• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Veto

Disagreeable

Well-known member
Bush vetos stem cell bill that allows excess embryos to be used in medical research. Instead, they'll be disposed of as medical waste. Only in the Bush world would that make sense. Link below.

"US President George W. Bush has used his first veto to block legislation expanding embryonic stem cell research, putting him at odds with top scientists, most Americans and some in his own Republican Party."


http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,19849967-5005961,00.html
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
Interesting topic. I welcomed his veto of course. Can you name me all the scientific break throughs from the embryonic stem cell research or treatments? Human or otherwise?
 

memanpa

Well-known member
not unless she finds some one else opinion and can copy it!!
DIS has no orignial thoughts other than those that make her appear the poor little tiny teeni picked on little wahhhhhha whahhhaa
Somebody done some body wrong SONG again! she knows that one by heart
 

Cal

Well-known member
It just seems to me like some esteemed socialist mecca out there that the left would love to emulate must be making all kinds of strides using ESC's. We probably don't even need to bother!! Uhhh, Dis, care to list the advances made and provide a link?
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
I'll go ahead and play my cards . Dis can respond if she wishes. Adult stem cells is where the money is being spent by private companies. There is less chance of rejection I hear and less risk of cancers developing. It's workable technology NOW. Here's a good link to the advancements/treatments that have been made using ASC's and the ones so far by ESC's.
http://www.stemcellresearch.org/facts/CheckTheScore.pdf
 

Disagreeable

Well-known member
Red Robin said:
Interesting topic. I welcomed his veto of course. Can you name me all the scientific break throughs from the embryonic stem cell research or treatments? Human or otherwise?

There are several promising programs ongoing. But there has been little actual research with stem cells because the lines the Administration gave the research community to use are limited. Some states are going to fund their own research, CA and, I think, NJ have passed large bond issues to fund private research.

You welcome the fact they are thrown out as medical waste? As I said, only in the Bush world would some warped person welcome that.

President Bush showed us the snowflake babies, but isn't trying to get a law in place to stop the other embryos from being discarded as waste? Keep spinning, but I think you'll have a hard time with that one. They're either children or they're not. If they're children and cannot be used for "spare parts", then how can they be discarded as medical waste?
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
Disagreeable said:
Red Robin said:
Interesting topic. I welcomed his veto of course. Can you name me all the scientific break throughs from the embryonic stem cell research or treatments? Human or otherwise?

There are several promising programs ongoing. But there has been little actual research with stem cells because the lines the Administration gave the research community to use are limited. Some states are going to fund their own research, CA and, I think, NJ have passed large bond issues to fund private research.

You welcome the fact they are thrown out as medical waste? As I said, only in the Bush world would some warped person welcome that.

President Bush showed us the snowflake babies, but isn't trying to get a law in place to stop the other embryos from being discarded as waste? Keep spinning, but I think you'll have a hard time with that one. They're either children or they're not. If they're children and cannot be used for "spare parts", then how can they be discarded as medical waste?
82% of the donors say they have plans to implant the embryos in the future. Where is the link to say they all are going to be thrown out..???? hmmmm? You wouldn't just make a bald face lie would you? If none were going to be implanted, they are still babies and deserve every protection afforded to any person.
 

Disagreeable

Well-known member
Red Robin said:
Disagreeable said:
Red Robin said:
Interesting topic. I welcomed his veto of course. Can you name me all the scientific break throughs from the embryonic stem cell research or treatments? Human or otherwise?

There are several promising programs ongoing. But there has been little actual research with stem cells because the lines the Administration gave the research community to use are limited. Some states are going to fund their own research, CA and, I think, NJ have passed large bond issues to fund private research.

You welcome the fact they are thrown out as medical waste? As I said, only in the Bush world would some warped person welcome that.

President Bush showed us the snowflake babies, but isn't trying to get a law in place to stop the other embryos from being discarded as waste? Keep spinning, but I think you'll have a hard time with that one. They're either children or they're not. If they're children and cannot be used for "spare parts", then how can they be discarded as medical waste?
82% of the donors say they have plans to implant the embryos in the future. Where is the link to say they all are going to be thrown out..???? hmmmm? You wouldn't just make a bald face lie would you? If none were going to be implanted, they are still babies and deserve every protection afforded to any person.

