What is Digg?237 Comments
- Lane, on 12/27/2007, -21/+99And just think of how many lives could be saved if this had not been hindered by the restriction of stem cell research....I feel this can best be expressed through musical interpretation.
"Aperture Science
We do what we must
because we can.
For the good of all of us.
Except the ones who are dead." - Osjpr, on 12/27/2007, -15/+62I really hope the ***** morons who oppose it will be banned from using any treatment developed from this research...
- Scanner, on 12/27/2007, -18/+46You've got it exactly backwards! IF there had NOT been restrictions on stem cell research the scientists would never have had to find new and better ways to get them. Instead they'd just be creating and destroying embros since we know thats one way to get them. And for the love of god please try to educate yourself about the "restrictions". There is not and never was a "BAN" on embrionic stem cell research. You or me or any other private party can do all the research they want with them. The Bush administration has only restricted FEDERAL TAX dollars (that is yours and my money) from funding such research in the form of grants. If you believe in it that much you are free to donate your money to any private organization that is doing the research. Thankfully we've found better ways now.
- smacksaw, on 12/27/2007, -17/+44Well that is pretty good news. Very exciting. The best part is that biological research should be done for the good of mankind. The problem is that feminists and religious fundamentalists have completely dominated the issue making it about abortion, which it isn't. The rest of the world laughed at us while they passed us by, knowing it was never about either.
I guess the most exciting thing is that the nutcases can generally go ***** themselves now and we can get on with saving lives and keeping biotech jobs in this country where they should be. - inactive, on 12/27/2007, -1/+24I wonder if this can affect aging as well? Less stress placed on the body fighting diseases could keep the body more youthful.
- cinder, on 12/27/2007, -2/+24And politicians will find more ways to restrict.
- plax3, on 12/27/2007, -2/+21they'll be first in line once they need it.
- Joomal, on 12/27/2007, -0/+19This is probably the most influential news in 2007, and is probably what 2007/2008 will be remembered for in history. We've finally done it!
- avenu420, on 12/27/2007, -11/+28science is good. remember that, kiddies.
- parkermauney, on 12/27/2007, -3/+19My name is Robert Nevile. I am a survivor living in New York City. I haven't seen another person in three years. If there is anybody out there. Anybody. Please.
- skyshock1, on 12/27/2007, -1/+15Restrictions? Nobody's restricting anything here. If you mean the US government not providing FEDERAL FUNDING... that's not a restriction. The government doesn't provide federal funding for me to go to strip clubs, but that doesn't mean I can't do it with my own money. Stem cell research is most definitely unrestricted, just not subsidized with taxpayer money.
Oh and let's not forget, Ron Paul would definintely oppose Federal Funding for such initiatives as well. - radikal3dward, on 12/27/2007, -3/+16Yes, please put a stop to medical advancement. and clothes, and written language, and metallurgy, and astronomy, and agriculture, and pasteurization, and airplanes, and boats. (well, maybe the clothes).
Oh, please won't "someone" put a stop to science! Can't we go back to living in caves and clubbing our mates?
Also, ***** CAPTCHA! - shaelen, on 12/27/2007, -1/+14You are wrong about brain cells not reproducing:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0 ... - smacksaw, on 12/27/2007, -2/+14It occurs to me that if any person put a stop to this, they would be playing God. Think about it - it's akin to a paradox. If God gave us the means to do this and did not tell us Himself not to do it, why did he give us powers like His? Yet God told us not to judge, and if we deny treatment to people we are judging them. And sentencing them to death. By not playing God we are in effect playing God by deciding who lives or dies. And it's not criminals or enemies but the infirm.
- inactive, on 12/27/2007, -6/+18Put any restriction . .scientists will find a way round ;)
- chancesarent, on 12/27/2007, -2/+13This is how it starts. Before you know it, some mucked-with cells go airborne and then all we have left are mutant zombies and Will Smith...
- trpnblies7, on 12/27/2007, -0/+11My broken pancreas just gave a cry of joy.
- smacksaw, on 12/27/2007, -3/+14Yeah that reminds me of an old joke...something about giving the entire White House staff AIDS and there were 12 different cures in 6 months.
- formergthing, on 12/27/2007, -0/+11I realize you're joking (at least I hope), but the more likely scenario, assuming the bullet didn't kill the person, would be that unchecked stem cell growth in the body would just cause a bunch of tumors.
But we already know plenty of ways to cause cancer... - DeFex, on 12/27/2007, -0/+10why not just shoot them with a regular bullet.
- Darkvertigo, on 12/27/2007, -2/+12You have made the fallacious assumption that even without restrictions there would have been enough embryonic stem cells to do more than research with. Scientists have always known that we would have to produce ways of replicating and manipulating other cells to the stem cell state for and viable cures to be mass available. Restrictions didn't bring about the research and they certainly didn't help it along.
- Tippis, on 12/27/2007, -2/+12That's mainly because it's not science. If it was, it would be good too.
- smacksaw, on 12/27/2007, -0/+10We should develop a gun that shoots Marlboros, Crisco and Splenda
- MacEnvy, on 12/27/2007, -0/+10You want to shoot people with my average Saturday night?
- Ramble, on 12/27/2007, -3/+12I bet you're the same kind of person that opposes GM crops too. Stopping advanced science that has the potential to keep billions on the earth fit and healthy just because of your own outmoded outdated superstition is extremely selfish.
