Stem Cells cure Blind Man

[Casey]

Stem Cells Cure Blind Man - stem cell - Gizmodo

Englishman Russell Thurnbull got attacked with ammonia 15 years ago during a street fight. As a result, he got an extremely painful condition called Limbal Stem Cell Deficiency, which resulted in blindness in one eye. After much medication, he became a lab rat for all kinds of treatments until a team from Newcastle's North East England Stem Cell Institute got the miraculous cure he was waiting for.

First, the team took a minuscule sample of stem cells from his healthy eye's cornea. This millimeter square of cells was placed on a amniotic membrane, which was placed inside a liquid made from his blood, glucose, insulin, and hydrocortisone. The cells will grow in that solution until taking all over the membrane, which then is used to replace the damaged cornea.

The result: He completely gained eyesight after only eight weeks of the operation. It is not Christopher Reeve walking, but if this is not the future ringing the doorbell, right here, right now, I don't know what it is. [Channel 4]

Amazing.

And to think that those religious tools try and stop great things like this because "it's unnatural", we're "playing god" and other such bulllshit.

Stem cells is where it's at, people. Proof is right here.

 

[S. Fourteen]

This was tested on animals first (bs), casey - now what?

 

[YaYo!]

yea its about time..its like weed..just legalize it already. See i figure all the really super old people are gonna die off, then things that should be done, will be without their 99% voter turnout. Then we can actually get some stuff accomplished

 

[Rukas]

Religious groups are against the use of stem cells from aborted fetuses because they are against abortion.

This operation happened using stem cells from the patient's good eye and I dont see the Christian church having a problem with this, but Im not sure, meh, who knows. But you're fundamentally getting two arguments mixed up.

 

[Casey]

No. They have placed blocks on stem cell research in general (from aborted foetuses or otherwise) for years. Scientists have had to flee to other countries to continue their research.

They have no justification for doing so other than their christian beliefs.

 

[Rukas]

No. They have placed blocks on stem cell research in general (from aborted foetuses or otherwise) for years. Scientists have had to flee to other countries to continue their research.

They have no justification for doing so other than their christian beliefs.

No Casey, you are flat out wrong on this one. The Church is not against research with umbilical cord stem cells, haemopoitic stem cells and adult stem cells and have publicly supported those. They are only against research conducted with embryonic stem cells and stem cell farming (cloning stem cells).

I think this is a case of your hate towards Religion pushing you to believe bullshit made up by people who hate Religion.

Dont be ignorant and do the research yourself before blatantly posting false accusations against anyone or any group.

 

[Flipmo]

yea its about time..its like weed..just legalize it already. See i figure all the really super old people are gonna die off, then things that should be done, will be without their 99% voter turnout. Then we can actually get some stuff accomplished

And you are... lol

 

[Casey]

No Casey, you are flat out wrong on this one. The Church is not against research with umbilical cord stem cells, haemopoitic stem cells and adult stem cells and have publicly supported those. They are only against research conducted with embryonic stem cells and stem cell farming (cloning stem cells).

I think this is a case of your hate towards Religion pushing you to believe bullshit made up by people who hate Religion.

Dont be ignorant and do the research yourself before blatantly posting false accusations against anyone or any group.

I'm not flat out wrong. You jumped to a conclusion and assumed that when I said "They" , I was referring to the church.

I was not referring to the church, because it doesn't matter what they think.

I was referring to the conservative christian politicians, the bible-bashers, the ones that flat out vote against stem cell research in all forms.

Yes - the specific bans that George Bush (for example) put in place were regarding embryonic cells. Thankfully, Obama has removed these bans.

But to say that local politicians in more conservative parts of the world did not oppose and do everything in their power to block ALL stem cell research is wrong, because that has happened, and 99.9% of the time these actions have been as a direct result of their conservative religious beliefs.

And yes I despise religion but I am still capable of having an objective view. Religion is the biggest barrier preventing the progress of the human race.

 

[ARon]

Why are they against stem cell cloning?

 

[Duke]

Stem cells fucking rock.

You religious people can defend all you want, but fact of the matter is that organized religion has strangled proper science for centuries, milennia even and continues to do so to this very fucking day.

 

[Bender]

stem cell research is also carried out using animals.

despite religion, does a vegetarian condone stem cell research/practice with use of animals?

this is where i think that religion and animal rights differ when it comes to the practice of science and medicine

 

[masta247]

You religious people can defend all you want, but fact of the matter is that organized religion has strangled proper science for centuries, milennia even and continues to do so to this very fucking day.

Sure they block some things that are not ethic in their opinions. However bare in mind how they used to boost science and promote education. They built universities, promoted personal growth and made education accessible to the poor. Some countries wouldn't have any universities for centuries if it wasn't for Churches or Buddhist monasteries in this case.
It's quite terrifying to me how atheists seem to believe that religions cause more bad than they do good, that almost everything they do is bad with little or no positive sides. I'm not saying there were no terrible things sparked by religious people but you can't neglect all the good things either.

 

[Duke]

They used to promote science?

get


the


fuck


out


of


here

 

[masta247]

Sure and I guess building universities with technical faculties is a good enough proof.
The previous Pope was all for science too.
While not supporting some "evil" things they did a lot to support science.
Even in the Catholic church you can hear speeches supporting various fields of science, in my local churches they are even saving money and investing in medical research.

 

[Duke]

Yeah, the Church is all for science. That's why they still condemn condoms and that's why it took them 4 fucking centuries to admit Galilei was right. All because of their undying love and unyielding loyalty to science, yeah.


You keep telling yourself that shit.

