105 replies to this topic

[DJS]

edit: I just noticed that DJS a.k.a. technosophy (aka nonzero, aka donspanton aka....), is not in authority anymore. What happened?

It's just a glitch in the system. Sorry for getting your hopes up.

[DJS]

For anyone who is pro-science, lifting restrictions and allowing scientists maximum flexibility in pursuing their research agendas is a no-brainer.

[luv2increase]

For anyone who is pro-science, lifting restrictions and allowing scientists maximum flexibility in pursuing their research agendas is a no-brainer.

It isn't a no-brainer when the economy is in the shape that it is in right now. There has already been millions if not billions of dollars spend on embryonic stem-cell research and no results. What makes you think that those of us hard working Americans want our hard earned money spent on something such as this that shows no hope for its success as a viable treatment option for those diseased patients which it has been deemed a possible future treatment option for?

I know that I want my tax dollars spent on something other than that which has had years of funding and research done on it with ABSOLUTELY NO PROGRESS WHATSOEVER. It is my money, and I want it spent where it is going to do the most good for humanity. Quite frankly, to anyone who has done the slightest of research into embryonic stem-cell research, they would realize that it should be placed at the bottom of the totem poll.


This isn't scientific anymore; it is political. Someone will an IQ of even 90 could even fathom that.

[Shepard]

edit: I just noticed that DJS a.k.a. technosophy, is not in authority anymore. What happened?

You blinded him with the science and his head exploded.

[luv2increase]

edit: I just noticed that DJS a.k.a. technosophy, is not in authority anymore. What happened?

You blinded him with the science and his head exploded.

With a statement such as that, evidently the Alabama boy's head exploded too.

[Shepard]

Are we getting nicknames now? If so, I prefer Drunken Rooster over Alabama Boy.

I really need to make myself a costume.

[eternaltraveler]

Luv you can't help it. All of your arguments are religious ones.

Don't be a wiseguy. Point them out. Blatant lies will get you nowhere in life "eternaltraveler LOL:)"...

Talking to you and DJS, two supposed people of authority here at Imminst (how ironic), is like talking to two computer programs with many flaws in their programming. You both are extremely out-of-touch with reality, sadly.

"all arguments are religious ones" --> point them out. It doesn't get any more blatant than that. What a comment.


I think you both need to seriously think about stepping down from leadership here at Imminst. When you both display what you have here in these last fews threads, it seems extremely viable. Think about it.


edit: I just noticed that DJS a.k.a. technosophy, is not in authority anymore. What happened?

Allow me to offer my apology for commenting because after my getting off yet another 36 hour shift in surgery I really don't have the energy or desire to deal with you.

toodles

[valkyrie_ice]

It's funny, on my local newspaper forum, there is a bigoted, barely literate redneck who is spouting almost verbatim, word for word, your arguments Luv...

Now, I suppose I could assume that somehow this brain dead moron has suddenly become a genius, but that seems highly unlikely. Which leaves the other conclusion, that both he and you are repeating the same BS given to you by someone else, be it republican, evangelical, or whatever.

Screaming doesn't give your arguments weight, Luv. Especially not LARGE PRINT SCREAMING All it really does is make you look like a hysterical fool, much like the redneck I referred to above. Neither does making personal attacks against those who disagree with you make you look like anything but someone who knows they are in the wrong and refusing to admit it.

Now, DJS has asked you to create a new thread if you wish to continue debating whether ESCR or ASCR should be pursued, and I am suggesting that when you do so, make sure you use better references for you arguments than obviously biased and politicized blogs, preferably scientific journals, magazines, or articles which can be verified and their research looked into. I for one understand that ASCR is stalled because of the chemical doping that has to be done to force cells to revert to embryonic mode once they have been differentiated, though I admit I may have this confused somewhat with my reading on therapeutic cloning. If you have valid evidence to support your claims, I would definitely like to read it. However, more links to things like iReport are going to be rather detrimental to your arguments rather than helpful.

If however, your arguments are based entirely on emotions and political or religious beliefs, they are unlikely to win any converts. At present you have offered nothing which could be validated, simply opinions.

