1
   

Laura Bush vs. Science

 
 
Reply Mon 9 Aug, 2004 03:36 pm
First Lady Bashes Kerry Stem Cell Stancehere and you will, as Paul Harvey would say, know the rest of the story!)

Perhaps someone should inform Mrs. Bush how science works. Yes, we don't know if stem cell research will yield any miracle cures. THAT'S WHY WE NEED TO DO THE RESEARCH YOU NINNY!

Oh well, looks like the First Lady has been recruited in her husband's "war against science".
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 6,774 • Replies: 134
No top replies

 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Aug, 2004 03:40 pm
Well, duh, Joe . . .


Obviously she's a ninny, look who she married . . .
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Aug, 2004 03:41 pm
Point well taken, Set.
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Aug, 2004 03:43 pm
Some posters have opined that Teresa Heinz Kerry scares them. I'll tell you who scares me: The Stepford First Lady...
0 Replies
 
Rick d Israeli
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Aug, 2004 03:45 pm
What's Bush's stand on condoms? I saw a documentary on Belgian television (originally it was a BBC documentary) about condoms, and the Catholic Church saying condoms have 'holes' in it and 'up to 15% can leak and spread HIV/AIDS'. It was very interesting to see how an enormous amount of scientists proved this statement to be completely false.
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Aug, 2004 03:47 pm
Bush's stand on preventing HIV/AIDS is to promote abstinence. He'll get no argument from the priests for that kind of progressive thinking...
0 Replies
 
Rick d Israeli
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Aug, 2004 03:49 pm
Theoretically that would be the best way to prevent the spread. But in real life, it's not, especially not in Africa (as the documentary also showed).
0 Replies
 
princesspupule
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Aug, 2004 04:08 pm
Re: Laura Bush vs. Science
joefromchicago wrote:

Oh well, looks like the First Lady has been recruited in her husband's "war against science".


Joe, you can't say Bush has a "war against science," when he is ordering supercomputers to employ in the "war on terrorism." http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99996235
0 Replies
 
Karzak
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Aug, 2004 04:11 pm
Re: Laura Bush vs. Science
joefromchicago wrote:
THAT'S WHY WE NEED TO DO THE RESEARCH YOU NINNY!


LOL, we are researching stem cells. Who's the ninny now?
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Aug, 2004 04:33 pm
LOL boy is back!
0 Replies
 
Gala
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Aug, 2004 05:01 pm
rick, an interesting bit of trivia-- bush sr., long before he became president, was a strong supporter of condom use.
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Aug, 2004 05:10 pm
Too bad he didn't start using them before W was born...
0 Replies
 
Gala
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Aug, 2004 05:44 pm
good point, d'artagan. i forget what the nicknmae they had for him, but it was something like "rubber-boy".
0 Replies
 
princesspupule
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Aug, 2004 08:31 pm
There's a little bit more to "the rest of the story," Joe. Didja know that researchers are having luck coaxing adult stem cells into becoming something else? I think I read about them doing something like this w/insulin, too... These breakthroughs will prove what ninnies the Bushes are... and I can't help but think of Galileo and the Catholic Church and making him renounce science since it didn't jive w/church teaching on the topic at the time...

http://www.ajc.com/health/content/shared-auto/healthnews/park/518652.html

Bone Marrow Cells Can Become Brain Stem Cells

THURSDAY, April 29 (HealthDayNews) -- Cells found in a patient's own bone marrow might someday be a safe, ethical source for replacing brain cells lost to Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and other neurological conditions, researchers report.

The potential breakthrough may also allow doctors to bypass complex moral issues surrounding the use of stem cells derived from human embryos.

"It's exciting to think that some day a person with Alzheimer's disease could use their own bone marrow to create brain cells that could potentially restore their functioning and make up for cells that were lost," lead researcher Dr. Alexander Storch of the University of Ulm, Germany, said in a statement.

The research was presented Thursday in San Francisco at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology.

The profound disability that characterizes degenerative brain disorders such as Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, Huntington's and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (Lou Gehrig's disease) is caused by the steady destruction of cells within the brain. Experts have long speculated that the introduction of new brain cells could restore neurological function.

Stem cells are unique in that they have the potential to convert into any type of cell found in the body -- heart, bone, muscle, organ, even brain cells. Stem cell research has come under fire in recent years, however, due to moral issues surrounding the use of cells sourced from human embryos.

Looking for less controversial alternatives, Storch and his team focused on a type of cell found in bone marrow called the stromal cell.

