Stem Cell Research, Genetic Engineering (1 Viewer)

[Not-That-Bright]

Victory​

The bill succeeded despite Prime Minister John Howard and new Labor leader Kevin Rudd speaking against it at the 11th hour.

While this probably was their conscious decision, I'm pretty sure even if they had other feelings they would have done the same given the unpopularity of the idea in the wider community...

Personally, I feel the right decision was made and hope I am right.

 

[HotShot]

I agree with you that it was the right decision. Stem-cell research (embreonic and otherwise) will open many possibilities in the fight against illness, disease and disability (see links)

Scientists Discover Stem Cells That Cause Colon Cancer

Insulin-Producing Pancreatic Cells Are Created From Human Embryonic Stem Cells

Oh and for those against it due to the harming of embryos and such:

Scientists Develop Technique That May Generate Human Embryonic Stem Cells Without Harming The Embryo

Click

It also better to allow it - rather than to push to one side and as it develops create some sort of black market for it.

 

[katie_tully]

Swish!

 

[bshoc]

I'd prefer it if he didn't hold the Health portfolio

He was given it after Gillard was given the shadow health portfolio, it was a balancing move.

It looks like the socially corrupt, retard scientists and neo-liberal Liberal morons won the day - unless Abott and others decide to act on the loophole in the bill - that would be interesting.

 

[katie_tully]

Oh noes, we've been given the right to KILL MORE (POTENTIAL?!) BABIES...

 

[bshoc]

Oh noes, we've been given the right to KILL MORE (POTENTIAL?!) BABIES...

Its the purpose of this bill that really makes you question it, there are already enough stem cells in Australia and international research abroad on this form of research, which to date has not yielded a single real advance. All it does is give scientists the right to play with clones and monetary gains some biotech firms. Howard and Rudd were right when they sided with caution, a bill of this nature must justify itself with evidence, which it did not.

 

[katie_tully]

Actually, they have yielded quite a few advances. The most significant being the reversal of degenerative brain diseases in mice. Mind you these in turn had adverse affects such as tumours on said mice, but the technology remains promising regardless.

Regarding cloning; fanatical scientists interested in cloning humans will do so without it being legal anyway. I wouldnt be suprised if some were already trying it with financial backing from some of the shadier business people.
As you said, there is already an abundance of stem cells, so really what's stopping them?

However why should progress be stopped because of this apparent 'cloning' paranoia by the scientifically deficient and backward naysayers?

 

[Not-That-Bright]

there are already enough stem cells in Australia and international research abroad on this form of research

Embryotic stem cells? No.

which to date has not yielded a single real advance.

Pretty new research, lots of promising results so far.

 

[katie_tully]

Pass me another baby for the soup pot. Har, har, har.

 

[bshoc]

Actually, they have yielded quite a few advances. The most significant being the reversal of degenerative brain diseases in mice. Mind you these in turn had adverse affects such as tumours on said mice, but the technology remains promising regardless.

So why the would you even want to begin testing on humans when there so much yet to do on animals? Sounds stupid, bullish and unethical.

Regarding cloning; fanatical scientists interested in cloning humans will do so without it being legal anyway. I wouldnt be suprised if some were already trying it with financial backing from some of the shadier business people.
As you said, there is already an abundance of stem cells, so really what's stopping them?

Well up until yesterday, prison time.

However why should progress be stopped because of this apparent 'cloning' paranoia by the scientifically deficient and backward naysayers?

Because science is a two way street and lots of dead end side roads, why should a useless, unproven and likely failed form of unethical science be allowed because of this apparent support from the morally deficient and impatient?

 

[bshoc]

Embryotic stem cells? No.

20 years, 0 results?

No thanks.

Pretty new research, lots of promising results so far.

Yes and these advances are going to be made by the tiny Australia biotech industries rather than the huge ones in Europe and South Korea? This bill was indirect subsidy to Australia's failed biotech industry, nothing more.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

20 years, 0 results?

20 years is really nothing in medicine, especially with something as complex/drastic as what we are dealing with here.

I would also claim there have been many huge results, but you're after 'cure for X', a really simplistic analysis imo.

Yes and these advances are going to be made by the tiny Australia biotech industries rather than the huge ones in Europe and South Korea?