[luv2increase]

It's funny, on my local newspaper forum, there is a bigoted, barely literate redneck who is spouting almost verbatim, word for word, your arguments Luv...

Now, I suppose I could assume that somehow this brain dead moron has suddenly become a genius, but that seems highly unlikely. Which leaves the other conclusion, that both he and you are repeating the same BS given to you by someone else, be it republican, evangelical, or whatever.

Screaming doesn't give your arguments weight, Luv. Especially not LARGE PRINT SCREAMING All it really does is make you look like a hysterical fool, much like the redneck I referred to above. Neither does making personal attacks against those who disagree with you make you look like anything but someone who knows they are in the wrong and refusing to admit it.

Now, DJS has asked you to create a new thread if you wish to continue debating whether ESCR or ASCR should be pursued, and I am suggesting that when you do so, make sure you use better references for you arguments than obviously biased and politicized blogs, preferably scientific journals, magazines, or articles which can be verified and their research looked into. I for one understand that ASCR is stalled because of the chemical doping that has to be done to force cells to revert to embryonic mode once they have been differentiated, though I admit I may have this confused somewhat with my reading on therapeutic cloning. If you have valid evidence to support your claims, I would definitely like to read it. However, more links to things like iReport are going to be rather detrimental to your arguments rather than helpful.

If however, your arguments are based entirely on emotions and political or religious beliefs, they are unlikely to win any converts. At present you have offered nothing which could be validated, simply opinions.

Opinions? You haven't read a word I've written nor quoted. It is factual that no progress whatsoever has been made with embryonic stem-cell research. This is sadly in spite of the millions/billions of dollars spent on embryonic stem-cell research. How is that considered an "opinion"? It isn't my fault that no progress has been made. It is how it is.

I would certainly question your intelligence with this matter because I've seen nothing quoted from you except something trying to debunk all conspiracy theories if I remember correctly.


Where did you come from? lol You've made the third most unscientific, uneducated & ignorant post in this whole thread thus far. Many congrats to you.




edit: Here is something to ponder about. What gives "one man" the authority to ban or un-ban the federal spending (American worker tax dollars ---> let's not forget where the money comes from) on something such as embryonic stem-cell research??????? Should not the people decide? After all, it is our money and most importantly, our country.

More to come in a new topic which regards to this scary matter.

Edited by luv2increase, 19 March 2009 - 01:54 PM.

[DJS]

Ugghh... so boring... How many times are you going to repeat yourself. Start a new thread already and be done with it.

Repetition does not win debates.

Lifting the ban on federal funding is a good thing because it grants researchers the freedom to determine scientifically what are and what are not promising lines of research.

For anyone who is pro-science, lifting restrictions and allowing scientists maximum flexibility in pursuing their research agendas is a no-brainer.

[luv2increase]

Ugghh... so boring... How many times are you going to repeat yourself. Start a new thread already and be done with it.

Repetition does not win debates.

Lifting the ban on federal funding is a good thing because it grants researchers the freedom to determine scientifically what are and what are not promising lines of research.

For anyone who is pro-science, lifting restrictions and allowing scientists maximum flexibility in pursuing their research agendas is a no-brainer.

Repetition? Boring? WOW!


Nothing I stated there was repetitious in the least. Why don't you quote what I said that was said in an earlier post? I bet you can't do it.

That is a challenge.


I can't believe you people in authority are posting the things you are. They are all obvious & blatant lies.

1) First it was saying that ALL my arguments were religious ones by the Elf.
2) Second, it is saying that all of my arguments are repetitious. This was implied to my last post when in fact, nothing in it was yet stated in this thread.


I hate to say it, but some of you are just flat-out brain dead. I am serious. I say this because there has been no rebuttals of a scientific nature. It is philosophical theorizing. Because you can't fend for yourselves, you all start resorting to crazy, absurd posting tactics.

[Shepard]

I say this because there has been no rebuttals of a scientific nature. It is philosophical theorizing.

All this philosophical theorizing in the Society & Philosophy section. That's just madness.

[DJS]

there has been no rebuttals of a scientific nature. It is philosophical theorizing.

For the thousandth time, start a new thread and we'l have a discussion on the merits of ESCR.

