PDA

View Full Version : Embryonic stem cell research: Obama takes two steps forward, two steps back



Little-Acorn
03-20-2009, 12:39 PM
On Monday, President Obama signed an Executive order that lifted previous Pres. Bush's order banning Federal funds from being used in research that killed new embryos for their stem cells.

Two days later, Obama signed the Omnibus Spending Bill into law. It contained a passage that has been in every such bill since 1996, forbidding such funding once again. Since Obama's Executive Order said that funding would be restored only to the extent permitted by law, that means that this spending bill's ban on funds, supersedes any permission in the Ecec Order.

Apparently Congressmen on both sides knew the passage was in the bill, and did nothing to change it or take it out, despite large Democrat majorities in both houses of Congress.

When does "change we can believe in" start, anyway?

---------------------------------------

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=44943

Obama Signs Law Banning Federal Embryo Research Two Days After Signing Executive Order to OK It

By Terence P. Jeffrey, Editor-in-Chief
Friday, March 13, 2009

President Barack Obama (AP Photo) (CNSNews.com) - On Wednesday, only two days after he lifted President Bush’s executive order banning federal funding of stem cell research that requires the destruction of human embryos, President Barack Obama signed a law that explicilty bans federal funding of any "research in which a human embryo or embryos are destroyed, discarded, or knowingly subjected to risk of injury or death."

The provision was buried in the 465-page omnibus appropriations bill that Obama signed Wednesday. Known as the Dickey-Wicker amendment, it has been included in the annual appropriations bill for the Department of Health and Human Services every fiscal year since 1996.

The amendment says, in part: "None of the funds made available in this Act may be used for—(1) the creation of a human embryo or embryos for research purposes; or (2) research in which a human embryo or embryos are destroyed, discarded, or knowingly subjected to risk of injury or death."

Found in Section 509 of Title V of the omnibus bill (at page 280 of the 465-page document), the federal funding ban not only prohibits the government from providing tax dollars to support research that kills or risks injury to a human embryo, it also mandates that the government use an all-inclusive definition of “human embryo” that encompasses any nascent human life from the moment that life comes into being, even if created in a laboratory through cloning, in vitro fertilization or any other means.

(snip)

At a widely publicized White House ceremony on Monday, President Obama signed his own executive order lifting an executive order that President Bush had signed in 2001. While allowing federal funding of research involving embryonic stem cell lines that had already been created from embryos that had already been destroyed, Bush's 2001 order denied federal funding to research that required the killing of any additional embryos.

(snip)

Close observers on both sides of the embryonic stem cell issue were well aware of the Dickey-Wicker amendment, and understood that it would pose a legal obstacle to federal funding of embryo-killing research even if President Obama issued an executive order reversing President Bush's administrative policy denying federal funding to that research.


(Full text of the article can be read at the URL listed above)

Abbey Marie
03-20-2009, 12:53 PM
...
When does "change we can believe in" start, anyway?
...


Hopefully, January, 2013.

Little-Acorn
03-20-2009, 01:05 PM
At this rate, do you realize just how badly Republicans will have to suck, to lose the 2012 elections?

I'm not saying they can't do it - they were racking up quite a record for miserable liberal legislation themselves for a while. But the bar is being set VERY high (or low) by the Obama administration - and all in the first two months of the administration.

DannyR
03-20-2009, 03:17 PM
According to the law:
“For the purposes of this section,” says the law, “the term ‘human embryo or embryos’ includes any organism … that is derived by fertilization, parthenogenesis, cloning, or any other means from one or more human gametes or human diploid cells.”

So the answer is simple. Obama needs to do exactly what Clinton said, and only use human embryos that are not fertilized! :laugh2:

But seriously, was this something Dems didn't have the votes necessary to remove, and thus it was either veto the bill or leave it in? Or did Obama just not know it was in there?

Kathianne
03-20-2009, 03:25 PM
Hopefully, January, 2013.

I'm hoping Jan. 2011. ;)

sgtdmski
03-20-2009, 06:19 PM
YOu know all the hoopla about lifting this ban and yet, the ban remains. Newsflash, despite the lies of the MSM about Bush and spending, former President Bush actually increased spending for stem cell research, he only cut spending for embryonic stem cell research.

Well, what happened, I guess the world missed the news reports about the scientists in Japan and in California that were able to create stem cells from skin cells. (http://www.wired.com/medtech/stemcells/news/2007/11/skin_cell)

Imagine that, stem cells that the body would actually recognize as one's own, meaning, no drugs to suppress the immune system.

dmk

PostmodernProphet
03-20-2009, 08:00 PM
Well, what happened, I guess the world missed the news reports about the scientists in Japan and in California that were able to create stem cells from skin cells. (http://www.wired.com/medtech/stemcells/news/2007/11/skin_cell)


they didn't miss it.....it's simply that the secular support behind embryonic research has nothing to do with scientific need.....they seek it as a means of shaping acceptance of abortion, not as a way to cure disease.....