No, I don't lie. Here are a couple of links. Now you show me where 82% of the donors say they have plans to implant, from a recognized source, of course. And so what if they implant one or two? Most of them produce several and those are slated to become medical waste. But it's against Bush's religious principals to use them for medical research! Only in his warped world would this make sense!

"You may be surprised to learn that there are a significant number of people who do not want to use their frozen embryos to become pregnant. These are typically people that have completed their families and are not interested in having any more children. Having embryos remaining creates a very difficult situation for these families. The embryos can be discarded as medical waste, but the decision to destroy the embryos is not made easily. Couples with children resulting from IVF treatment often view the frozen embryos as potential children and siblings for their existing children. Coming to terms with destroying the embryos can be impossible, and many couples avoid taking this decision by simply leaving the embryos frozen indefinitely. In the UK, the government has taken action against these couples by ordering the destruction of all embryos in frozen storage for more than 5 years."

http://www.infertilitydoctor.com/lab/lab_freeze.htm

"Despite the national soul-searching stirred up by stem cell research, human embryos are discarded all the time in fertility clinics - and hardly anyone seems to mind.

At one Bay Area clinic, they are flushed down the drain in a metal sink. At another, a technician drops them into a medical waste bin, to be picked up and incinerated by hospital staff.

At still another, a "quiet area" is set aside in the lab, where frozen embryos are thawed and allowed to live out their last days - usually no more than three or four at most.


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/08/20/MN58092.DTL
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
It was 88.2% according to rand. I guess you were just wrong instead of lying. Only you know.

The Legend of the 400,000 Embryos
That there are 400,000 frozen human embryos that could provide a potentially unlimited supply of stem cells has become a truism of the stem cell debate. Indeed, in recent letters to President Bush, members of both the House and Senate explicitly refer to these 400,000 frozen embryos in urging the administration to change its current policy on embryonic stem cell research (ESCR).

A further truism is that the stem cells lines that could be derived from these frozen embryos have the potential to cure numerous diseases, but that such cures remain just around the corner and just out of reach because the Administration refuses to fund research in which these embryos would be destroyed. After all, yet another truism goes, the vast majority of these embryos will likely be destroyed anyway. Because the number of frozen embryos is so large there is an underlying assumption, accepted almost without question, that an equally large number of therapeutic stem cells can be derived from them.

But like all such truisms, there is little truth behind these assumptions:

According to a 2002 survey by the RAND Corporation of IVF clinics in the United States , the vast majority of the 400,000 currently frozen embryos are NOT slated for destruction. The vast majority — 88.2% — are being held for family building.
Only a small fraction — 2.2% --- are slated to be discarded.
An only slight higher percentage –- 2.8% — have been designated for research. That means of the original 400,000 frozen embryos, only 11,000 are actually available to be destroyed for their stem cells.
Only a small number of those 11,000 embryos would actual yield stem cells. Using what it calls “a conservative estimate” the RAND study calculated that only about 275 stem cell lines could actually be developed from the embryos available for research. And even then, the RAND study concedes that this number “is probably an overestimate.”
Leading fertility experts also agree that frozen embryos would yield a far smaller number of stem cell lines than is often assumed. Dr. William Gibbons, of the Jones Institute for Reproductive Medicine in Virginia, says the Institute has about 200 frozen embryos available for research, but “there is no guarantee that we would get any stem cells from those 200 frozen embryos… We hear all this stuff about how all these embryos are available, but we just didn’t think there was much there.” And Dr. Barry Behr of Stanford University notes that “By far, by far, the vast majority of embryos that are frozen are not good. If we thawed 10,000 embryos, we would get 100 or so that are viable blastocysts”.

So behind the seemingly impressive number of “400,000 frozen embryos,” the reality is that the actual number of stem cell lines likely to be produced from them is so small as to be clinically useless. In order to treat diseases (still a very distant prospect using human embryonic stem cells) hundreds of thousands more embryos, beyond those currently frozen and available for research, would be needed. This could only be achieved by a deliberate effort to create new embryos for the sole purpose of destroying them — an outcome that the use of the frozen embryos is supposed to avoid, but would most likely cause.

And if these 275 potential stem cell lines derived from frozen embryos would therefore be used only in basic research, then the number of human embryonic stem cell lines already available for federal funding under current administration policy (a number sure to increase) is already sufficient for this purpose.
http://www.stemcellresearch.org/
 

Disagreeable

Well-known member
Red Robin said:
It was 88.2% according to rand. I guess you were just wrong instead of lying. Only you know.

