What is Digg?Sponsored by Double Your Dating
Scary Quiz - Do you have what it takes to attract women? view!
doubleyourdating.com - Think you know a thing or two about meeting women? Take this quiz and find out...
186 Comments
- Echota, on 03/06/2009, -11/+95There's going to be a big dust up about this but I for one am happy about it.
So many people will benifit from this research. - piratearggghhh, on 03/07/2009, -6/+83For all the religious nutjobs out there - if you're against stem cell research, don't partake in its fruits. Meaning, the new medicines and treatments out there that is a direct result of cutting edge stem cell research, just refuse them. Just say no, then pray for your cure - see where that gets you. Plus the afterlife is really great, so why bother to continue on this sinful world? It's that simple.
- GiantJr, on 03/06/2009, -15/+77This man is amazing, less then two month into his presidency the tides of ignorance clouding this whole country are slowly starting to be broken up for some REAL progressive change.
I won't let anyone discourage me from seeing the real picture, this is the change we need. - inactive, on 03/07/2009, -6/+45Spot on again President Obama, this will benifit many people!
- shupy, on 03/06/2009, -10/+49About time.
As for the dustup, I doubt it. Truth is, the sooner the Republican party jettisons the religous right the better their chances for recovery.
Not that I want them to recover. - DrewG7, on 03/07/2009, -2/+39As a diabetic: ***** yes.
- milarepa, on 03/07/2009, -7/+39I am so happy 2 hear this.
- Shaggy3, on 03/07/2009, -4/+35I h8 grammar 2.
- dinot, on 03/07/2009, -0/+29Kids, this is what happens when you leave home without your bicycle helmet.
- jericko, on 03/07/2009, -4/+33I guess the Dark Ages are over.
- MaxxusFlamus, on 03/07/2009, -3/+30you know what else wasn't deemed plausible and beneficial technology that the private sector didn't greedily run with at the beginning?
satellites.
the internet. - deathfix, on 03/07/2009, -7/+33Are you implying that opposition to stem cell research is due to fear of it being a waste of time/money? The only reason federal funding was banned is because the previous administration wanted to pander to religious fundies.
- LiebeMachtFrei, on 03/07/2009, -6/+32Thank goodness we have an administration built on science and reason rather than hysteria and religious pandering.
- piratearggghhh, on 03/07/2009, -1/+27Our country is already wrecked and last I checked, it wasn't because of Obama.
- inactive, on 03/07/2009, -3/+28He's going to piss off half the country doing this, while the other half is going to be happy. The fundies had their fun interfering with scientific progress, now it's time for the rest of us to be satisfied. Some of the neurological and cardiac studies look promising.
- inactive, on 03/07/2009, -6/+31HELL YES!
I'm liking Obama more and more everyday! - Bekey, on 03/07/2009, -0/+24This is really good news. I had cancer several years ago and it will be nice to know there could be more options in the future, if it comes back, and also for others. It's an awful thing to go through, and chemo and radiation just seem so barbaric. I've done a lot of personal reading on stem cell research and I wish it had been available for me.
I really believe that this research will help to find a cure. It's almost incomprehensible to think of what that could mean. Cancer touches almost everyone's life at some point, and the suffering of a dying patient and their family is enormous.
Here's to HOPE! - Suricou, on 03/07/2009, -4/+27Unfortunatly he's also going to get most of the blame for the economic crisis he inherited.
- s043446583, on 03/07/2009, -1/+20FTA:
"Indeed, there are different types of stem cells: So-called adult stem cells that produce a specific type of tissue; younger stem cells found floating in amniotic fluid or the placenta. Scientists even have learned to reprogram certain cells to behave like stem cells.
But even researchers who work with varying types consider embryonic stem cells the most flexible and thus most promising form" - MizuhoChan, on 03/07/2009, -1/+20They aren't people.
- Cannonballkid, on 03/07/2009, -0/+16it seems you like dick as well. To each his own.
