement has for years argued that there have been dozens of successes with non-embryonic stem cells and zero successes with embryonic cells. They argue that we should exhaust adult stem-cell research before even contemplating embryonic research.

Whether this argument is right or wrong from your perspective, your evidence entirely backs up their claims. You've driven a scientific stake through your own argument.

Let me conclude with more:

"Stem cells are immature, unprogrammed cells that have the ability to grow into different kinds of tissue and can be sourced from people of all ages."

You might also read the very fascinating the 91 comments below the article.

Bruce Fealk said...

Chet, you cleary need to get your science straight. Embryonic stem cells offer the greatest hope as they are the most malleable.

With Liberty & Justice for all . . . said...

This is a breakthrough using adult stem cells. If that is what they can do with adult stem cells, just think of the miracles they could achive with embryonic stem cells.

The stem cell issue will come up for a vote again this year.

Joe's vote on this issue could cost him his seat next year. I'm sure he recognizes it.

It will be interesting to see if he changes his position to keep his seat. He has already changed his position on alternative fuels.

SharonRB said...

The House actually already passed this bill in the first 100 hours and Joe voted against it, if I recall. Of course, it will come back again after Bush vetoes it, and I'm sure Joe will vote no again.

Chet said...

Bruce, is that the best you can do?
The old insult without analysis: "Get your science straight".

You assert, without evidence, that "embryonic stem cells offer the greatest hope". Based on what? I've relayed the argument that there has been no successful use of embryonic cells and dozens of successful uses of adult cells.

You've demonstrated yourself incapable of reasoned argument and needing to resort to ad hominem. I have my science straight - I'm not taking a position here on embryonic research, merely pointing out the pro-life argument, which is appearing stronger by the minute.


You're certainly more polite and civil hear, but I have yet to see how your argument differs from Bruce's. "if that is what they can do with adult stem cells, just imagine..." the thing is, science doesn't always translate that way. And it is possible that while embryonic cells are more "malleable," everything that can be done with embryonic cells could be duplicated with adult cells (or properly put, non-embryonic, since the stem cells often used are from umblical cords, which have the advantage of being from the same person over time). If it is the case that "adult" (or non-embryonic) are capable of everything, then there is a legitimate moral question as to whether it is right to harvest embryos for that purpose (there's a moral question even if it isn't possible, but if it is possible, then the moral question seems pretty darn clear).

Can any one on the left give me something other than a mantra - that is, point me to hard scientific evidence that "adult" cells can't accomplish the same.


Chet said...

mis-spelled "hear" above. sorry

With Liberty & Justice for all . . . said...


I do believe that embryonic stem cells have tremendous potential to cure diseases.

This could be particularly critical to patients who are seriously ill and can't harvest their own stem cells.

So let me flip the question -- why limit scientists to adult stem cell research when embryos are available.

I believe one of the bills that passed the Senate this week allows for the use of embryos that are not viable. The Senator who proposed it -- whose name I can't remember off hand -- seemed to think Bush would not veto a bill with that provision.

Bruce Fealk said...

Chet, maybe this will help enlarge your miniscule mind.

An article on how EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS are being used to rebuild heart muscle after an infarct. That's what I found in 3 seconds using The Google. Want more?

Anonymous said...