Ethics breakthrough on stem cells?

StemcellTwo different scientific teams have announced success in developing stem cells from skin tissue — without using human embryos. One doctor called it a “tremendous scientific milestone — the biological equivalent of the Wright Brothers’ first airplane.”
It’s still possible that embryonic cloning techniques might have some advantages over skin reprogramming, so research needs to continue on both. But if the findings hold up, this breakthrough could help defuse some of the ethical controversy surrounding stem cell research.
Posted by Randy Scholfield

35 Comments

  1. Ben
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 2:02 pm | Permalink

    This I find fascinating. Consider the potantial - if it works. Tissues grown from the patient’s own cells. No rejection issues due to ‘foreign tissue’ as is so common.

  2. SolDevVB
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 2:05 pm | Permalink

    So whu is it we need ESC again…http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7101834.stmPosted by: SolDevVB | November 20, 2007 at 12:20 PM

    http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/11/open-thread-112.html#comment-90631666

  3. outlander
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 2:11 pm | Permalink

    People resist the temptation to cave on pro-life principle and what happens? It turns out science develops a better, more effective way than the sacrificing embryonic human life to research. Science must be guided based on human moral principles.

    Posted by: outlander | November 17, 2007 at 08:30 AM

  4. Posted November 20, 2007 at 2:14 pm | Permalink

    Poor “outlander” –

    Can’t understand the difference between an egg and a chicken.

  5. Posted November 20, 2007 at 2:24 pm | Permalink

    I wonder what the first applications will be?

    Burn patients or perhaps some sort of organ transplant supplement to help with rejection issues?

  6. Jed
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 2:37 pm | Permalink

    The big question of course is will it work? The anti’s have succeeded in slowing research for so long that any more delays are unconscionable. Many thousands of people are suffering right now, and are being told it will be decades more before the research is done. I am sure they appreciate the time spent and the efforts made to insure that their suffering will someday be alleviated in the most moral way possible, if ever!

  7. Posted November 20, 2007 at 2:40 pm | Permalink

    I’m sure someone can cook you up a batch of ‘Tiller’ soup real quick Jed. :)

  8. rfl
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 3:02 pm | Permalink

    Poor Monkey-

    He doesn’t understand that ethical standards are important to advanced civilization.

  9. ?
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 3:10 pm | Permalink

    That was a tacky thing to say, Kansas.

  10. ?
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 3:10 pm | Permalink

    That was a tacky thing to say, Kansas.

  11. Posted November 20, 2007 at 3:48 pm | Permalink

    That was a tacky thing to say, Kansas.

    Posted by: ? | November 20, 2007 at 03:10 PM

    Indeed it was.

  12. lindainks55
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 4:05 pm | Permalink

    The speed with which this was accomplished is amazing! Isn’t it exciting to live in these times and witness these kinds of discoveries!?

  13. Posted November 20, 2007 at 4:11 pm | Permalink

    Those skin cells are living beings so we must not damage them for purposes of advancing scientific research and curing maladies.

  14. J R
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 5:48 pm | Permalink

    Now the cry will go up for a Constitutional Amendment banning emryonic stem cell research.

    It would be a mistake to abandon ANY promising potential for curative discovery.

  15. The Phantom
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 5:50 pm | Permalink

    The speed with which this was accomplished is amazing! Isn’t it exciting to live in these times and witness these kinds of discoveries!?

    You’d think we could develop an eco-friendly source of energy.

  16. David Atkins
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 6:17 pm | Permalink

    “It would be a mistake to abandon ANY promising potential for curative discovery.”__________

    If a reasonable hypothosis was made that this poster’s nuttiness had an organic cause, and it was further reasonable to assume that by performing a lobotomy on him we could determine the root cause of nuttiness and prevent it in others, thus precluding nuts from our society, would it be more appropriate for this person to present himself for the lobotomy, or should the government require the lobotomy in the name of science and for the good of all?

    This scenerio, using the poster’s logic, demonstrates the absurdity of research in a moral vacuum. Research is *never* amoral, but is driven by underlying principles. There is a growing trend that justifies the stronger preying on the weaker in research. It is ridiculous to assert that “any promising potential” should be explored. In fact, it goes beyond ridiculous to evil.

  17. remote
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 6:21 pm | Permalink

    “so research needs to continue on both.” Why????

  18. outlander
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 6:25 pm | Permalink

    “Now the cry will go up for a Constitutional Amendment banning embryonic stem cell research.”————–

    The cry JR, will be coming from the embryonic stem cell researchers who are about to lose their funding.

    Kudos to science. A better way has been found. One that does not require pitting one groups’ interests against another. We should all be happy.

  19. ksagnostic
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 6:38 pm | Permalink

    “”so research needs to continue on both.”

    Why????

    Well, here was one reason given in the article.

    “Other scientists said it’s too early for the field to give up studying stem cells from embryos.

    “Dr. George Daley of the Harvard institute, who said his own lab has also achieved direct reprogramming of human cells, said it’s not clear how long it will take to get around the cancer risk problem.

    “His lab is pursuing both the reprogramming and cloning strategies.

    “‘We’ll see, ultimately, which one works and which one is more practical,’ he said.”