- blast_flame, on 12/27/2007, -0/+9Watch these videos. We might just be able to do it.
http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=-123381 ...
http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=-332906 ... - captnkurt, on 12/27/2007, -0/+9Well that's that then. If the massage guys have their d/boubts then that's good enough for me.
- WallyAnti, on 12/27/2007, -0/+9would have been funny were it not for the fact that skin cells reproduce asexually through division... so it's not so much the "birds and the bees", as it is "the amoebas and themselves"
- shaelen, on 12/27/2007, -0/+9Don't know why that link didn't work.. maybe this one?:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0 ... - Platypus5, on 12/27/2007, -0/+9I can't tell if you are joking or not. I hope you are joking as such an attitude is dangerous to the advancement of knowledge.
- EntropyMan, on 12/27/2007, -3/+11What's the lie? Bush set back stem cell research in the US at least a decade.
- radikal3dward, on 12/27/2007, -3/+11I don't remember seeing anything about pro-embryonic stem cell researchers saying that it was the _only_ way, only that it was the only _current_ way.
I'll be the first to applaud this advancement, it is potentially huge. And even better that embryos need not be destroyed.
Now, what to do with all those extra embryos at fertility clinics...aw, just flush 'em (pretty much what happens already), we don't need 'em anymore!
Also, don't your eyes hurt? - DeFex, on 12/27/2007, -5/+13We already invented god, so we are actually just "playing human"
- Darph.Bobo, on 12/27/2007, -2/+10And fortunately for so many, no one will.
- DeFex, on 12/27/2007, -1/+8well you would have to give it to the puppet masters, rather than the actual puppets.
- ICSU, on 12/27/2007, -4/+11So? Opposition to stem cell research is based on stupid religious morals and has no logical basis in science.
By theists' logic, god is the biggest abortionist since about 50% of fertilized eggs end up flushed out of the body naturally. - amoeba, on 12/27/2007, -0/+6If this is true, this is fantastic news
- ohhoe, on 12/27/2007, -2/+8Oh wow, this is amazing. Accident victims needing extensive skin grafts / people who need transplants, I can't even imagine the possibilities of things they could do with this.
- formergthing, on 12/27/2007, -3/+9I liked the inaccurate jab at George Bush, even though this article has nothing to do with him.
I'm not defending the guy, I'm just saying there is enough stuff to say negatively about him with lying or bending the truth. - Platypus5, on 12/27/2007, -1/+7I like reading articles about new scientific advancement.
- WoollyMittens, on 12/27/2007, -2/+8It's bittersweet to know they wasted a decade of research on circumventing laws made by people who think they know what god wants. In my eyes a man on a cloud with a beard won't burn you in hades for using left-over sperm and eggs to save a life.
- GothAlice, on 12/27/2007, -3/+9The real key to the "ever-lasting youth" problem is DNA caps. There are cells in our body which are not replaced as they die; most notably brain cells. If we could prevent the DNA caps from eroding over time, or simply replenish them every so often, cells would not self-destruct and/or be killed off by our immune system automatically. Disease would still remain a problem, but cellular aging would effectively stop.
- dBLiSS, on 12/27/2007, -1/+7Its not a question of living forever, its a question of living however long you want.
- teh_techie, on 12/27/2007, -0/+6Aubrey DeGrey - This guy is amazing
- smacksaw, on 12/27/2007, -0/+6LOL don't even say that. Monsanto will team with Lily or something and make a stem cell cure, but the stem cells expire automatically every 3 months and you need a treatment from them all the time - oh, and they patent the stem cells so you can only get it from them.
I'm sure big Pharma is looking at what guys like ADM and Monsanto are doing. Didn't Agent Scully learn her lesson from Fight The Future? Yet she shilled for ADM. For shame. - Zeonix, on 12/27/2007, -0/+6Why am I silly? All politicians ever do is play word games, try to enforce laws, and then look for loopholes so that they may be exempt from said laws.
- cfuse, on 12/27/2007, -3/+8I'm sure that the families and loved ones of the people who died whilst waiting for an alternative method of making stem cells (to satisfy your baseless desire to prevent embryos being used for research) will take great comfort in knowing that you are happy.
People like you deserve to have your kids suffer and die from a disease while a bunch of morons campaign against a cure for it. Still, if there is any justice in this world, then you won't ever have any children - the rest of us can do just fine without any more like you.
Oh, and 'morons' doesn't have an apostrophe in it. Moron. - MaximusD, on 12/27/2007, -0/+5Say what you want, but using fertilized embryos for stem cell research is an ethically gray area -- bioethics aren't cut and dry, and seeing things differently about it doesn't make you an idiot. Both parties are coming from a place of good intentions -- prolifers don't want to see people suffer. They just don't think you can kill other humans to save more humans (because they see the embryo as a human life, that is how it works in their paradigm). Now there is a better, more efficient way that doesn't involve the destruction of embryos. This news isn't an excuse to bash religious people, or scientists with a different sense of ethics, it's just straight up good news. It's better for everybody. Let's throw a party.
- NinjaBoy, on 12/27/2007, -0/+5It was one of the best discoverys of 2007 according to a show on discovery science.
- Flatlineskillz, on 12/27/2007, -1/+6maybe someone will figure out how to make a man-bear-pig.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 230 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is