- Weapongod30, on 03/07/2009, -3/+19Look people, they don't just go in and say to random would-be mothers: "Ohai, give up your baby please! We need it to save others and we don't care about your child!" No. It has always been done the same way. They even stated it in the article. They get embryos from fertility clinics THAT WOULD BE LEFT OVER ANYWAYS AND WOULD GO TO NO USE, NOT EVEN LIFE IF THEY WEREN'T USED FOR STEM CELL RESEARCH. I hope you people get your heads screwed on straight and think about things before you say them. They don't abort embryos to get the stem cells, they get them from already aborted or left-over embryos. PLEASE people, educate yourself on some of the intricacies of these things before you post your opinions here. Uneducated opinions have no bearing on anything, and just serve to make you look like, well, an uneducated jackass, to be frank.
- zbeast, on 03/07/2009, -1/+16Science returns to the white house...
- tava0002, on 03/07/2009, -2/+17I assume all the fundies against this will forever reject future therapies developed by this research.
- inactive, on 03/07/2009, -3/+17A cell is a life, so make sure not to go to the toilet or ever bleed.
- Nickolassc, on 03/07/2009, -1/+15They banned the federal government from funding stem cell research on new lines of stem cells.
Although there was some story about the existing lines being contaminated. - Bekey, on 03/07/2009, -2/+16I feel the same way. Well said. The reasoning behind blocking stem cell research was so shockingly stupid to me when I had cancer. You can't use an egg because it could be a baby. Well, as a woman, I make one egg a month that I can't use because of cancer. Yet, I was a baby, and I'm a living person who could die, and you want to tell me that you're blocking research that could possibly help me because "an egg could be a baby"? Ooooh, I was upset!
Of course, then they found that there were stem cells in sperm, and the fundies went, oh, well, that's ok, there's millions!
ARGH x346456059468457 - Demand911Truth, on 03/07/2009, -3/+16Onward, science!
- awinters, on 03/07/2009, -1/+13My father has Parkinsons so I am very happy about this.
I am happy that we have a President who respects the possibilities of Science. - spriggig, on 03/07/2009, -1/+13My mom died of Alzheimer's Disease back in May. I don't really believe that federally funded stem cell research for the past eight years would have given my mom any more years. But, if stem cell research does lead to a cure, then we would have been eight years closer had the silly religious beliefs of our last administration not gotten in the way.
- tidu, on 03/07/2009, -0/+12What's that sound? SCIENCE?
- cyrix, on 03/07/2009, -0/+11Well obamadeception, you've sold me on your views. I will stop jerking off into an old stretched out t shirt so that my "kids" won't die a horrific death.
- BuzzEdition, on 03/06/2009, -11/+22One of my best Digg friends subbed a similar story about 3 minutes prior to me that didn't show up for me in dupe check.
And because I love the panda, here is his sub!
Digg it!
http://digg.com/general_sciences/Obama_to_Lift_Ban ... - Shadic, on 03/07/2009, -1/+12Republicans were the ones blocking it the first time, moron.
- inactive, on 03/07/2009, -9/+19If it pisses bible-thumpers and Republican'ts off, it has to be good!!!
- CarbonXe, on 03/07/2009, -1/+10ObamaDeception, do you remember being a fetus? No, you don't. A fetus is no more a baby than sperm, and billions of sperm are killed every second. A fetus is not a conscious being, therefore it is not living. So what you're saying, is that you'd rather have one person be born into this world, than save millions who are already living?
- erkokite, on 03/07/2009, -0/+9Embryonic stem cells are usually taken from (presumably unviable) embryos created during IVF procedures. AFAIK, these cells would otherwise just be thrown out.
- Weapongod30, on 03/07/2009, -0/+9Look, ObamaDeception, I really would like to know where you got the information about what abortion is really used for from. I do agree that it could be used for eugenics. It'd be pretty effective too. How many people do you think practice eugenics and use abortion as a tool of eugenics though? I'm not sure where you come off thinking that it is only used for that. What if a woman got raped? What if a couple decided to have sex, yet their contraceptive broke fpr whatever the reason, and they could not monetarily support their kid(s)? What then? Do we just let the baby be born into a possibly bad life like that? I know enough about eugenics and abortion to know that abortion isn't all about eugenics. So when I ask myself "Is abortion a good idea?" I have to tell myself "Yes, though under certain conditions only." If it is an abortion done for reasons similar to those I outlined above, then yes, it is a good idea. If someone is just getting an abortion for no reason then no, it isn't a good idea. The whole thing about embryos being life though, I've never understood where people have gotten off as calling that life. It's a collection of a few cells, nothing more. All of them are stem cells, too. There isn't any heart tissue yet, no brain tissue, no skeletal tissue, blood, muscular tissue, etc. A zygote does none of the functions we know as life. It doesn't think. Doesn't move. Doesn't pump blood. Doesn't reproduce. When a zygote turns into an actual fetus, when it has a brain, heart, lungs, skeleton, (all still developing of course) then I draw the line and call it life, or at the very least "Something that cannot be aborted/killed." If you truly believe a zygote to be of life, that a zygote counts as a human, then please, PLEASE write your reasoning here and explain to me why you think it.
