Stem cell research

  • Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
New posts
scooterbug44

scooterbug44

SoWal Expert
May 8, 2007
16,706
3,339
Sowal
Did Obama sign the executive order to reverse Bush Sr.'s ban on stem cell research today?

I think it's a great idea on several fronts - the potential to create jobs, cure or treat a variety of horrid & chronic diseases, and promote scientific exploration and innovation. :clap:
 
traderx

traderx

Beach Fanatic
Mar 25, 2008
2,133
467
Andy A

Andy A

Beach Fanatic
Feb 28, 2007
4,389
1,738
Blue Mountain Beach
traderx said:
Isn't the ban on federal funding of stem cell research?

Do you support the government funding such research?
Click to expand...
This was something that should never have happened. Stem cell research is too important to be governed by politics. The research is need to promote cures of many different ailments. It should be funded regardless of the funding resource. It was a serious mistake on the part of the Bush administration to restrict stem cell research as they did.
 
30ashopper

30ashopper

SoWal Insider
Apr 30, 2008
6,845
3,471
58
Right here!
traderx said:
Isn't the ban on federal funding of stem cell research?

Do you support the government funding such research?
Click to expand...

Yes, and yes. Basic research funded through the NIH and Dept. of Energy is important. The private sector doesn't invest in research that can't produce profits but contributes to our overall understanding of science. The benefits of government grants for university research and research conducted at government run labs are immense. It's one of the few things government does that's actually beneficial.

Which isn't to say that the private sector doesn't contribute either, and there are plenty of private endowments that produce amazing returns as well. (Gates Foundation, Howard Hughes) But government funding is also an important part of our overall quest through science for a better world.
 
Last edited:
traderx

traderx

Beach Fanatic
Mar 25, 2008
2,133
467
30ashopper said:
Yes, and yes. Basic research funded through the NIH and Dept. of Energy is important. The private sector doesn't invest in research that can't produce profits but contributes to our overall understanding of science. The benefits of government grants for university research and research conducted at government run labs are immense. It's one of the few things government does that's actually beneficial.

Which isn't to say that the private sector doesn't contribute either, and there are plenty of private endowments that produce amazing returns as well. (Gates Foundation, Howard Hughes) But government funding is also an important part of our overall quest through science for a better world.
Click to expand...

Actually, there is quite a bit of private research ongoing. Typically it's small companies that convert high risk capital into research. There are plenty of historical examples. Trilogy pioneered water-cooled wafers; Qualcomm pioneered CDMA.

I am 100% in favor of stem cell research; just opposed to government funding and not on any basis of religious or moralistic reasoning: we are going to have a two trillion dollar budget deficit. At some point, it seems prudent to question what we can afford.

In Irvine, Calif., a tiny company called PrimeCell Therapeutics has taken adult stem cells found in testes, reprogrammed them, and created human heart, brain, bone and cartilage cells. This marks a breakthrough in developing what are known as "pluripotent" adult stem cells?cells that can be turned into most other cell types. That pluripotent ability, and the fact that stem cells self-renew, is the main attraction of stem cells from human embryos. One challenge with embryonic stem cells, however, is preventing them from creating tumor cells. So far, the PrimeCell researchers have been able to reprogram the cells they extract from testes without any tumor growth.
Click to expand...

Despite Bush Veto, Stem Cell Research Abounds - Forbes.com
 
30ashopper

30ashopper

SoWal Insider
Apr 30, 2008
6,845
3,471
58
Right here!
traderx said:
Actually, there is quite a bit of private research ongoing. Typically it's small companies that convert high risk capital into research. There are plenty of historical examples. Trilogy pioneered water-cooled wafers; Qualcomm pioneered CDMA.

I am 100% in favor of stem cell research; just opposed to government funding and not on any basis of religious or moralistic reasoning: we are going to have a two trillion dollar budget deficit. At some point, it seems prudent to question what we can afford.

Despite Bush Veto, Stem Cell Research Abounds - Forbes.com
Click to expand...

Sure, but the motivation is usually some sort of profitable discovery. I'm not against this obviously I just know from first hand account that private enterprise should not be relied on completely when it comes to scientific research. Raw scientific research is rarely profitable directly, but over time the build up of knowlege results in unique discoveries that later become cures and treatments for desease, MRIs, and other such technological wonders.

As far as budget deficits go, the NIH budget is a drop in the bucket and has been fairly constant over the last decade. I wouldn't punish all the researchers out there by cutting their funding when the real reason for our current government excess is an administration that likes to blow cash out of its helicopters using a weed blower. :D
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
New posts


Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter









Share this page

Share this page



                               
Top Bottom