The Legend of the 400,000 Embryos
That there are 400,000 frozen human embryos that could provide a potentially unlimited supply of stem cells has become a truism of the stem cell debate. Indeed, in recent letters to President Bush, members of both the House and Senate explicitly refer to these 400,000 frozen embryos in urging the administration to change its current policy on embryonic stem cell research (ESCR).

A further truism is that the stem cells lines that could be derived from these frozen embryos have the potential to cure numerous diseases, but that such cures remain just around the corner and just out of reach because the Administration refuses to fund research in which these embryos would be destroyed. After all, yet another truism goes, the vast majority of these embryos will likely be destroyed anyway. Because the number of frozen embryos is so large there is an underlying assumption, accepted almost without question, that an equally large number of therapeutic stem cells can be derived from them.

But like all such truisms, there is little truth behind these assumptions:

According to a 2002 survey by the RAND Corporation of IVF clinics in the United States , the vast majority of the 400,000 currently frozen embryos are NOT slated for destruction. The vast majority — 88.2% — are being held for family building.
Only a small fraction — 2.2% --- are slated to be discarded.
An only slight higher percentage –- 2.8% — have been designated for research. That means of the original 400,000 frozen embryos, only 11,000 are actually available to be destroyed for their stem cells.
Only a small number of those 11,000 embryos would actual yield stem cells. Using what it calls “a conservative estimate” the RAND study calculated that only about 275 stem cell lines could actually be developed from the embryos available for research. And even then, the RAND study concedes that this number “is probably an overestimate.”
Leading fertility experts also agree that frozen embryos would yield a far smaller number of stem cell lines than is often assumed. Dr. William Gibbons, of the Jones Institute for Reproductive Medicine in Virginia, says the Institute has about 200 frozen embryos available for research, but “there is no guarantee that we would get any stem cells from those 200 frozen embryos… We hear all this stuff about how all these embryos are available, but we just didn’t think there was much there.” And Dr. Barry Behr of Stanford University notes that “By far, by far, the vast majority of embryos that are frozen are not good. If we thawed 10,000 embryos, we would get 100 or so that are viable blastocysts”.

So behind the seemingly impressive number of “400,000 frozen embryos,” the reality is that the actual number of stem cell lines likely to be produced from them is so small as to be clinically useless. In order to treat diseases (still a very distant prospect using human embryonic stem cells) hundreds of thousands more embryos, beyond those currently frozen and available for research, would be needed. This could only be achieved by a deliberate effort to create new embryos for the sole purpose of destroying them — an outcome that the use of the frozen embryos is supposed to avoid, but would most likely cause.

And if these 275 potential stem cell lines derived from frozen embryos would therefore be used only in basic research, then the number of human embryonic stem cell lines already available for federal funding under current administration policy (a number sure to increase) is already sufficient for this purpose.
http://www.stemcellresearch.org/

You know I'm not lying. And I'm not wrong. It doesn't say they're not "medical waste." It's not current, but if we accept their numbers, it still says there are 400,000 embryos and 2.2% of them are slated for destruction, medical waste. I thought every life was precious? Every embryo was a child. Now you tell me you're accepting the fact that 8,000 babies will be casually dropped in the disposal? I do believe that's hypocritical. Another Rand link (below) says an additional 4.5 percent are held in storage for other reasons, including lost contact with a patient, patient death, etc. Eventually those will probably also be destroyed if they can't find anyone to take responsibility for them. So now we're up to 25,000 or so. If your President actually believed what he claims, that, according to Tony Snow, destroying an embryo was the same as murder, why isn't he fighting for a law to protect the lives of the unborn? Why aren't you? I call blatant hypocriticy when he points to the snowflake babies and says these children are not "spare parts" and yet allows the destruction of, what even Rand says, is as many as 24,000 other snowflakes.

Rand link: http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB9038/index1.html
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
Disagreeable said:
Red Robin said:
It was 88.2% according to rand. I guess you were just wrong instead of lying. Only you know.

The Legend of the 400,000 Embryos
That there are 400,000 frozen human embryos that could provide a potentially unlimited supply of stem cells has become a truism of the stem cell debate. Indeed, in recent letters to President Bush, members of both the House and Senate explicitly refer to these 400,000 frozen embryos in urging the administration to change its current policy on embryonic stem cell research (ESCR).

