Latest News on Stem-Cell ResearchFollow

I'm really interested in how far we seem to be developing our scientific knowledge. I can't wait to see how much everything will change in the next 50-80 years.

Much as I spend time arguing with you about 'grey areas' - don't you accept that there are 'facts' and opinions'?

I go for facts over opinions every time

Oh, and just to call shennanigans on ya......bullshit. There's multiple areas of debate where I can say "I don't agree with you on that but I can see where you're coming from." Claiming that pulling a cell out of a ten-cell embryo is more morally reprehensible than tossing it into a fire isn't one of those arguments.

But I imagine that "Well, if you don't agree, you're just close minded!!" is an easy out when the above argument is the best you can muster.

Wait! Are you seriously trying to say you can't understand a pro-life proponent arguing that we shouldn't be using embryos for medical research?

Not agree with, I can understand, but are you honestly trying to say that you don't "see where they're coming from"? Seriously? You actually don't understand how someone who believes that life begins at conception would be opposed to medical research on fertilized human eggs?

Might want to turn the shenanegans broom on yourself there Joph. Cause that's just silly...

Edited, Jun 8th 2007 3:34pm by gbaji

Not to be obvious Joph, but an alternative that does *not* involve experimentation on human embryos would be considered "better", right?

We are still talking about ethics, right?

Let me put this another way. No matter how you feel on the subject, some people *do* oppose the use of those embryos for medical research. For them, it *is* a violation of their ethical beliefs.

If we are to look at socio-ethical "harm", clearly a solution that violates the least number of people's ethical beliefs is the solution that causes the "least harm".

Thus, somewhat by definition, their concerns are valid and legitimate, even if you don't agree with them. From a socio-ethical point of view anyway. The very fact that more people oppose the medical use then oppose tossing the embryos in a fire is all the "proof" we need. It's not a subject of debate. It's fact. Using them for research violates more of our citizens ethical beliefs then not using them, thus that means it's causing more ethical "harm".


Using those same citizens tax dollars to do it is even *more* harmful from a socio-ethical standpoint. See how that works?

Irrelevant Joph. That poll did not ask the following questions:

1. Do you believe it is unethical to harvest embryos for stem cells?

2. Do you believe it in unethical *not* to harvest embryons for stem cells?


See. That's the only set of questions that would tell us whether there is a greater violation of ethics by harvesting or not harvesting stem cells from embryos. You could even go on to a correlary asking about government funding of harvesting of said stem cells.

From the question they did ask, 41% of the population opposed federal funding of new ESC lines. Now, we can't know for sure *why*, but it's reasonable to assume that most of them opposed it on ethical grounds. 53% said we should fund new ESC lines. However, it's *not* clear how many of those (if any) hold that position because they believe it's some kind of violation of their ethical beliefs if we don't. I'd wager that most of them are choosing that position because they believe that the scientific advantages outweigh the ethical concerns, but that's not the same thing.


You asked for socio-ethical reasons Joph. That poll (presumably) only shows us the rate of people willing to set aside their own ethics (or don't care anyway) for the reseach. It does not tell us that harvesting those stem cells is less socio-ethically harmful then not harvesting them.


Ultimately, you're dancing around the issue. I think the position your trying to argue is completely untennable and somewhere inside you know it too. At the end of the day, I think it's completely reasonable to assume that more people oppose havesting of stem cells from embryos on ethical grounds then not. Here we actually have a very clear case of ethics before us. The government can take action A and not violate anyone's ethics (not harvest embryos), or they can take action B and violate a whole lot of people's ethicss (harvest the embryos).

From a socio-ethical point of view it's obvious which action is "right". You were better off sticking to an "ends justify the means" argument. I still think you're wrong, but at least you have a valid position to start with. But arguing that somehow performing research on left over IVF embryos is less ethically-challenged then letting them erode and disposing of them is ludicrous in the extreme.

Oh, and your imaginary poll is ridiculous. Wait! I have a poll!

(1) Do you believe it is unethical to eat meat?
(2) Do you believe it is unethical NOT to eat meat?

So now, when people say "WTF? Umm.. no, I don't think it's wrong to not eat meat", I'll have proven that most people believe that we shouldn't be allowed to meat in the United States!

After all, more people are ethically opposed to eating meat than ethically for it! My poll is FLAWLESS!!

Really? No tax money goes towards the beef industry? Huh... who knew?

I'm still waiting on your numbers though.

'Cause I'm sure you didn't just pull a claim like "more people oppose the medical use then oppose tossing the embryos in a fire" out of your ***, right? C'mon... tell me I'm right.Yeah, it's my fault that your reasons sucked and now you have to make shit up.

Thanks. You admitting that you were just making shit up was all I needed to know.

You can stop embarassing yourself now.

Holy Cow Joph. I've seen people go to great lengths to avoid the point, but this is positively pathological.


let me repeat:

I do not need to show you any numbers.

My argument does not assume any specific number. It simply assumes that there is *any* amount of people who oppose harvesting ESC on ethical grounds.


I'll ask you (again): Are you trying to argue that not a single person in the entire US oppses federal funding of the harvesting of embryos for stem cells on ethical grounds?


Yes or no Joph. Answer the damn question. You know the answer. I know the answer. Everyone reading this thread knows the answer. Why do you keep avoiding it? Just say yes or no. Either there are people in the US who oppose this on ethical grounds, or there are not. Which do you think is true?

I'm positive you see this all the time. Consistently. Unceasingly.

Edited, Jun 8th 2007 10:29pm by Atomicflea

I want to know why you never hear anti-abortion (pro-life, if you will) people stating that they're against IVF.

I mean, one of their big arguments is "you can always put the kid up for adoption"... it would seem like they'd come right out and state opposition to IVF so that there were more people willing to adopt.

Am I giving these people too much credit for being able to think logically?