Stem Cells. Pro or Con?
17-10-2004 18:14
к комментариям - к полной версии
- понравилось!
What do _you_ think?
My own take is not hard to guess. I'm a staunching advocate. There are a number of good scientific and ethical reasons to allocate fedeal funding for the stem-cell research. But one rhetoric stands out, especially in debates on stem-cell ethics: What is more (or rather less) ethical, slaughtering scores of Iraqis in a meaningless and shameful war having had lost over 1000 of own people, or NOT looking for cures of terminal deseases that kill millions.
Laura Bush, whose father has Alzheimer's (and thus dying from it), opposes the spending of federal funds. Mind you, she might not, deep in her heart, oppose the research that can eventually help her father and millions of other inflicted. She opposes the federal spending on the basis of inevitable destruction of embryos, never mind that they were made in a lab's petri dish, and not via an intercourse, as she'd like it to happen.
Catholics who obviously are not fond of anything what's going on in the labs will have another chance to choke off the hope for people. First they were afraid of God's wrath when first petri-dish babies were made. Now, they decided, it's OK to do that. Of course even Catholics benefit from the IVF -- it works even on them, and they are happy to be mothers and fathers when all other options are exausted. So now those embryos which, according to law, belong to no one, are being made into a cure. And this is a big no-no. What are they going to do when, god forbid, their boys and girls develop juvenile diabeties or muscular distrophy. I wonder if they have ever seen a child and a parent going through 3 or 4 agonizing years of slow death from the muscular distrophy? What really saddens me is when a paraplegic Catholic with Parkinson's votes for Bush; it's not unlike voting to be euthanized.
And how pathetic and insincere it looks when the administration runs around arguing for the preservation of reserach ethics and showing off its allegiance to the stem-cell research with an appropriation bill of $35M for its funding when $200B !!!! is committed to the war!!!
In the end it all boils down to fundamentalism vs. progressive thinking. There is no place for the ideology in the midst of science.
вверх^
к полной версии
понравилось!
в evernote
What do _you_ think?
My own take is not hard to guess. I'm a staunching advocate. There are a number of good scientific and ethical reasons to allocate fedeal funding for the stem-cell research. But one rhetoric stands out, especially in debates on stem-cell ethics: What is more (or rather less) ethical, slaughtering scores of Iraqis in a meaningless and shameful war having had lost over 1000 of own people, or NOT looking for cures of terminal deseases that kill millions.
Laura Bush, whose father has Alzheimer's (and thus dying from it), opposes the spending of federal funds. Mind you, she might not, deep in her heart, oppose the research that can eventually help her father and millions of other inflicted. She opposes the federal spending on the basis of inevitable destruction of embryos, never mind that they were made in a lab's petri dish, and not via an intercourse, as she'd like it to happen.
Catholics who obviously are not fond of anything what's going on in the labs will have another chance to choke off the hope for people. First they were afraid of God's wrath when first petri-dish babies were made. Now, they decided, it's OK to do that. Of course even Catholics benefit from the IVF -- it works even on them, and they are happy to be mothers and fathers when all other options are exausted. So now those embryos which, according to law, belong to no one, are being made into a cure. And this is a big no-no. What are they going to do when, god forbid, their boys and girls develop juvenile diabeties or muscular distrophy. I wonder if they have ever seen a child and a parent going through 3 or 4 agonizing years of slow death from the muscular distrophy? What really saddens me is when a paraplegic Catholic with Parkinson's votes for Bush; it's not unlike voting to be euthanized.
And how pathetic and insincere it looks when the administration runs around arguing for the preservation of reserach ethics and showing off its allegiance to the stem-cell research with an appropriation bill of $35M for its funding when $200B !!!! is committed to the war!!!
In the end it all boils down to fundamentalism vs. progressive thinking. There is no place for the ideology in the midst of science.
Комментарии (5):
Все правильно и очень грустно. Все замешано на деньгах, а победить деньги могут только те же деньги. Когда станет совершенно понятно, что исследования производимые в данной (я не специалист) области способны приносить реальные деньги, т.е. будет возможно их реальное применение, то все начнет поворачиваться в другую сторону. Медицина это тоже бизнес, как ни цинично это звучит, и прибыль ни кто упускать не будет. Потребность в средствах для лечения того же детского диабета колосальна, это сумашедшие деньги и огромный рынок для медицинских корпораций. Так вот как только там запахнет реальными деньгами найдется лобби, раздадутся взятки и в силу вступят нормальные законы рынка. Остается надеятся, что г-н Буш и Ко не успеют развалить все до такой степени, когда уже и перспективы получения прибыли не сработают. Конечно, тут получается некий замкнутый круг: нет денег на исследования, нет результатов, нет денег на исследования. К счастью, здесь много частных компаний, которые на зависят от федерального финансирования, денег у них не так много, что существенно замедляет процесс, но он идет.
