todd Posted August 1, 2005 Share Posted August 1, 2005 That much I'll agree with. I don't agree with the restriction at all...but considering that the federal government last year spent a half-billion dollars on stem cell research, calling it a total ban is a gross mischaracterization. Either that, or a half-billion dollars was completely misappropriated. 395470[/snapback] The important thing to note is the particular stem cells that our President opposes funding. Human embryonic stem cells have different properties and capabilities that are unique to them. By denying federal funding to this type of research is idiotic because of the potential cures and therapies they could produce. Current funding is limited in nature and therefore limited in results. But Bush is a radical christian who probably thinks evolution is a farce, so this is what we get. A president stuck in the 1600s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted August 2, 2005 Share Posted August 2, 2005 Non-existent? C'mon, it's not a ban on stem cell research, it's a ban on using federal funds to do research on new lines of embryonic stem cells. Some people aren't doing the research they'd like because of it, but no one's not doing any research. And the US government still spends more on stem cell research than the rest of the world combined. So let's be clear about the REAL issue here: the US government won't allow researchers to establish new lines of embryonic stem cells using federal money. That's a far narrower restriction than the total ban everyone likes to pretend exists... 395390[/snapback] Right, so it is only a little stupid instead of a lot stupid. It isn't the likely effect on the course and speed of this research that gets me when it comes to Bush's policy here. It is the notion that science has to pass a religious litmus test to go forward. It is just a bad precedent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Tate Posted August 2, 2005 Share Posted August 2, 2005 Well, the majority seems to be on board with the federal government funding everything deemed important, which is exactly what the founding fathers had in mind - a massive, centralized government that is everything to everyone. All that is left to argue about is priority and how much. The good news is we can all live forever, free from disease, never wanting for food and shelter if we just raise enough tax money and get the right people in Washington to prioritize spending properly. I recommend everyone take their tax owed on their next return - double it, and send it in to Washington. Think of all the good we could do! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted August 2, 2005 Share Posted August 2, 2005 Right, so it is only a little stupid instead of a lot stupid. It isn't the likely effect on the course and speed of this research that gets me when it comes to Bush's policy here. It is the notion that science has to pass a religious litmus test to go forward. It is just a bad precedent. 395763[/snapback] It is what it is. Calling it what it isn't in an effort to manipulate people is stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted August 2, 2005 Share Posted August 2, 2005 I guess that explains all the square wheels, stone tablets and everyone eating raw food before the US government was created. 393104[/snapback] I think I just found my entry for the "most ridiculous political statement" I have ever heard sweepstakes! Mind if I copy and paste? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted August 2, 2005 Share Posted August 2, 2005 Well, the majority seems to be on board with the federal government funding everything deemed important, which is exactly what the founding fathers had in mind - a massive, centralized government that is everything to everyone. All that is left to argue about is priority and how much. The good news is we can all live forever, free from disease, never wanting for food and shelter if we just raise enough tax money and get the right people in Washington to prioritize spending properly. I recommend everyone take their tax owed on their next return - double it, and send it in to Washington. Think of all the good we could do! 395790[/snapback] So, what you are saying is you are against federal funding for the National Institute of Health, the Centers for Disease Control, and the Food and Drug Administration, all “centralized government” programs (they all fall under the Department of Health and Human Services)? Sorry, I just don’t see where you’re coming from on this. I’m shocked that someone would suggest that these programs are a frivolous waste of taxpayer money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted August 2, 2005 Share Posted August 2, 2005 It is what it is. Calling it what it isn't in an effort to manipulate people is stupid. 395814[/snapback] Yes, kind of like going from the "global war against terrorism" to the "global struggle against violent extremism" or the "Defense of Marriage Act" or the "Patriot Act". Calling things what they aren't to manipulate people is the enthusiastically accepted rule of the day in Washington. These fights pretty often end up being a contest of Stupid vs. Stupid. The most stupid usually carries the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted August 2, 2005 Share Posted August 2, 2005 I’m shocked that someone would suggest that these programs are a frivolous waste of taxpayer money. 395973[/snapback] I'm not. There's not twenty people in the country who actually understand the meaning of "public health". