Prop. 71? (And NO on Prop. 64!) - Stem cells research

[Guest guest]

Hi Sandra, Matthew, others,

 

First - I think this DOES have to do with the list's topic, read on to see why.

 

I have to put in my 2 cents here. I happen to be somewhat knowledgeable in the field of biology (including a doctoral degree).

 

I'd like to make one thing very clear: Stem cell research is NOT, and has nothing to do with, genetic engineering!!!

 

All the cells of our body start out as stem cells. And those cells are magical, because a stem cell can turn into a brain cell, a skin cell, a bone cell, a heart cell, etc... If researchers figure out how to INDUCE that change, it would mean people with a bad spleen for instance, could have a NEW one grown for them.

 

This is VERY different from genetic engineering, where a FOREIGN gene is inserted into an already ADULT, formed, cell, that has passed the stem cell stage. (This can work for plants or animals, and recently has been tried on humans, with very limited success).

 

Anyhow - apart from the HUGE scientific promise of stem cells - the potential cure for MANY MANY illnesses (spinal cord injury is just one example) - it is ALSO GOOD FOR ANIMALS!!!

 

Researchers that have turned to stem cells, HAVE to work with humans, they will NOT be conducting their research on animals, but on THOSE STEM CELLS. (The source of stem cells is either aborted fetuses, or, for the most part, frozen unused embryos from IVFs).

 

So for a potential HUGE advancement of medicine NOT at the expense of animals, vote YES on stem cells research.

 

Tal

 

 

 

 

 

Sandra Lupien <sandrallupien wrote:

Hi Matthew and other members of the community,Stem cell engineering is a form of geneticengineering. If a person has come to the intelligentconclusion that genetically engineering plants forfood is irresponsible and potentially catastrophic,then I would think that it would logically follow thatthat person would then reach the same conclusion aboutstem cell research. Due to our species' inability tobe satisfied with anything, once stem cell research isaccepted as common practice, other types of humangenetic engineering will become easier to stomach. Call me extreme, but, can you say Eugenics? All youhave to do is dig a little bit and you'll find plentyof information on the terrible problems that havealready been caused by the unpredictable results ofgenetically engineered foods and

supplements. Read"Seeds of Deception" by Jeffrey M. Smith. If theresults of genetically engineering plant cells areunpredictable and potentially dangerous, then the samemust be true for human and other animal cells, whichare, (I believe I remember from biology) more complex.And, as for the animal torture and exploitation,there is no way they're going to do stem cell researchwithout widespread use of animals. Maybe someone onthe list here who is science-oriented could explain inaccessible language the specifics of stem cellresearch. That would be super-helpful for everyone,I'm sure. It's a little frightening, I must say, that democratstend to be pro-stem cell research, while veryright-wing republicans seem to support it. I am veryfrightened to share any opinions with that camp,though my opinion is based on an entirely differentargument.Thanks for bringing this up. I

think its important.Sandra--- Matthew G Liebman <mliebman wrote:> Hi everyone,> I'm filling out my absentee ballot, and wondering> how to vote on 71, the> stem cell research proposition. Perhaps the more> medically experienced> folks could let the list know how stem cell research> affects animals. Is it> an alternative to animal-based research? Or does it> require an expansion of> the number of animals used in labs? Any help is much> appreciated.> > By the way, VOTE NO ON PROP 64! It's not about> so-called "shakedown> lawsuits;" it's about limiting public interest> groups' ability to sue> corporations. Especially in the context of animal> rights law, where it is> almost impossible otherwise to get legal standing,> Prop. 64 would seriously> destroy our ability to legally fight animal abuse.>

> Best,> Matthew> _______________________________Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!http://vote.BAY AREA VEGETARIANS (BAV) is a community group for veggies to network & find support. Event Calendar, Charter, FAQ and More!http://www.bayareaveg.org/Bookmark this page! Don't miss local events!http://www.bayareaveg.org/events.php

vote. - Register online to vote today!

[Guest guest]

Thanks for the explanation, Tal. What I'm

understanding -- and it's not wholly unlikely that I'm

confused -- is that stem cell research is working on

ways to insert genes from one type of cell into

another type of cell, thereby changing the entire

function/purpose of the cell. Is that what's going

on? I'm interested to know what the repercussions of

that might be. It still sounds like genetic

engineering to me: modifying a cell by inserting into

it a gene foreign to the cell in order to create a

different kind of cell/tissue/organ. I guess what 's

being looked at now is on a more somatic level, but is

the proposed legislation really limited to that? And

how far off, really, is the idea of trying to mix stem

cells from other species with cells from humans?

Guess we should talk about this offline.

Sandra

 

--- Tal <taltalita wrote:

 

> Hi Sandra, Matthew, others,

>

> First - I think this DOES have to do with the list's

> topic, read on to see why.

>

> I have to put in my 2 cents here. I happen to be

> somewhat knowledgeable in the field of biology

> (including a doctoral degree).