 

[masta247]

Yeah, the Church is all for science. That's why they still condemn condoms and that's why it took them 4 fucking centuries to admit Galilei was right. All because of their undying love and unyielding loyalty to science, yeah.

You all turn it the other way around bringing up selective things where religion doesn't get along well with science. Starting with picking up a specific church and then not even understanding their opinions.
They don't promote sex before marriage - in their minds sex is a way to create children - after marriage. That is - with 1 partner who had no partners before.
From this point of view if you're using condoms you're doing something bad by either having sex with multiple partners, with someone who had multiple partners or to protect yourself from having children which contradicts its original purpose. In reality it's hard to imagine for most people but in a perfect society sexual abstinence, 1 sexual partner aka wife/husband with whom you'll have children is the way you should pursue. So it's not that people should stop using condoms while fucking everyone they know because they shouldn't do that in the first place. It's wrong and I think most people would agree. Usually condoms are a way to justify doing something bad. If people stopped doing these "bad" things nobody would need a condom.

After all some Churches are behind on some things, while most priests don't even think the same way.
They do support science on various fields though. They are against some specific researches and specific things but they usually have opinions and research behind them. While sometimes they are entirely wrong in my opinion they are correct from the ethical point of view. I agree that they sometimes place a line that in their opinion shouldn't be crossed but sometimes it's really needed. Would you really want science to go too far? And no, don't give me examples of single researches where religions interfere for reasons that are silly to us. I'm aware that there are single cases that also seem wrong to me but hey, I'm not perfect either and Churches often give us an inspiration to look at things from the ethical point of view.
Cloning humans or using aborted fetuses for research don't really sound good to me.

 

[Duke]

You all turn it the other way around bringing up selective things where religion doesn't get along well with science. Starting with picking up a specific church and then not even understanding their opinions.
They don't promote sex before marriage - in their minds sex is a way to create children - after marriage. That is - with 1 partner who had no partners before.
From this point of view if you're using condoms you're doing something bad by either having sex with multiple partners, with someone who had multiple partners or to protect yourself from having children which contradicts its original purpose. In reality it's hard to imagine for most people but in a perfect society sexual abstinence, 1 sexual partner aka wife/husband with whom you'll have children is the way you should pursue. So it's not that people should stop using condoms while fucking everyone they know because they shouldn't do that in the first place. It's wrong and I think most people would agree. Usually condoms are a way to justify doing something bad. If people stopped doing these "bad" things nobody would need a condom.

After all some Churches are behind on some things, while most priests don't even think the same way.
They do support science on various fields though. They are against some specific researches and specific things but they usually have opinions and research behind them. While sometimes they are entirely wrong in my opinion they are correct from the ethical point of view. I agree that they sometimes place a line that in their opinion shouldn't be crossed but sometimes it's really needed. Would you really want science to go too far? And no, don't give me examples of single researches where religions interfere for reasons that are silly to us. I'm aware that there are single cases that also seem wrong to me but hey, I'm not perfect either and Churches often give us an inspiration to look at things from the ethical point of view.
Cloning humans or using aborted fetuses for research don't really sound good to me.

Thanks for telling me how I should live my life....sounds like very familiar reli-crap.


You're also doing a bang up job of directly relating religion to the existance of ethics. A common ploy used by "your people".

 

[masta247]

Thanks for telling me how I should live my life....sounds like very familiar reli-crap.


You're also doing a bang up job of directly relating religion to the existance of ethics. A common ploy used by "your people".

Okay, it's a better way - if everyone did that I think our world would be way better. I'm not telling you what you should do in a literal way, like giving orders and such. I'm not acting that way and I don't see myself acting that way so saying that you should do something else would be weird. That seems like a better way though and the world would be better if everyone did certain things they don't seem to do.

No, I'm relating the Church to ethics in a different way - that they are more of keepers of ethics. An "ethical police" would be too much but they sort of guard it in their own way. Not that they could do much anyway but they're trying.

 

[Jokerman]

Duke and masta are pathetic fools.


Of course the natural sciences grew out of Christian culture, with the help of the ancient Greeks and medieval Muslims. The Church built the first universities. They encouraged scientific endeavor. They believed God’s world was ordered and to study and understand that order was, in a way, to worship God. Rene Descartes said he was discovering the "laws that God has put into nature." Copernicus was actually a Catholic priest. It’s when the sciences started to contradict Christian belief and threaten some of their doctrines that the trouble began.

What the Church is doing now by giving lip service or support to selective areas of science is try to remain relevant to modern-thinking Catholics and not look like complete fools. If the science doesn’t contradict their doctrines and beliefs, why shouldn’t they make a show of supporting it? The Vatican even has its own astronomical observatory. But their main focus is the religious supernatural, not the natural world, and religious belief is ultimately incompatible with scientific truth and freedom.

Yes, there should be some checks and balances on the implementation of technologies like cloning, for instance, but we don’t need religious authority for that. We need our own ethical sense and rational debate. A religious code of ethics based on personal reward for behaving morally or eternal punishment for not doing so leads to a flawed morality with long-term and serious consequences for humankind. Many of society’s ills result to a considerable degree from religious morality based on fear of the unknown. Behaving morally for no reward and in no fear of punishment, but because we have the capability of being moral creatures, is one of the traits that can define humanity.

 

[Da_Funk]

Yeah, the Church is all for science. That's why they still condemn condoms and that's why it took them 4 fucking centuries to admit Galilei was right. All because of their undying love and unyielding loyalty to science, yeah.


You keep telling yourself that shit.

This is why I mentioned Masta during the idiots of the board thread. Dude is fucking dumb. Like this thread and then that thread where he's comparing porn to firemen and plumbers. I mean wtf sigh. How do you respect dumb ass?