They are all obvious & blatant lies.

some of you are just flat-out brain dead.

Friendly warning. Any more insinuations or insults and your warning level may be raised. It's flaming, ad hom, and inappropriate.

I'd enjoy having a conversation on the merits of ESCR, but only if it is going to be done in a respectful manner.

[eternaltraveler]

resorting to crazy absurd posting tactics

…

You mean like the pile of personal attacks you vomit forth.

All of your arguments have a religious basis (or a basis in mental illness). You've learned to veil these, but quite frankly you aren't very good at it. Whenever one of us actually gets annoyed enough by you to get enough motivation to respond you get utterly demolished in debate. If you'd like to get demolished again be more annoying. I haven't passed my threshold yet. But its pretty much a waste of time for us. Sorry.

Edited by eternaltraveler, 19 March 2009 - 11:07 PM.

[DJS]

eternaltraveler (I was about to address you as ET, but then thought better of it). I'd slightly disagree with you in that I think having a discussion on the merits of ESCs in the aftermath of the iPSC breakthrough is a good thing. I say this because I think it's important to set the record straight and refute the large volume of propoganda which is currently being spewed by bio-conservative elements in the United States.

Lifting federal restrictions and allowing scientists to use ESCs as a tool in their research arsenal is the topic of this thread.

A completely seperate topic is concerning the actual promise of ESCs, and the types of ESCR which should be funded. If such a discussion is attempted in good faith, I think it would be legitimate.

[eternaltraveler]

I'd slightly disagree with you in that I think having a discussion on the merits of ESCs in the aftermath of the iPSC breakthrough is a good thing.

where do we disagree?

edit:

If such a discussion is attempted in good faith, I think it would be legitimate.

oh. Well if you intend luv to take the opposing viewpoint in the discussion, it would both not be attempted in good faith, and not be fair to the other side in the debate.

Edited by eternaltraveler, 19 March 2009 - 11:14 PM.

[DJS]

luv2increase: Nothing I stated there was repetitious in the least. Why don't you quote what I said that was said in an earlier post? I bet you can't do it.

That is a challenge.

Are you for real?

luv states the same thing:

It is factual that no progress whatsoever has been made with embryonic stem-cell research. This is sadly in spite of the millions/billions of dollars spent on embryonic stem-cell research.

over

years of funding and research done on it with ABSOLUTELY NO PROGRESS WHATSOEVER.

and over

There has already been millions if not billions of dollars spend on embryonic stem-cell research and no results.

and over again.

There has been much effort into ESR, AND ABSOLUTELY NO "POSITIVE" RESULTS

Again, start a new thread and I'd be happy to dissect your propoganda.

[luv2increase]

resorting to crazy absurd posting tactics

…

You mean like the pile of personal attacks you vomit forth.

All of your arguments have a religious basis (or a basis in mental illness). You've learned to veil these, but quite frankly you aren't very good at it. Whenever one of us actually gets annoyed enough by you to get enough motivation to respond you get utterly demolished in debate. If you'd like to get demolished again be more annoying. I haven't passed my threshold yet. But its pretty much a waste of time for us. Sorry.

Quit posting your garbage lies and back up what you say with some quotes which alluded you as that of a religious argument elf.

You all are hysterical.

[luv2increase]

luv2increase: Nothing I stated there was repetitious in the least. Why don't you quote what I said that was said in an earlier post? I bet you can't do it.

That is a challenge.

Are you for real?

luv states the same thing:

It is factual that no progress whatsoever has been made with embryonic stem-cell research. This is sadly in spite of the millions/billions of dollars spent on embryonic stem-cell research.

over

years of funding and research done on it with ABSOLUTELY NO PROGRESS WHATSOEVER.

and over

There has already been millions if not billions of dollars spend on embryonic stem-cell research and no results.

and over again.

There has been much effort into ESR, AND ABSOLUTELY NO "POSITIVE" RESULTS

Again, start a new thread and I'd be happy to dissect your propoganda.

That is one of the key points of my argument. Why haven't you been able to fend against it yet? This is what I meant by crazy posting tactics. It is like when a child gets caught in a lie, and they run into their room crying and slamming their door shut. Instead of slamming the door shut, you guys just cry like little children when you get put into your place.

