What is Digg?80 Comments
- shutaro, on 11/05/2009, -7/+29Well... In fairness... The fetus doesn't really need them anymore...
- DrRossi, on 11/05/2009, -0/+14For all the accumulated outrage here: why don't you just read TFA before exploding into your holy wrath.
Note that TFA is on a website touting Sarah Palins new book. So you know which direction the wind is blowing right away.
Here are some snippets (though it's better to read the original):
"Children of God for Life, a watchdog group that monitors the use of fetal material in medical products"
This does not bode well. But ok.
"[ The company ] argues that the fetal cell line was harvested in a responsible, ethical manner for use in treating severe dermatological injuries."
"The abortion was deemed medically necessary because the baby could not survive to term, according to the company."
"The fetal skin cell line was taken from a piece of skin the size of a postage stamp and donated voluntarily by the parents for medical research. The donation was approved by the hospital's medical ethics committee and in accordance with Swiss laws"
"The company also insisted that the one donation would be sufficient for the manufacture of its products. Critics argue that it's impossible to know how long the cell line will last, but Neocutis states on its Web site that "no additional fetal biopsies will ever be required.""
So all the company evidently needed was a cell line, which is what they have now.
I can't see anything wrong with this.
Typical right-wing Talibangecal hysterical outrage. Buried. - shutaro, on 11/05/2009, -3/+16OM NOM NOM NOM!
- roarkmeister, on 11/05/2009, -5/+14Waste not want not!
- Junior612, on 11/05/2009, -2/+11It's just about the same as take a full load of semen on the face.
Amirite? - seltaeb4, on 11/05/2009, -0/+8Here's why pro-birthers are full of it.
If they really believed in the sanctity of embryos/fetuses as humans, they'd be camping out in front of in vitro fertilization clinics screaming and waving their signs, rather than harassing women trying to get low-cost pelvics and birth control at Planned Parenthood.
Many more embryos are made than implanted, in the hopes of getting one or more to "take," especially in the case of older or infertile women. Sometimes an unethical doctor will implant way too many (think Nadya Suleman or Kate +8.) More responsible doctors might plant 2 or 3, knowing that natural miscarriage will probably thin the crowd to 1.
What do you think happens to all of these in vitro "babies" after couples either succeed or quit therapy? The lab's not going to keep them in deep freeze for free, and most parents don't care about frozen embryos after they've had their child or children.
There are a lot more "babies" getting tossed at in vitro clinics than there are abortions at women's health clinics. Why don't you guys go protest there?
(I'm not asking rhetorically, I really want to know. What's the deal?) - Frankyfan3, on 11/05/2009, -4/+10Yeah... but what if they used miscarried fetuses instead? They happen all the time without medical intervention, often times requiring an extraction to prevent infection of the uterus & other complications.
If it's already dead & out of the womb, what respect is it to toss it in a bag of medical waste or bury in a tomb in the ground?
I don't have a problem with them using dead fetuses to create a line of Processed Skin Cell Proteins, only because there would be dead fetuses anyway.... abortion or not. Why let them go to waste? I prefer my body be used for scientific advancement and/or feeding the soil. I'm not using it anymore at that point.
FTA"Our view - which is shared by most medical professionals and patients - is that the limited, prudent and responsible use of donated fetal skin tissue can continue to ease suffering, speed healing, save lives and improve the well-being of many patients around the globe... the company developed Processed Skin Cell Proteins for the treatment of skin ulcers, burns and scarring, Neocutis soon recognized the ingredient's value in restoring aging skin."
I'll add that terminating a pregnancy for the express purpose of making this product would be untenable. - algaeturd, on 11/05/2009, -0/+5This isn't new. It's been going on for years. Proof positive that what you don't know doesn't hurt you sometimes. If you are so concerned, know where the products you buy come from and exactly what goes into them.
My problem with pro-birthers is that they want every sperm that connects with an egg to be born but they don't give a ***** about the humans that are already grown. Americans could be dying in the streets and republicans would rather piss on them that offer them some help or some kind of health insurance.
BUT ***** FORBID that the population be kept in check by abortion of fetuses before they're an actual human.
They apparently want to make sure every fetus is born even if it's into a broken home, but then ensure that the kid doesn't grow up into a productive, healthy adult. - inactive, on 11/05/2009, -2/+7LOL how is this in any way comparable to cannibalism?