>

> I'd like to make one thing very clear: Stem cell

> research is NOT, and has nothing to do with, genetic

> engineering!!!

>

> All the cells of our body start out as stem cells.

> And those cells are magical, because a stem cell can

> turn into a brain cell, a skin cell, a bone cell, a

> heart cell, etc... If researchers figure out how to

> INDUCE that change, it would mean people with a bad

> spleen for instance, could have a NEW one grown for

> them.

>

> This is VERY different from genetic engineering,

> where a FOREIGN gene is inserted into an already

> ADULT, formed, cell, that has passed the stem cell

> stage. (This can work for plants or animals, and

> recently has been tried on humans, with very limited

> success).

>

> Anyhow - apart from the HUGE scientific promise of

> stem cells - the potential cure for MANY MANY

> illnesses (spinal cord injury is just one example) -

> it is ALSO GOOD FOR ANIMALS!!!

>

> Researchers that have turned to stem cells, HAVE to

> work with humans, they will NOT be conducting their

> research on animals, but on THOSE STEM CELLS. (The

> source of stem cells is either aborted fetuses, or,

> for the most part, frozen unused embryos from IVFs).

>

>

> So for a potential HUGE advancement of medicine NOT

> at the expense of animals, vote YES on stem cells

> research.

>

> Tal

>

Sandra Lupien <sandrallupien wrote:

>

> Hi Matthew and other members of the community,

>

> Stem cell engineering is a form of genetic

> engineering. If a person has come to the

> intelligent

> conclusion that genetically engineering plants for

> food is irresponsible and potentially catastrophic,

> then I would think that it would logically follow

> that

> that person would then reach the same conclusion

> about

> stem cell research. Due to our species' inability

> to

> be satisfied with anything, once stem cell research

> is

> accepted as common practice, other types of human

> genetic engineering will become easier to stomach.

> Call me extreme, but, can you say Eugenics? All you

> have to do is dig a little bit and you'll find

> plenty

> of information on the terrible problems that have

> already been caused by the unpredictable results of

> genetically engineered foods and supplements. Read

> " Seeds of Deception " by Jeffrey M. Smith. If the

> results of genetically engineering plant cells are

> unpredictable and potentially dangerous, then the

> same

> must be true for human and other animal cells, which

> are, (I believe I remember from biology) more

> complex.

> And, as for the animal torture and exploitation,

> there is no way they're going to do stem cell

> research

> without widespread use of animals. Maybe someone on

> the list here who is science-oriented could explain

> in

> accessible language the specifics of stem cell

> research. That would be super-helpful for everyone,

> I'm sure.

>

> It's a little frightening, I must say, that

> democrats

> tend to be pro-stem cell research, while very

> right-wing republicans seem to support it. I am

> very

> frightened to share any opinions with that camp,

> though my opinion is based on an entirely different

> argument.

>

> Thanks for bringing this up. I think its important.

>

> Sandra

>

> --- Matthew G Liebman <mliebman wrote:

>

> > Hi everyone,

> > I'm filling out my absentee ballot, and wondering

> > how to vote on 71, the

> > stem cell research proposition. Perhaps the more

> > medically experienced

> > folks could let the list know how stem cell

> research

> > affects animals. Is it

> > an alternative to animal-based research? Or does

> it

> > require an expansion of

> > the number of animals used in labs? Any help is

> much

> > appreciated.

> >

> > By the way, VOTE NO ON PROP 64! It's not about

> > so-called " shakedown

> > lawsuits; " it's about limiting public interest

> > groups' ability to sue

> > corporations. Especially in the context of animal

> > rights law, where it is

> > almost impossible otherwise to get legal standing,

> > Prop. 64 would seriously

> > destroy our ability to legally fight animal abuse.

> >

> > Best,

> > Matthew

> >

>

>

>

>

> _______________________________

>

> Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!

> http://vote.

>

>

>

>

>

> BAY AREA VEGETARIANS (BAV) is a community group for

> veggies to network

> & find support.

>

> Event Calendar, Charter, FAQ and More!

> http://www.bayareaveg.org/

>

> Bookmark this page! Don't miss local events!

> http://www.bayareaveg.org/events.php

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

On Oct 22, 2004, at 8:04 PM, Tal wrote:

>

> Researchers that have turned to stem cells, HAVE to work with humans,

> they will NOT be conducting their research on animals, but on THOSE

> STEM CELLS. (The source of stem cells is either aborted fetuses, or,

> for the most part, frozen unused embryos from IVFs).

>  

> So for a potential HUGE advancement of medicine NOT at the expense of

> animals, vote YES on stem cells research.

>  

> Tal

>  

 

 

 

I agree, and I don't see why anyone would see it any differently. We've

all heard the argument that animal research is bad science, with

problems involved to extrapolate data from a rat to human. Because stem

cells used are human, we can find real cures for people, and many

animals will avoid vivisection because of it.