[DJS]

That is one of the key points of my argument. Why haven't you been able to fend against it yet?

I thought I was being clear but I'll say it again. I'm telling you that you're confused. Your "key point" is irrelevant when it comes to the basic contention that lifting restrictions on research is a good thing. For most readers of this thread I am making an obvious point.

In addition, it's also obvious that lifting federal restrictions has very little to do with how much funding ESCR will receive (other than that it is not guaranteed to be zero). And besides, you've neglected to mention a major point, which is that ESCs will be used in conjunction with other lines of research. So there's not going to be a clear demarcation between ESCR and the rest of bio-medical research.

Anyhow, addressing the merits of ESCR on this thread would only confused the issue of intellectual/scientific freedom - which is why I've refused to take your bait.

[Prometheus]

I never thought I would be saying this but is Bush the godfather of inducible pluripotent stem cells (IPS)? Could Bush be the catalyst for stem cell treatments that have already arrived in the clinic? Could it be that due to his and his constituency's scientifically uninspired views that one of the most significant stem cell discoveries - IPS - came about? We have seen time and time again that innovation thrives on constraint and once again this proved true. Faced with absurd and unprecedented restrictions on stem cell research, scientists had no choice but to channel their resources into deriving high pluripotency stem cells without resorting to the embryo. And they succeeded magnificently. Companies such as Mesoblast and Osiris would not have had their pipeline accelerated into clinic-ready stem cell therapeutics were it not for this ban. In fact, were it not for this restriction they may today not be operating at all.

It's difficult to envisage precisely how stem cell science would have evolved without Bush's 8-year enforced moratorium but I think what we would have seen is a lot of research into directing ES fate and many bungled experiments that would have generated bad press. The technical reality is that in order to use ES in the clinic we have to direct them to some restricted lineage otherwise they will spontaneously form teratomas as soon as they are removed from highly controlled culture conditions let alone engrafted. In effect they must be turned into a type of adult cell which is no longer totipotent. This point was correctly raised by luv2increase.

Importantly, what we now know is that its more difficult to control immunogeneic potential than it is to control cell lineage because we still don't have a handle on altering histocompatibility (but some adult stem cells like mesenchymals, when grafted, have the unique ability to calm down graft versus host response) but we can now take a terminally differentiated cell and induce it to pluripotency which largely solves that problem. Ideally, having stem cell lines that are universally histocompatible is the way of the future but we haven't gotten there yet.

I think Bush's moratorium may have given the science an opportunity to mature and rethink itself. I was besides myself when I first heard of it but now I think it was not so bad after all. Obama has lifted the chains at the right time.

[DJS]

I never thought I would be saying this but is Bush the godfather of inducible pluripotent stem cells (IPS)? Could Bush be the catalyst for stem cell treatments that have already arrived in the clinic? Could it be that due to his and his constituency's scientifically uninspired views that one of the most significant stem cell discoveries - IPS - came about? We have seen time and time again that innovation thrives on constraint and once again this proved true. Faced with absurd and unprecedented restrictions on stem cell research, scientists had no choice but to channel their resources into deriving high pluripotency stem cells without resorting to the embryo. And they succeeded magnificently. Companies such as Mesoblast and Osiris would not have had their pipeline accelerated into clinic-ready stem cell therapeutics were it not for this ban. In fact, were it not for this restriction they may today not be operating at all.

It's difficult to envisage precisely how stem cell science would have evolved without Bush's 8-year enforced moratorium but I think what we would have seen is a lot of research into directing ES fate and many bungled experiments that would have generated bad press.

Just a few quick points because I'm running out the door.

First, the iPS break through happened in Japan where there were/are no restrictions on ESCR. So why weren't they engaged in lots of bungled ESC experiments that "would have generated bad press"? I would contend that the reason is that change in the prevailing research trajectory of the scientific community had very little to do with restriction on federal funding in the US, but instead had a lot to do with scientists recognizing where the more promising lines of research were and pursuing them. (And further, most stem cell specialist have always been bearish about using ESCs directly for treatments). I think you're assigning credit where no credit is due.