- eir574, on 03/08/2009, -0/+7"Furthermore, it's simply bad policy to tax people to fund controversial research."
Maybe wars should be funded entirely by people who support them, then. In fact, how about we take up a separate collection for every item in the federal budget? - SpeedyThing, on 03/07/2009, -0/+7Our grandkids with less health concerns and greatly increased life expectancy. I'm sure many of them will be glad to pay that bill!
- dandonia, on 03/07/2009, -1/+8@CarbonXe - I completely agree with stem cell research but lets not be idiots here. Fetus are babies they just aren't born yet. They don't just turn into babys when the mother spits them out. Stem cells are not taken from fetus's, they are taken from embryo's the stage before it becomes a fetus, the stage after the sperm hits inside.
Many would have no problem killing a spider which is infinitely more aware than an embryo and research is done on chimpanzees that can communicate with humans. The level of hypocrisy comes when we start trying to make our race more important than any other. If all life is created equal then we would all struggle to eat.
Would you class the sperm on the end of your erection to be a waste of life? Well the embryo is not much bigger and it is no more aware.
----
Another take on the matter is that this could save millions of lives in the long run - are the lives of many not worth the death of a few? Didn't Jesus himself die to save the us? If God can sacrifice his own son to save humans, what makes us more special than God that we are above sacrificing our unborn, unmade children? - yocouchdigga, on 03/07/2009, -4/+11Good.
- Daniel591992, on 03/07/2009, -4/+11And by digg friend you mean fellow spammer?
- harronoob, on 03/07/2009, -5/+12Federal funding is more necessary in the early stages of research... Private companies won't shell out the kind of bucks needed for basic stem cell research when the clinical treatment payoff is 10 years down the road. The payoff has the potential to be huge, but only the feds have the means to help us get out of the basic and into the clinical.
- Suricou, on 03/07/2009, -1/+8Yes, you can get some nifty things from umbilical blood or from adult stem cells. But there are two important reasons embryonic stem cell research is needed still.
First, in the immediate future, a lot of those adult stem cell treatments are dependant on embryonic cell research. The cells need to be manipulated correctly to ensure they develop in the desired ways, and the only way to work out how to do that is to pull apart embryos, analyse them chemically, watch how their cells move as grow, tag the genes so you can study which ones are active at different times... study them down to every minute detail. It's that information that can then be fed into the adult stem cell research.
In simpler terms: If you want to make a cell differentiate into the desired type, you need to understand exactly what conditions in the embryo cause that to happen.
The second reason is long-term. Adult stem cells can potentially do some very impressive things, but they do have their limits. Embryonic cells are harder to work with, but their pluripotency is unrivaled. If you want to ever see the really exotic, near-panacea technologies like cloning entire limbs or organs, it'll have to be with embryonic stem cells.
Also, I invoke Godwin's law. You lose. - inactive, on 03/07/2009, -2/+8Curing paralysis and Alzheimer's. What a crime against humanity.
You still seem to have trouble delineating the 19th and 21st centuries. - sulthernao, on 03/07/2009, -0/+6Who cares? He is enacting the right policies, or at the very least trying. I think it is high time someone is taking the right actions, even if he is chastised for it.
- AmeriPatriot, on 03/06/2009, -16/+22Maybe they'll find a cure for all the neo-con nuts and fundaMENTALists?
I just hope that anyone who questions science and global warming studies, DOES NOT come to science for help when it comes to their health...that would be quite the hypocrisy now wouldn't it?
Ask any extreme religious fanatic why they rely on medication (which is science based) and trust science in that aspect, but deny any science at all costs when it comes to our environment? -
Show 51 - 100 of 196 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is