They say that this might create more incentives for abortions. Personally I think that there's such a possibility. Did you personally indicate on your driver's license that you'd like to be a donor?
I didn't. Same issue.
However, I think that we need the research. It's just that you have to get the parent's consent prior to that.
I didn't. Same issue.
However, I think that we need the research. It's just that you have to get the parent's consent prior to that.
Исходное сообщение Monna
They say that this might create more incentives for abortions.
what is 'that?'
Did you personally indicate on your driver's license that you'd like to be a donor?
I have, indeed.
I didn't. Same issue.
why not? I mean, here is a clear-cut issue -- to enable someone to live, to perform an act of an ultimate benevolence. Tell me what are you going to do with your organs when you're dead? Are you gong to let them jut rot? You can, if you die a traumatic death, enable up to 6 people to continue to live!!! You'll save 6 people! How many times in your life would you have such a chance?
How about simple humanitaruan benefits if heroism is not your plate?
Death. It doesn't hav to be boring!
However, I think that we need the research.
Are you suggesting it's a matter of discussion!!!???
that - using fetus to isolate stem cells.
donor thing:
I don't know. I guess I've heard too many horror stories about how your being a donor reduces your chances of being saved in the ER. On the other hand, I'm still working on my attitude toward death. To become a donor, means to accept death... I... I'm going nuts thinking about all this... I know this is not right, my not becoming a donor. I, as a future health professional must be the 1st one to do that. But... it's not all that easy for me... I wish you could feel what I feel and were able to read my messy mind...
Have you ever heard about Tuskegee study? - We are able to describe the effects of untreated syphilis in black men now, but are we able to bring those dead men back to life? I'm suggesting, that not everything that is done for the sake of good is worth it. Discussion is what helps us ensure that we'll consider the possible shortcoming.
donor thing:
I don't know. I guess I've heard too many horror stories about how your being a donor reduces your chances of being saved in the ER. On the other hand, I'm still working on my attitude toward death. To become a donor, means to accept death... I... I'm going nuts thinking about all this... I know this is not right, my not becoming a donor. I, as a future health professional must be the 1st one to do that. But... it's not all that easy for me... I wish you could feel what I feel and were able to read my messy mind...
Have you ever heard about Tuskegee study? - We are able to describe the effects of untreated syphilis in black men now, but are we able to bring those dead men back to life? I'm suggesting, that not everything that is done for the sake of good is worth it. Discussion is what helps us ensure that we'll consider the possible shortcoming.
I don't know. I guess I've heard too many horror stories about how your being a donor reduces your chances of being saved in the ER.
sheer nonsense I've been working in the ER, never was an issue in determining the course of management.
On the other hand, I'm still working on my attitude toward death. To become a donor, means to accept death...
dopn't waste your time on accepting death. first of all it's too early, and doing something so much in advance takes all fun out of it :) And then, it's inevitable regardless of your "acceptance".. so quit this...
to become a donor is to accept a simple idea that you can give someone a chance to live longer.
I know this is not right, my not becoming a donor
I don't judge you, not at all. you're tormented, and nothing is wrong with being a bit lost in all these ethical issues... do what makes the most sense. It's just a bit different from, say, religion or other ethical debates. And this difference is that you won't be able to take an opportunity to enjoy whatever idea or a concept you'd feel in peace with when you're dead and don't feel anything. So the only thing one really should be worrying about is whether my life can be veneratred in someone.
, as a future health professional must be the 1st one to do that
Just being a health professional doesn't automatically oblige you to donate.. it's more in line with humanistic ethics, then with a profession. But, I agree, being a health professional, you're more educated about an issue and have an overall better understanding of its factors than an average joe.
I wish you could feel what I feel and were able to read my messy mind...
I hope it's a working mess :)
Have you ever heard about Tuskegee study?
No, I haven't.
I'm suggesting, that not everything that is done for the sake of good is worth it
i don't understand. care to elaborate?
Комментарии (5):
вверх^
Вы сейчас не можете прокомментировать это сообщение.
Дневник Stem Cells. Pro or Con? | Alpine - Alpine's Notes from All Over |
Лента друзей Alpine
/ Полная версия
Добавить в друзья
Страницы:
раньше»