Second, without having an adequate understanding of how ESCs grow, what nutrients they require, what mitogens are needed, etc; the creation of iPS cells may have taken many more years. Inotherwords, the iPS breakthrough is largely attributal to our knowledge of ESCs.

I think Bush's moratorium may have given the science an opportunity to mature and rethink itself. I was besides myself when I first heard of it but now I think it was not so bad after all. Obama has lifted the chains at the right time.

I'm out of time to respond, but I must say that I emphatically disagree about the value of Bush's executive order. I'll respond more when I have time.

[niner]

I never thought I would be saying this but is Bush the godfather of inducible pluripotent stem cells (IPS)? Could Bush be the catalyst for stem cell treatments that have already arrived in the clinic? Could it be that due to his and his constituency's scientifically uninspired views that one of the most significant stem cell discoveries - IPS - came about? We have seen time and time again that innovation thrives on constraint and once again this proved true.

Bush was the catalyst for a lot of things, like the rise of the Shi'a Crescent, the death and injury of countless people, the further damaging of Earth and its economy, but IPS? I don't think so. I would say that the development of IPS was driven more by the difficulty of transferring the patient's genome to the ESC than anything else. If innovation really thrives on constraint, then lets outlaw PCR and chromatography. That should result in all kinds of innovation.

[Prometheus]

First, the iPS break through happened in Japan where there were/are no restrictions on ESCR. So why weren't they engaged in lots of bungled ESC experiments that "would have generated bad press"? I would contend that the reason is that change in the prevailing research trajectory of the scientific community had very little to do with restriction on federal funding in the US, but instead had a lot to do with scientists recognizing where the more promising lines of research were and pursuing them. (And further, most stem cell specialist have always been bearish about using ESCs directly for treatments). I think you're assigning credit where no credit is due.

Lol.. I knew someone was bound to pick that up.. An astute observation. However, the Japanese were not ignorant of the legal and ethical ramifications in developing technology that underpinned an appropriate stem cell therapeutic strategy. The global trends were unequivocal.

I'm not calling them IPS anymore - they're BS - Bush-inspired Stem cells. Tremendous stuff. The ex-Pres may be eligible for a Nobel.

@ niner: you would be surprised at the inventiveness in the lab when reagents and equipment are lacking! PCR and chromatography are ancient technologies anyway!

[DJS]

However, the Japanese were not ignorant of the legal and ethical ramifications in developing technology that underpinned an appropriate stem cell therapeutic strategy. The global trends were unequivocal.

You're presenting an interesting counter argument.

Basically what I'm arguing is that the reason that we (collectively) arrived at iPS is because it's where the research led us.

Conversly, you're arguing that a ethical/socio-political road block forced science to come up with an (alternative) novel solution (iPS). At the heart of this contention is the assumption that all other nations of the world take marching orders from the US. Versus my view which is that the US, while often a leader in research because of the structure and sheer size of its economy, is not immune from falling behind other nations when its public policy is intentionally putting the brakes on research.

One could argue argue that because of the chilling effect of restricted funding to ESCR in the US, the iPS breakthrough was actually delayed.

So cleawrly, we're interpreting events differently. But in any event, it's besides the point since we're now both in agreement that lifting federal restriction on ESCR is a good thing.

[sUper GeNius]

Ideally, having stem cell lines that are universally histocompatible is the way of the future but we haven't gotten there yet.

I think Bush's moratorium may have given the science an opportunity to mature and rethink itself. I was besides myself when I first heard of it but now I think it was not so bad after all. Obama has lifted the chains at the right time.

Uh oh, a guy who knows what he's talking about enters the fray.

[Prometheus]

a ethical/socio-political road block forced science to come up with an (alternative) novel solution (iPS). At the heart of this contention is the assumption that all other nations of the world take marching orders from the US.

You've summed up my position better than I did.
I can think of worse places than the US for the scientific world to take marching orders from.

Versus my view which is that the US, while often a leader in research because of the structure and sheer size of its economy, is not immune from falling behind other nations when its public policy is intentionally putting the brakes on research.

One could argue argue that because of the chilling effect of restricted funding to ESCR in the US, the iPS breakthrough was actually delayed.

