Are you in favor of embryonic stem-cell research?

hoolahan, ASN, RN · Aug 6, 2001

kday, , I wasn't "asking" anything, just kind of agreeing with your statement.....

"I was like, 'why?? it's just cord blood??' "

Capesh?

I am just back from vacation and my brains are ahead of my weary body. I am plum worn out. Sorry for the confusion.

JennieBSN · Aug 6, 2001

heh heh...i knew that...i was just testing you...yeeeeaaahhhhhhhh..

had a slight brain fart there, okay? thanx, margaret...:)

fiestynurse · Aug 7, 2001

The cells that make up days old embryos embody a world full of potential because they can develop into almost any type of tissue. Stem cells transformed into islet cells could restore a diabetic's pancreas. Stem cells that morph into nerve cells could replace neuronal tissue damaged by strokes, spinal cord injuries, ALS, Alzheimer's and Parkinson's. Skin tissue grown from stem cells could provide a ready supply for burn victims. Lab-grown cardiac tissue could shore up damaged arteries and hearts.

If the destiny of embryos at IVF clinics is to be thrown out, and couples are willing to donate them to research instead, it's hard for me to believe that throwing them out is a better ethical decision. And for me, as long as that fertilized egg is not destined to be placed in a uterus, it cannot become life.

In addition, embryonic cells are thought to be superior to the adult variety or stem cells taken from cord blood. But we won't know this for sure, if research on embryonic cells remain off limits.

By banning the research, we uphold the most extreme view of the sanctity of life, but at a price: foreclosing the possibility of doing all we can to improve the lot of the living.

TracyRNMSN, MSN · Aug 8, 2001

Stem cell research is a valuable and necessary tool in treating a lot of devistating diseases. If clinics are going to throw these cells out, why shouldn't they be used to treat diabetes, forms of cancer, and multiple sclerosis? We all have loved ones who have died or are still suffering from these debilitating diseases, and if this research can stop the suffering and heartache, why not keep doing it. As nurses, we want to save lives, and this could definately be the way to save more.

nurs4kids · Aug 9, 2001

We were discussing this over dinner tonight and a few things came up.

1. Can these be harvested AFTER the fetus is aborted or would it have to be done prior to the abortion?

2. I know anti-abortionist are going to go haywire over this one, and I'm neither anti or pro. BUT...why not offer women free abortion in exchange for this? It would cut down on illegal abortions AND the abortion could be funded by the receiving patient(s).

just food for thought

Nurse2BinNC · Aug 9, 2001

I am even more in favor of stem cell research than I was in my original post just a few days ago. After spending the last 2 nights at a Childrens Hospital with my daughter because of Diabetic Ketoasidosis. Lucky for us this is the first time she has ever been hospitalized, BUT even 1 time for a child is way too much when there is a posibility of a cure if only the research is able to proceed. We are anxiously waiting for our insulin pump, but I would give up anything that I have or ever will have to prevent my little girl from going thru what she has been thru the last 2 days. The Islet cell transplant that is being studied is a wonderful relief for those that have been tested with this. But from my understanding, These people are having to take anti-rejection drugs. If the Stem cells can be transformed into the Islet cells that are needed, then there may not be the need for the Anti-rejection Meds. I am going to get off of my soap box now, Thanks to everyone that is in favor of this. Hopefully someday there will be cures for all of these terrible deseases.

Tammy:rolleyes:

Russ Dowling · Aug 9, 2001

FiestyNurse expressed my thoughts on this subject better than I could. I feel the potential good outweighs the bad, and federal money should definitely be used to pay for further research.

JennieBSN · Aug 9, 2001

I didn't know this...cut and pasted from Foxnews.com article on the whole stem cell debate and the upcoming announcement from President Bush:

(begin quote)

But some opponents of embryonic stem cell research say that researchers could simply use stem cells harvested from adults, or from umbilical cords, and thus avoid destroying embryos.

Many of them support studying somatic stem cells, which are made by mature tissue. But there is a debate over whether somatic stem cells are as flexible or as long-lived as embryonic stem cells. Many scientists advocate research on both types.

(end quote)

any comments? I didn't know that there was any difference between cord blood stem cells and embryonic stem cells..

bhart · Aug 9, 2001

Pro.

fiestynurse · Aug 9, 2001

I think that all types of stem cells should be studied. Why waste precious time, only to find out that adult stem cells or cord blood cells are inadequate. As Nurse2BinNC has passionately stated--- Her daughter needs all possible treatment NOW!

misti_z · Aug 9, 2001

Bush's is to make an address tonight at 9pm. And CNN expects he will go toward limited federal funding (according to a senior advisor).

I have to work so will not be able to see his address, maybe some of you can and keep us up to date!

P_RN, ADN, RN · Aug 10, 2001

https://allnurses.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=9022

I did post my opinion, but on another thread. I must say that I am pleased at the respect and restraint all of the posters have demonstrated here.