A further truism is that the stem cells lines that could be derived from these frozen embryos have the potential to cure numerous diseases, but that such cures remain just around the corner and just out of reach because the Administration refuses to fund research in which these embryos would be destroyed. After all, yet another truism goes, the vast majority of these embryos will likely be destroyed anyway. Because the number of frozen embryos is so large there is an underlying assumption, accepted almost without question, that an equally large number of therapeutic stem cells can be derived from them.

But like all such truisms, there is little truth behind these assumptions:

According to a 2002 survey by the RAND Corporation of IVF clinics in the United States , the vast majority of the 400,000 currently frozen embryos are NOT slated for destruction. The vast majority — 88.2% — are being held for family building.
Only a small fraction — 2.2% --- are slated to be discarded.
An only slight higher percentage –- 2.8% — have been designated for research. That means of the original 400,000 frozen embryos, only 11,000 are actually available to be destroyed for their stem cells.
Only a small number of those 11,000 embryos would actual yield stem cells. Using what it calls “a conservative estimate” the RAND study calculated that only about 275 stem cell lines could actually be developed from the embryos available for research. And even then, the RAND study concedes that this number “is probably an overestimate.”
Leading fertility experts also agree that frozen embryos would yield a far smaller number of stem cell lines than is often assumed. Dr. William Gibbons, of the Jones Institute for Reproductive Medicine in Virginia, says the Institute has about 200 frozen embryos available for research, but “there is no guarantee that we would get any stem cells from those 200 frozen embryos… We hear all this stuff about how all these embryos are available, but we just didn’t think there was much there.” And Dr. Barry Behr of Stanford University notes that “By far, by far, the vast majority of embryos that are frozen are not good. If we thawed 10,000 embryos, we would get 100 or so that are viable blastocysts”.

So behind the seemingly impressive number of “400,000 frozen embryos,” the reality is that the actual number of stem cell lines likely to be produced from them is so small as to be clinically useless. In order to treat diseases (still a very distant prospect using human embryonic stem cells) hundreds of thousands more embryos, beyond those currently frozen and available for research, would be needed. This could only be achieved by a deliberate effort to create new embryos for the sole purpose of destroying them — an outcome that the use of the frozen embryos is supposed to avoid, but would most likely cause.

And if these 275 potential stem cell lines derived from frozen embryos would therefore be used only in basic research, then the number of human embryonic stem cell lines already available for federal funding under current administration policy (a number sure to increase) is already sufficient for this purpose.
http://www.stemcellresearch.org/

You know I'm not lying. And I'm not wrong. It doesn't say they're not "medical waste." It's not current, but if we accept their numbers, it still says there are 400,000 embryos and 2.2% of them are slated for destruction, medical waste. I thought every life was precious? Every embryo was a child. Now you tell me you're accepting the fact that 8,000 babies will be casually dropped in the disposal? I do believe that's hypocritical. Another Rand link (below) says an additional 4.5 percent are held in storage for other reasons, including lost contact with a patient, patient death, etc. Eventually those will probably also be destroyed if they can't find anyone to take responsibility for them. So now we're up to 25,000 or so. If your President actually believed what he claims, that, according to Tony Snow, destroying an embryo was the same as murder, why isn't he fighting for a law to protect the lives of the unborn? Why aren't you? I call blatant hypocriticy when he points to the snowflake babies and says these children are not "spare parts" and yet allows the destruction of, what even Rand says, is as many as 24,000 other snowflakes.

Rand link: http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB9038/index1.html
I count distorting the truth as lying. You are lying. You know it's your goal to further the aborton on demand cause in this country...not mine. I would protect each unborn baby to the fullest if it was up to me. You on the other hand think they are nothing more than medical waste. These babies have no value to you what so ever yet you criticise Bush for "not protecting" these lives. I'd say Bush's veto is protecting these lives...the very thing you hate about him. I call that blatent distortion. A lie. You have no moral compass.
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
Disagreeable said:
Instead, they'll be disposed of as medical waste.
Here's what you said dis. I showed you where 88% of the people said they had plans to implant the embryos and you said you weren't wrong or lying and that Bush wanted to use them as medical waste... More lies.
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Get a grip....they WILL BE disposed of as medical waste!!


You're so gung-ho on saving the unborn....how many are you gonna adopt? Have them implanted in a surrogate...there's plenty of women out there willing to do it....hmmmmmmm?????


Put you money where ya mouth is....what's your contribution to save the unborn?
 