    That being said, I hope that this new technique does work out, because it would be win-win.

  20. lindainks55
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 7:16 pm | Permalink

    “The cry JR, will be coming from the embryonic stem cell researchers who are about to lose their funding.”Posted by: outlander | November 20, 2007 at 06:25 PM

    Scientists are not as petty as you! They truly want cures and treatments. Outlander, Do YOU actually know any scientists? What an absolutely cruel and very stupid remark!

    In this instance I’m very sorry that scientific advancements will be enjoyed by everyone — EVEN YOU. I wish people with your level of intellect would be excluded!

  21. outlander
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 7:40 pm | Permalink

    Um.. Linda. What did I write that was cruel? If it was the portion that you posted, then little lady, you are way too sensitive to play here.

  22. lindainks55
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 7:50 pm | Permalink

    For those interested in this amazing feat here is another article with more detail.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/21/science/21stem.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2&hp

  23. lindainks55
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 7:51 pm | Permalink

    And I still think you are way too stupid to play anywhere! You made statements about stem cell scientists that are absolutely cruel, stupid, unfair and untrue!

  24. J R
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 7:52 pm | Permalink

    And the embryo defense league takes the field!

    Fellas? You need to advocate on the behalf of the MILLIONS of your object defense du jour currently held in frozen stasis in any number of fertility clinics. To arms! Go free your frostlings!

    Let’s leave the scientists and doctors to decide which research merits further explore shall we?

  25. J R
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 7:56 pm | Permalink

    linda has you outie.

    You basically implicated all doctors who continue to pursue embryonic stem cell research as soley fiscally motivated.

    Pretty serious charge. And it was of course your intention. YOUR sensibilities are offended by the research. SO the research AND the researchers are “bad”.

  26. outlander
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 7:59 pm | Permalink

    “You basically implicated all doctors who continue to pursue embryonic stem cell research as soley fiscally motivated.”

    No I didn’t. Just sad that they will soon have to go do something else when their grants expire.

  27. J R
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 8:06 pm | Permalink

    Not even a nice try outlander.

    And just how is it you know their grants will expire?

  28. outlander
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 8:06 pm | Permalink

    “Let’s leave the scientists and doctors to decide which research merits further explore shall we?”

    —————-

    Oh let’s not JR. Why should scientists and doctors decide the morality of their research? They could certainly have mixed motivations, now wouldn’t they? Motivations that could cloud their vision in regard to moral considerations. Should they have a voice? Sure. Decide? Absolutely not.

    That is why even the U.N. is involved. See their position on human cloning.

    http://www.un.org/news/Press/docs/2005/ga10333.doc.htm

  29. lindainks55
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 8:29 pm | Permalink

    Outlander, I’m sorry. I’ve never called anyone here stupid and I don’t like knowing I did. You aren’t stupid and I’m sorry I said that. I try not to react, to not read something that isn’t there, to take anything written as more than words. This time, I did. Again, I’m sorry.

  30. J R
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 8:29 pm | Permalink

    Look outlander I KNOW how YOU see embryonic stem cell research.

    But that is more to do with you and your beliefs.

    It’s hardly Dr. Mengele stuff. In the greater scheme of things I mean.

    That is unless you honestly imagine bloodthirsty researchers with a pro anti embryo agenda?

    Come on.

    Hey I got no dog in the fight other than HELPING PEOPLE get BETTER.

    If there is another way or a better way I say GO that way.

    But let’s not use this newest to further YOUR moral judgements.

    This isn’t exactly the best comparison.

    Benjamin Franklin invented the lightning rod. Now in his time? There was no small number of folks that felt if lightning hit your house and burned it down, well that was God’s action and you’d no business questioning it let alone interfering. Some of these folks even thought the lightning rod was wrong.

  31. Ben
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 8:36 pm | Permalink

    I heard some caveats on the news tonight suggesting that there is a higher risk of cancer with this sort of stem sells. I don’t know; biology was not my strongest science. That said; I’d like to see this research continued.

    Wasn’t there an earlier hopeful result with ‘belly fat’ cells as stem precursors?

  32. outlander
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 8:50 pm | Permalink

    No problem Linda. Thank you.

  33. J R
    Posted November 20, 2007 at 8:55 pm | Permalink

    Should they have a voice? Sure. Decide? Absolutely not.

    I hope you will remember this in your own ruminations about scientists and researchers outlander. You SHOULD have a voice. You SHOULD help decide.

    Making law? Maybe not so much?

  34. Posted November 21, 2007 at 4:52 am | Permalink

    From all I have heard, this new form of research is intended to be only ANOTHER form of stem cell research. There is NO reason to suspend Embryonic Stem Cell Research. The only stem cells they are using are currently frozen, with no intentions to use them for anything else.. They arent living creatures, for crying out loud!!

    And Kansas, What the HELL does Dr. Tiller have to do with ESC?? NOTHING, moron!!

  35. Jed
    Posted November 21, 2007 at 5:03 am | Permalink

    Chas,Don’t worry about Kans. His solution for every problem the world has ever had is to make snide remarks about Dr. Tiller. So far, it hasn’t solved anything, but he just keeps trying. Isn’t that the definition of insanity?