Besides, people taste like chicken and not everyone has a mcdonalds down the street. Quitchyo bitchin. - Vaiper, on 11/05/2009, -2/+7FTA: "We feel we are in complete compliance with the laws of God and the laws of man,"
Seriously, ***** god. It's incredibly insane to think that an invisible, non-existent man gives a ***** what we do with our dead babies. Stop catering to these ***** religious nut jobs.
"Oh boo hoo, abortion, boo hoo, god is gonna be mad, boo hoo. How will I ever deal with my hypocrisy if I can't blame everyone else for my own insecurities. Boo hoo." - seltaeb4, on 11/05/2009, -1/+6I read somewhere that cannibals think human meat tastes like most like pork.
- g0atm0nster, on 11/05/2009, -2/+7Isn't there some sort of a medical purpose? Maybe the tissues could go to actually save a life rather than prolong human vanity? Who am I kidding though; there's not nearly so much money in that.
- AntoniusMaximus, on 11/05/2009, -2/+6I might get dugg down to oblivion for being the devil's advocate, but objectively, the fetus won't be needing these cells since it has been aborted. If abortion is objectionable, this is a lesser misdoing in comparison.
But no, I don't condone what has been done. - yocouchdigga, on 11/05/2009, -9/+13I'm glad the little guys are advancing science.
- gerryk, on 11/05/2009, -0/+4This article is full of emotive spin...
- tmonsta1, on 11/05/2009, -0/+4then you should read your shampoo bottles very carefully
- billraydrums, on 11/05/2009, -2/+6Yeah but where do all the foreskins go? In your face cream, of course.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/146761/hu ... - blumarlin1, on 11/05/2009, -2/+6No wonder my hair and scalp was growing back so fast!
- fury420, on 11/05/2009, -2/+5It sounds far, far worse than it is
I mean... its not like each jar is 10% fetus by volume or anything, we're talking about a cell culture from a tissue sample from one single fetus that was doomed to be aborted regardless & was donated by the parents, its not like they require a continual supply.
How many people with serious burns & skin damage need to be treated based off of that single skin sample before its morally acceptable to you?Their poor baby boy's skin cells go on to help any number of people, why is this any more objectionable than childrens organ donation? - seltaeb4, on 11/05/2009, -0/+3Isn't there a hair treatment called "Tia Zolin Placenta"?
It's been around for decades. This is old news. - fury420, on 11/05/2009, -1/+4what about the parent's consent?
I mean... parental consent is good enough for childrens organ, bone & tissue donation after death, why not for fetal tissue?
We already use the bodies of the dead for medical purposes, how is this so different from say... cadavers donated by the families of the deceased for medical research?
If this donated tissue that would otherwise be wasted can be processed into a treatment for serious burns & skin recovery who are we to deny people the choice to donate? - jaytek13, on 11/05/2009, -0/+3@Speed, I'm not aware of scientists who are conducting stem cell research complaining about a shortage.
- DrRossi, on 11/05/2009, -0/+3@abbott75:
Well you ARE trying to start an argument here, and you're basing it on LOTS of HYPOTHETICALS.
These are not the issues at hand. The issues at hand are mentioned in TFA. We're discussing THAT.
If you want a discussion about your own hypothetical questions, start your own ***** thread. - digggggggggg, on 11/05/2009, -2/+5I'm not a pro lifer, but I think that skin care has truly gone too far. Apparently, all the exotic combinations of fruit, aloe, vitamins, and other stuff (read: snake oil) isn't good enough anymore, so now they're trying this crap.
Seriously, the audacity of such an endeavor is just mind boggling. - BasalCellBossk, on 11/05/2009, -3/+6Bible says its AOK
:D - hancid, on 11/05/2009, -0/+2Reminds me of that Chinese Horror movie called "dumplings" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0472458/
- Jovian84, on 11/05/2009, -0/+2awesome
- KevinRowz, on 11/05/2009, -1/+3Cells from the most rapid stage of human development used to spark new growth in older organs? How unthinkable... Not.
- SystemicThought, on 11/05/2009, -2/+4I'm gonna go with "using human tissue in cosmetics, regardless of the nature by which it is acquired, is pretty damn gross."
- Speed, on 11/05/2009, -0/+2True, it's not like there's any type of medical research that could be done with them... Oh wait
- blumarlin1, on 11/05/2009, -0/+2correction: "...scalp were* growing..."