All of these places collaborate with each other, the research is large enough that ALL players can find their niche.

 

[katie_tully]

So why the would you even want to begin testing on humans when there so much yet to do on animals? Sounds stupid, bullish and unethical.

Nobody is testing anything on humans.

Well up until yesterday, prison time.

It's still illegal to clone humans, so up until yesterday and including today, tomorrow and next week, it's still illegal. You're wrongfully equating stem cell research to cloning. It's not.

Because science is a two way street and lots of dead end side roads, why should a useless, unproven and likely failed form of unethical science be allowed because of this apparent support from the morally deficient and impatient?

Where did you get your science degree from? It'd be interesting to know how you know so adamantly that stem cell research will fail dismally. As for ethics, what else in science and medicine do you consider unethical? You've already said you agree with animal testing - I would assume that'd be just as unethical?

 

[katie_tully]

20 years, 0 results?

No thanks.

Rome wasn't built in a day. Nor were most medical advances. Should we stop searching for a cure to cancer because it's taken more than 20 years?
Wake up.

 

[bshoc]

Nobody is testing anything on humans.

Cloning, killing, splitting, infusing, deriving, you call that not testing?

It's still illegal to clone humans, so up until yesterday and including today, tomorrow and next week, it's still illegal. You're wrongfully equating stem cel research to cloning. It's not.

Note subset of the bill - "Theraputic Cloning" - look it up.

Where did you get your science degree from?

Actually the decisions reguarding this bill should be made by everybody but scientists.

It'd be interesting to know how you know so adamantly that stem cell research will fail dismally.

Nothing succesful can be developed from 20 years of failure, even nuclear fission took less time than this.

As for ethics, what else in science and medicine do you consider unethical? You've already said you agree with animal testing - I would assume that'd be just as unethical?

Why? Animals aren't human, many animals would make excellent research subjects in terms of actually demostrating some developments that this wonderous technology could bring, instead you agree with letting scientist screw around with human genetics with no viable evidence for success, no explantion as to why current laws were insuffient and no genuine assessment of the risks.

That approach lacks caution and judgement, that alone should be a no from any reasonble indavidual, before ethics are even brought in.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Nothing succesful can be developed from 20 years of failure, even nuclear fission took less time than this.

Medicine is quite a different science where alot of the best testing you could want to do, to yield the best possible results, is risky to human life. It's also not '20 years of failure', real results have happened to move closer towards what is needed for cure(s)... Stem-cell research is a huge new field of medicine though with many possible avenues to explore and alot of work needs to be done.

 

[bshoc]

Rome wasn't built in a day. Nor were most medical advances. Should we stop searching for a cure to cancer because it's taken more than 20 years?
Wake up.

Better we focus on biotechnics, neurology, cybernetics and prosthetics, the sciences that have actually yielded suffiecient results and improvements.

 

[katie_tully]

Cloning, killing, splitting, infusing, deriving, you call that not testing?

Keyword missing being 'human'.

Note subset of the bill - "Theraputic Cloning" - look it up.

Keyword missing being 'human'. Embryonic cells haven't been fertlised by sperm yet, therefore they're not human.

Actually the decisions reguarding this bill should be made by everybody but scientists.

Shit, that'd explain why the bill was passed through parliament by politicians and not through a board like the AMA by doctors and scientists!?

Nothing succesful can be developed from 20 years of failure, even nuclear fission took less time than this.

Uh, so yay for nuclear fission? So despite advances in cancer treatment, because it has taken more than 20 years including many failures, nothing successful will ever amount from the research?

Why? Animals aren't human, many animals would make excellent research subjects in terms of actually demostrating some developments that this wonderous technology could bring, instead you agree with letting scientist screw around with human genetics with no viable evidence for success, no explantion as to why current laws were insuffient and no genuine assessment of the risks.

So we've established that according to you, ethics in science doesn't cover the usage of animals.

 

[katie_tully]

Better we focus on biotechnics, neurology, cybernetics and prosthetics, the sciences that have actually yielded suffiecient results and improvements.

Ah yes, because bioethics, neurology, cybernetics and prosthetics have ALL been less than 20 years in the making? lol. You're so fucking backward.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

What is biotechnics?