"Bone marrow is the repository of a lot of tissues in the body," explained Samuel Saporta, a brain disease expert at the University of South Florida's Center for Aging & Brain Repair, in Miami. "It's the source of white blood cells and red blood cells, and the stromal cells can be the source for other kinds of tissues as well."

The German researchers removed stromal cells from human bone marrow and then cultured them in the lab using special growth factors.

Within a few weeks these bone marrow stromal cells had multiplied into "neuroprogenitor cells" -- brain stem cells capable of maturing into either neurons or glial cells, the two most common types of neural cells.

The fact that Storch's team used human bone marrow cells is what makes this study "unique," Saporta said.

"People have taken rat and mouse bone marrow and have pushed it into a neuronal, glial type of cell, but these researchers are taking from the knowledge that's been gained from the animal model and applied it to humans," he said.

Saporta cautioned, however, that it's one thing to create brain stem cells, and quite another to get them to survive and thrive within the brain. "You have to get them into the brain or the nervous system someplace," he said. "They have to engraft into the nervous system and actually form some kind of functional arrangement with the existing cells, if we're talking about cell replacement therapy."

So far, in experiments done with cell replacement in the human heart, "not a lot of the cells survive," Saporta noted. "That's the real challenge."

Still, cells derived from a patient's own bone marrow would provide a way around certain medical and moral issues.

Tissue transplants sourced from other than the patient's own body can be rejected by the body's immune system, Saporta pointed out. Suppressing this immune response with powerful drugs "is very, very onerous therapy, it's really hard on the individual and the system," he said. "If you can find a way of minimizing the amount of immunosuppression you have to do -- or not have to do any at all --- that's the ideal situation."

Stem cells derived from bone marrow stromal cells also avoid moral and legal issues surrounding embryonic stem cells. "Bone marrow donations are done all the time, there are thousands done every day in the United States," Saporta said. "There's not the ethical issue here of obtaining stem cells from an embryo."

Bone marrow now joins the growing list of body sites with known reservoirs of stem cells or "stem-like" cells, Saporta added. "People have already described stem-like cells in fat tissue, in bone, skin, and in tooth pulp. Each organ seems to have its own niche of stem-like cells. Even the brain has stem cells that produce neurons," he said.

However, much more research lies ahead before stem cell research translates into effective bedside therapies. "The problem is that we don't understand enough about the 'instructions set' that makes the stem cell become what we would like it to become," Saporta said. "A lot more basic biology needs to be done."

More information

Information on stem cell research and its implications for the treatment of disease can be found at the National Institutes of Health and Northwestern University.
0 Replies
 
El-Diablo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Aug, 2004 08:37 pm
SOunds good. Theres not logical reason to be opposed to stem cell, exept for petty religious motives.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Aug, 2004 08:40 pm
Re: Laura Bush vs. Science
LOLKarzak wrote:
LOL, we are researching stem cells. Who's the ninny now?

Present company excepted?

princesspupule wrote:
There's a little bit more to "the rest of the story," Joe. Didja know that researchers are having luck coaxing adult stem cells into becoming something else? I think I read about them doing something like this w/insulin, too... These breakthroughs will prove what ninnies the Bushes are... and I can't help but think of Galileo and the Catholic Church and making him renounce science since it didn't jive w/church teaching on the topic at the time...

An apt analogy.
0 Replies
 
Karzak
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Aug, 2004 09:29 am
Re: Laura Bush vs. Science
joefromchicago wrote:
LOLKarzak wrote:
LOL, we are researching stem cells. Who's the ninny now?

Present company excepted?


LOL, no, I am not excepting you.

Stem cell research has not been reduced under Bush, it continues. If someone can prove that harvesting stem cells from human beings against their will is proper, then we can redress it. For now, however, the proper course is the current one, to wait and see if stem cells actually can do some good.
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Aug, 2004 09:57 am
LOL, Karzak. Your knowledge of appropriate research methods is based on what, I'm wondering?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Aug, 2004 09:58 am
I can field that one . . . based upon Fox News, speculation, superstition and a bone-headed partisan devotion . . .
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Aug, 2004 10:04 am
Quote:
Stem cell research has not been reduced under Bush, it continues.


This is categorically wrong. Please do some research, Karzak....

Current limitations on stem cell research are putting the U.S. way behind other countries in this critical area of bioscience. I happen to work with a proffessor of neurobiology here at U.T. and we were just discussing how terrible the Bush policy is.

There is a massive amount of evidence that shows that the study of stem cells could lead to dramatic jumps in our knowledge of brain and organ development.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Laura Bush vs. Science
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/26/2020 at 10:18:29