- tmonsta1, on 11/05/2009, -0/+2Hey Northmass.... I hate to break it to you, but they use all kinds of adult bodies for these experiments that you're complaining about
do a search for The Farm and see, also google homeless people... they love to "leave" their bodies to science... - krayneeum, on 11/05/2009, -0/+2Thank you! Finally, someone who actually read the article. The parents DONATED the skin cells to science, researchers followed ETHICAL standards and practices, and they will never need to do it again. How can you argue with that? If you don't want to use their aborted-baby-cell product, then don't buy it! I sure wouldn't use it.. gives me the creeps.
- Vizeris, on 11/05/2009, -1/+3Oh I'll defend it, and good.
The boy who was aborted was used to create a cell line, which I imagine is being used in R & D labs for skin related ailments right now, in addition to this cosmetic use. Not like we killed him to have soft and supple cheeks and lips, it just happens to work out that way. If it works, then I could not give two *****. Hell, I might actually go buy some.
Besides, I'd be ok if this happened to my cells. - tmonsta1, on 11/05/2009, -0/+2ignited outcry from Pro-lifers
just pro-lifers...
well then ***** it, make more - Frankyfan3, on 11/05/2009, -0/+2They would also be up in arms about environmental toxicity & pollution in rural & poverty stricken communities, which cause a fair bit of miscarriages.
What makes me sick is people like Thomas and Amanda Stansel who were having trouble conceiving, so they opted to undergo fertility treatments... they couldn't contemplate reducing some of the fetuses as recommended by their doctor because it was "god's plan." Four of their six babies are now dead, and the rest have developmental disabilities if they survive.
Here's what God was gonna do: God was gonna make you infertile. God did that, actually, and then you thwarted God's plan for you—that you be infertile—and availed yourselves of the latest medical technologies and sought the help fertility specialists. Then you ignored the advice of your doctors and refused to reduce the number of fetuses you were carrying and now four premature infants have died in great pain and two more will very likely die—but, hey, you'll get another smug, self-satisfied, just-letting-God-do-what-he's-gonna-do photo op out of it, so it's not a total loss. And it's all material for the blog you're writing about "your journey," and there will probably be a book deal in it for you when it's all over.
Ugh.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/12/health/12fertili ... - Slain3, on 11/05/2009, -0/+2 And then i wondered why i posted that before i read the whole article. bury.
- dogfood, on 11/05/2009, -0/+2I heard it tastes better. Mmmmmmm.
- BasalCellBossk, on 11/05/2009, -0/+2For not being able to spell. Maybe you were making a pun?
- SystemicThought, on 11/05/2009, -0/+1I have a really sensitive scalp, so I use some super-hippie stuff that says "vegan" right on the bottle. Though it would be interesting if their definition of "vegan" allowed the use of human products.
- TrouserJazz, on 11/05/2009, -0/+1*cell
But yeah, fair call. I'll take some time out. - murrdpirate, on 11/05/2009, -0/+1haha i thought it was a pun
- murrdpirate, on 11/05/2009, -2/+3Actually I agree and might even say it isn't a misdoing at all. If someone murders a person, should we not make use of that person's organs? Unless people are aborting fetuses so they can sell them to cosmetic companies, I really don't see what is unethical. Although I hope we can find better use for aborted fetuses than putting them in an anti-wrinkle cream.
- Junior612, on 11/05/2009, -0/+1No I really meant that I'm going to sell you into slave labor where you belong.
- BasalCellBossk, on 11/05/2009, -1/+2Duuuuhrrrr, yes it does. According to the Bible, fetuses are not even alive. Life begins at birth, the first breath, Ezekiel 37:5-6. You can't murder something that doesn't live.
Penalty for causing a miscarriage in the Bible? A fine. Exodus 21:22. It is treated as property damage.
Fact # 328 of why the Bible is ***** stupid.
Purity laws probably forbid it, but if you're eating bacon, shrimp, and wearing fabric made out of more than one type of fibre - which you are - then you won't care about that anyway.
(Aside from the fact I wasn't entirely serious and dearly love pissing off fundies.) - TitsMageee, on 11/05/2009, -0/+1"Talibangecal" nice word :)
- jammnrose, on 11/05/2009, -0/+1Way to f**king spoil Soylent Green for me: Valerie Richardson, The Washington Times. I was planning to watch that sometime and now you've gone and ruined on me! How thoughtless!
- Slain3, on 11/05/2009, -0/+1I was going to say that least they didn´t harm any animals, but then i remembered that we ARE animals :P
- fragMasterFlash, on 11/05/2009, -9/+10Can I get fries with that?
-
Show 51 - 82 of 82 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is