DannyR
03-20-2009, 08:30 PM
they didn't miss it.....it's simply that the secular support behind embryonic research has nothing to do with scientific need.....they seek it as a means of shaping acceptance of abortion, not as a way to cure disease.....

The need is certainly there.

Embryonic research has been necessary because its where most of the discoveries have occurred, as the embryonic stem cells have a lot more potential than adult ones.

Someone who doesn't know much about the research looks at a list like this (http://www.stemcellresearch.org/facts/treatments.htm) and wonders why anyone would even bother with embryonic cells. But the fact of the matter is that pretty much EVERY advance that is possible with adult cells was pioneered with research done first on embryonic cells. Adult lines at this time just haven't had the potential of the embryonic ones.

Why is this? Its really simple. As yet, adult cell lines are not immortal. Its still impossible to continue a line indefinitely. This means most researchers can't do the basic science on the adult lines because the results are compromised if they have to continually change lines frequently.



Imagine that, stem cells that the body would actually recognize as one's own, meaning, no drugs to suppress the immune system. Yes, most cures require adult cells for just this reason. Again, the point of researching embryonic cells is not to implant them as you would adult cells. Their use lies in their properties that adult cells do not yet have. The development of stem cells from skin would not have occurred nearly as quickly without all the research done first on the embryonic cells.

Now its possible in the near future that embryonic cells will no longer be necessary. But their use until now is what has made this even possible.

PostmodernProphet
03-20-2009, 08:56 PM
as the embryonic stem cells have a lot more potential than adult ones.


you should have read the article.....that simply isn't true any more......

DannyR
03-20-2009, 09:15 PM
Eh? I'm guessing you didn't understand my point. The article didn't discuss germline immortality at all.

Yes, the 4 gene treatment allows one to create a pluripotent stem cell from a non-stem cell. Thats what they meant when they talked about creating an adult stem cell with the potential of the embryonic.

However pluripotency (what the article talks about), isn't the same as immortality (the ability of a germ-line to continually replicate itself).

And as yet, creating continual lines of adult stem cells for research purposes has still been difficult. Embryonic stem cell lines still have the advantage here, which is why they are still used by researchers who need reliable tests using the same genetic line with every experiment.

Eventually that will change, but doing a quick search, I don't think we are there yet.

PostmodernProphet
03-20-2009, 10:26 PM
Eh? I'm guessing you didn't understand my point.

that you aren't ready to give up killing children for science yet?........

DannyR
03-20-2009, 10:29 PM
Embryonic stem cell lines aren't kids. None of the federally approved cells researchers use today were ever embryos (nor their predecessors back several hundred generations!). They have absolutely no potential of becoming kids. All the 21 lines feds approve of were all developed almost 10 years ago. You want to just dump the lines totally?

Now new lines might be vaguely interpreted as "killing" something, but not really. The "potential" kid had absolutely zero potential of becoming an adult. And the "life" isn't killed, but just transformed into a germline. Still alive. Same potential of becoming an adult (absolutely none).

PostmodernProphet
03-21-2009, 06:40 AM
None of the federally approved cells researchers use today were ever embryos

????....you can pretend that embryos aren't kids, but you can't pretend that research didn't involve embryos......that is obviously self-deception taken to the extreme......


The "potential" kid had absolutely zero potential of becoming an adult.

sorry, another self-deception.....it had full potential of becoming an adult until it was killed to harvest it's cells.....

DannyR
03-21-2009, 10:13 AM
????....you can pretend that embryos aren't kids, but you can't pretend that research didn't involve embryos......that is obviously self-deception taken to the extreme.The federally approved embryonic stem cell lines were once embryo's, certainly. A couple hundred generations ago.

Refusing to use them today however is like holding a grudge against the British because they shot a couple of your ancestors during the Revolutionary War.



it had full potential of becoming an adult until it was killed to harvest it's cells.....The self deception is believing these embryos ever had a purpose other than to develop stem cells. Oh, yeah, forgot they did. They otherwise would have been tossed in the trash as medical waste.

PostmodernProphet
03-21-2009, 01:44 PM
The self deception is believing these embryos ever had a purpose other than to develop stem cells. Oh, yeah, forgot they did. They otherwise would have been tossed in the trash as medical waste.

of course they had a purpose......and they could have filled that purpose if they had been released for adoption.....

http://www.embryodonation.org/

PostmodernProphet
03-21-2009, 01:45 PM
The federally approved embryonic stem cell lines were once embryo's, certainly. A couple hundred generations ago.

are you saying you favored the Bush solution of limiting research to pre-existing embryonic lines?......

DannyR
03-21-2009, 02:20 PM
are you saying you favored the Bush solution of limiting research to pre-existing embryonic lines?

No. But its better than some people's desire to eliminate it entirely.

PostmodernProphet
03-21-2009, 03:55 PM
No. But its better than some people's desire to eliminate it entirely.

if research is not limited to that approach, your argument about existing lines is irrelevant......the current plan is to open research to creating new lines.....