Disagreeable

Well-known member
Red Robin said:
I count distorting the truth as lying. You are lying. You know it's your goal to further the aborton on demand cause in this country...not mine. I would protect each unborn baby to the fullest if it was up to me. You on the other hand think they are nothing more than medical waste. These babies have no value to you what so ever yet you criticise Bush for "not protecting" these lives. I'd say Bush's veto is protecting these lives...the very thing you hate about him. I call that blatent distortion. A lie. You have no moral compass.

Funny, I call distoring the truth lying, too. And you're distorting the facts from your own article. It says "The vast majority — 88.2% — are being held for family building." It does not say 88.2% plan to implant them. I didn't say they were medical waste, but they are disposed of as medical waste. I say the President pulled the wool over your eyes. He vetoed the bill that would have allowed the owners of these embryos to donate them for medical research. So instead of being put to use and possibly helping find cures for diseases, they will be discarded as medical waste. Spin and call names all you want, but those are the facts. Only in the warped world you and Bush live in would this make sense.
 

memanpa

Well-known member
Disagreeable said:
Red Robin said:
I count distorting the truth as lying. You are lying. You know it's your goal to further the aborton on demand cause in this country...not mine. I would protect each unborn baby to the fullest if it was up to me. You on the other hand think they are nothing more than medical waste. These babies have no value to you what so ever yet you criticise Bush for "not protecting" these lives. I'd say Bush's veto is protecting these lives...the very thing you hate about him. I call that blatent distortion. A lie. You have no moral compass.

Funny, I call distoring the truth lying, too. And you're distorting the facts from your own article. It says "The vast majority — 88.2% — are being held for family building." It does not say 88.2% plan to implant them. I didn't say they were medical waste, but they are disposed of as medical waste. I say the President pulled the wool over your eyes. He vetoed the bill that would have allowed the owners of these embryos to donate them for medical research. So instead of being put to use and possibly helping find cures for diseases, they will be discarded as medical waste. Spin and call names all you want, but those are the facts. Only in the warped world you and Bush live in would this make sense.

hummmmmmmm god old DIS calls Dis torting the truth is lying!
gee golly wizz she distorts everything she posts!
DIS what does that make you :D :D :D
seems like you ppen mouth insert foot a lot lately with your posts :D
but then that is why we have a vacinne for hoof and mouth disease unfotunatly we can not use it on you!
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
So your kids were frozen embroys from some other couple? Well...RR I'm proud of you then!!! Excellent move!!!


Me....no I fostered kids, 2 and now have another one I'm resp for their college fund.


Sorry Charlie....I had to have the baby cradle taken out and it's a play pen now!!! Certain conditions are not worth risking in my book.
 

nonothing

Well-known member
memanpa said:
Disagreeable said:
Red Robin said:
I count distorting the truth as lying. You are lying. You know it's your goal to further the aborton on demand cause in this country...not mine. I would protect each unborn baby to the fullest if it was up to me. You on the other hand think they are nothing more than medical waste. These babies have no value to you what so ever yet you criticise Bush for "not protecting" these lives. I'd say Bush's veto is protecting these lives...the very thing you hate about him. I call that blatent distortion. A lie. You have no moral compass.

Funny, I call distoring the truth lying, too. And you're distorting the facts from your own article. It says "The vast majority — 88.2% — are being held for family building." It does not say 88.2% plan to implant them. I didn't say they were medical waste, but they are disposed of as medical waste. I say the President pulled the wool over your eyes. He vetoed the bill that would have allowed the owners of these embryos to donate them for medical research. So instead of being put to use and possibly helping find cures for diseases, they will be discarded as medical waste. Spin and call names all you want, but those are the facts. Only in the warped world you and Bush live in would this make sense.

hummmmmmmm god old DIS calls Dis torting the truth is lying!
gee golly wizz she distorts everything she posts!
DIS what does that make you :D :D :D
seems like you ppen mouth insert foot a lot lately with your posts :D
but then that is why we have a vacinne for hoof and mouth disease unfotunatly we can not use it on you!

dis becareful,looks like this guy/gal follows you all over ranchers.....its getting kinda creepy now...I think the dude running this site should monitor this person....its looks to me like you have become thier obsession......
 

memanpa

Well-known member
NONOTHING!
if IT was my obsession makes me wonder what your RELATIONSHIP with it is?
crawl back under IT"S desk and wait for the next puppy treat :D :D

you tried making this statement once before, didn't work then won't now!
 
Top