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted August 2, 2005 Share Posted August 2, 2005 Yes, kind of like going from the "global war against terrorism" to the "global struggle against violent extremism" or the "Defense of Marriage Act" or the "Patriot Act". Calling things what they aren't to manipulate people is the enthusiastically accepted rule of the day in Washington. These fights pretty often end up being a contest of Stupid vs. Stupid. The most stupid usually carries the day. 395978[/snapback] Well...as a matter of fact, I cringe at the DOMA or PATRIOT Act as well...though I'll give the PATRIOT Act points for being an acronym for the phrase that describes what it actually is...then detract points for giving it a name designed to reduce to the acronym "PATRIOT". But the whole "ban on stem cell research" really irks me, simply because it frames the debate in the terms of "should stem cell research be performed or not", when the real issue is "should new embryonic stem cell lines be created to further the research that's already being performed". Anyone with half a brain can dig up and comprehend the actuality of the PATRIOT Act or DOMA or the GWOT...distinguishing the real issues behind the federal stem cell policy and making an even remotely informed judgement on stem cell research requires closer to three-quarters of a brain, which effectively prohibits most of the American public from being able to judge the issue properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted August 2, 2005 Share Posted August 2, 2005 distinguishing the real issues behind the federal stem cell policy and making an even remotely informed judgement on stem cell research requires closer to three-quarters of a brain, which effectively prohibits most of the American public from being able to judge the issue properly. 395991[/snapback] The world must be coming to it's end. I agree with Dexter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted August 2, 2005 Share Posted August 2, 2005 The world must be coming to it's end. I agree with Dexter. 396000[/snapback] That would almost make me change my mind...except that I'm sure it was an accident and you won't do it again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted August 2, 2005 Share Posted August 2, 2005 So, what you are saying is you are against federal funding for the National Institute of Health, the Centers for Disease Control, and the Food and Drug Administration, all “centralized government” programs (they all fall under the Department of Health and Human Services)? Sorry, I just don’t see where you’re coming from on this. I’m shocked that someone would suggest that these programs are a frivolous waste of taxpayer money. 395973[/snapback] I'd love to see the FDA go away. Love it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted August 2, 2005 Share Posted August 2, 2005 The most stupid usually carries the day. 395978[/snapback] Not really. The Democrats keep losing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted August 2, 2005 Share Posted August 2, 2005 The most stupid usually carries the day. 395978[/snapback] Not really. The Democrats keep losing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted August 2, 2005 Share Posted August 2, 2005 I'd love to see the FDA go away. Love it. 396063[/snapback] Why? The whole thing, or specific centers? FDA home page Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted August 2, 2005 Share Posted August 2, 2005 I'd love to see the FDA go away. Love it. 396063[/snapback] The FDA's no better and no worse than any other government program. Of course, I strongly suspect you'd love to see most government programs go away anyway... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted August 2, 2005 Share Posted August 2, 2005 The FDA's no better and no worse than any other government program. Of course, I strongly suspect you'd love to see most government programs go away anyway... 396133[/snapback] You're not too far off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted August 3, 2005 Share Posted August 3, 2005 Not really. The Democrats keep losing. 396068[/snapback] One word: Santorum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted August 3, 2005 Share Posted August 3, 2005 As for stem cell funding, i can weigh in, seeing how i work in a research lab that does work on adult stem cells. the ban is as stated above, on establishing new lines of embryonic stem cells. Much research has been done on adult cells, including the lab i'm in, where we are working on studying mesenchymal stem cells and their differentiation into cardiomyocytes (heart muscle cells) which can be implanted into a heart post ischemia (heart attack) and can regenerate healthy tissue. But the fact here is that the number of ES lines are dwindling, and cells lines dont last forever. Also, there is a world of possibility with ES cells, as they can differentiate into anything in the body. With adult stem cells, we are somewhat limited in the scope of what we can research and what they can do. ES cell research woudl open up an entire world of opportunity for various therapies and treatments for a whole slew of problems and diseases. This is why i hate bush for banning the funding of establishing new ES research. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted August 3, 2005 Share Posted August 3, 2005 That would almost make me change my mind...except that I'm sure it was an accident and you won't do it again. 396023[/snapback] I hope it never happens again. It's a very frightening place to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts