We think prescription drugs are expensive, I wonder how much a heart grown from your own skin cells would cost you.

Looks like the pro-lifers are going to win this debate. "Saving lives" and "ending suffering" are no longer an excuse to kill fetuses.

Thank God those human beings as embryos aren't being murdered by this Joseph Mengele Anymore. He should still get capital punishment for the humans he slaughtered in the name of "progress".

-Pinche Mao.

"Saving lives" and "ending suffering" are no longer an excuse to kill fetuses.

Guess you expect fertility clinics to close too, right? After all, they discard embryos constantly.

Curses! Foiled again! Just when I was all set to order a Jessica Alba clone, the factory closes down. Oh well...nature abhors a vacuum, so it's just a matter of time before someone else steps up an says "I'll drive that tanker."

Looks like the pro-lifers are going to win this debate. "Saving lives" and "ending suffering" are no longer an excuse to kill fetuses.
Posted by alwaysright at 2007-11-18 01:39 AM

I'm abstaining from coffee and it's killing my ability to focus while stoned. I'll try my best for you.

Ethically, rather than Professor Wilmut resign the post enforce a corrected regime. This is the commonly ethical science versus corporate science. We are talking about a "lead" scientist in this particular field, not the average celebrinerd. He could have landed on Oprah in a friggin' heartbeat (or Emiril in a more Harkonnen universe - "You take your fetus and ... BAM!").

Humanity ABSOLUTELY REQUIRE less-invasive methods of scientific examination. Even the great sage Marlin Perkins never seriously harmed an animal during drugging and tagging. This is human life we are dealing with. Not unlike our own. One might easily argue that those poor minds suffering a daily grind of "murder" don't deserve ridicule from the Christian community, but pity. They are someones child become successful enough to join an elite medical community, and competent enough to work on experimental sciences. They are our most talented, insightful, many times spiritual beings thrust into a corporate-controlled practice where they are required to perform distasteful duties which now include ethical and moral suicide.

We probably shouldn't risk inhibiting the right for life to exist. Our focus should be better instruments and methods.

Arg, I've just been called in to work - they are lucky that I slept last night. L8r.

Baaaaaaaa...addd move!

So when the potential for regenerating life is possible to extract from every living cell in our bodies, the prolifers will be screaming bloody murder everytime we scrap our knees.

Prolifers think you can put a skin cell in an enucleated egg and that skin cell suddenly becomes a person. why? because that produces pluripotent stem cells?

Soon technology will allow a host cell to regenerate pluripotent stem cells without the egg, and just because pluripotent cells can be derived from existing DNA that qualifies thier potential as a person? NO.

What prolifers fail to realize is that life is not a specific moment, life is a continuum and the blurring of what constitutes life from black and white becomes grey.

Im confused, why is this process any different morally than SCNT?


it says Wilmut, who works at Edinburgh University, believes a rival method pioneered in Japan has better potential for making human embryonic cells


So its ok to coax ES Cells which are pluripotent from a skin cell in a lab, but its not ok to derive the same ES Cells from an enucleated egg and skin cell in a lab dish?! I fail to understand why one is some sort of moral imparitive over the other... they are both producing pluripotent cells in an ideal situation.

Of course the anti-clone baby savers will argue that this solution is morally acceptable, as they are to ignorant to realize its basically the same thing.

Of course the anti-clone baby savers will argue that this solution is morally acceptable, as they are to ignorant to realize its basically the same thing.
Posted by Repugnant at 2007-11-19 04:02 PM

I'm fairly certain that we are all opposed to clones for the same basic reasons, but I'm not sure I understand your point. Professor Wilmut is understandably upset regarding the destruction of the embryo, not the collection of samples from it.

Do you think "baby savers" are opposed to cloning organs such as skin, or just the entire entity?