You could, but to do yourself justice you need to have an understanding of the sentiment in scientific circles at that time. Maybe Mondey could chime in and give us her views of the European perspective. In Australia ESC research was fairly taboo and scientific investigators are not a particularly politically activist bunch, rather they live in constant anxiety from grant to grant. Terrible way to operate (but that's another matter). The only country that continued to conduct some (fairly ordinary) ESC research at that time was China but nothing defining came out of that work. In China it was 'lets shove some ESCs here and see what happens' attitude. And rather than playing around with mice they were doing it on their own population.

I really believe Bush's stance actually forced innovation. From a personal perspective I went from a thought paradigm of ESCs being a panacea to looking at mesenchymals, which are far more interesting (in my view) and therapeutically viable. This would not have happened if there was a blank cheque on ESCs. Then, everybody would have been looking at ways to restrict them prior to grafting, which is what adult cells do anyway, and the problem of immunogenicity would still need to be resolved. Probably an area we have fallen behind in, is technology to enable more rapid testing of pharmaceutical toxicity and efficacy using human tissue models grown in the lab.

So cleawrly, we're interpreting events differently. But in any event, it's besides the point since we're now both in agreement that lifting federal restriction on ESCR is a good thing.

Yep, its a good time now. Brave new world stuff. Grad students growing human teratomas in petri dishes. Maybe one may get flushed down a NY toilet, and still viable, encounter a whole new culture medium..

[DJS]

You could, but to do yourself justice you need to have an understanding of the sentiment in scientific circles at that time....

From a personal perspective I went from a thought paradigm of ESCs being a panacea to looking at mesenchymals, which are far more interesting (in my view) and therapeutically viable. This would not have happened if there was a blank cheque on ESCs. Then, everybody would have been looking at ways to restrict them prior to grafting, which is what adult cells do anyway, and the problem of immunogenicity would still need to be resolved.

Again, and with all due respect, I'm going to dispute some of the contentions you're making here.

I'm not arguing that bioethics didn't have some level of influence on the process. I'm sure that even less culturally encumbered countries like Japan had their finger on the pulse when the previous US adminstration was trying to push the thera-repro ban through the UN. However, if a researcher team in Japan could've gain a competitive advantage via ESCs, then I believe they would have taken it since clearly it would have been in their best interest to do so. I really don't think the arrival of iPS was determined by ethics as much as it was the empirical realities which researchers were starting to uncover. I remember even back in 05 (04?) heavy hitters like Jaenisch were voicing their opinion that SCNT had potentially insurmountable technical issues and was not a viable option. So I'm at a loss as to why you'd think researchers world wide would voluntarily lead themselves down a blind alley...

BTW, none of this is to say that there wasn't (and isn't) value in ESCR. The fallacy (which luv2 repeated over and over again) that "no treatments have been developed and therefore no progress has been made with ESCs" demonstrates a certain amount of confusion over how to evaluate science.

Sometimes many years of basic research are necessary before a level of applied science is reached. Therefore, especially when dealing with such a nascent subfield, measuring progress only by clinical trials is inappropriate. If we were to view the creation of iPS cells as progress then, without question, our knowledge of ESCs played a crucial role.

(On a side note, am I the only one who finds it quite ironic that moral conservativism has failed to place iPSC in the same category as ESC? ... not that I'm complaining!)

So cleawrly, we're interpreting events differently. But in any event, it's besides the point since we're now both in agreement that lifting federal restriction on ESCR is a good thing.

Yep, its a good time now. Brave new world stuff. Grad students growing human teratomas in petri dishes. Maybe one may get flushed down a NY toilet, and still viable, encounter a whole new culture medium..

Viable in what sense?

Regardless, 60 to 80% of human sanctity is already getting flushed. X files may be on to something but I'm not too worried as I generally try to stay above ground.

[Prometheus]

Viable as in still alive and able to survive the transition to their new culture medium - sewage. (it was a joke)

I must say that in my view ESCs are much harder to control than any other type of SC and more importantly they offer less therapeutic value (but they offer great pure research value). Unless there was a compelling reason to use ESCs for clinical purposes I would prefer to take the least challenging ethical road.

[eternaltraveler]

http://www.independe...od-1651715.html