Sight restored within weeks with ADULT Stem Cell contacts!
Sight restored within weeks with ADULT Stem Cell contacts!
Last Updated on Monday, 28 March 2011 10:30 Written by Administrator Monday, 28 March 2011 10:30
Science Matters #3: This has got to be the coolest adult stem cell treatment yet! Scientists are placing adult stem cells on contact lenses, placing them on patients eyes and they’re seeing (no pun intended) dramatic improvements within weeks! We also take a look at how confusing the simplified headlines have been in reporting this story so far. The BBC Story: tinyurl.com Link to YouTube video showing the procedure: tinyurl.com The abstract: tinyurl.com Story about adult stem cell transplants helping soldiers who have suffered from mustard gas attacks: tinyurl.com Follow us on Twitter: Twitter.com More stem cell info at StemCellAnswers.com Josh’s brutally honest podcast on abortion cell: ProLifePodcast.net
What about Universal Stem Cells (being researched in Israel & mentioned in one of the popular books on stem cells
Also what about dedifferentiating adult stem cells from an organ such as an eye, to the point where it becomes embryonic enough to RE-differentiate into another organ, such as a nose?
What about Universal Stem Cells (being researched in Israel & mentioned in one of the popular books on stem cells
Also what about dedifferentiating adult stem cells from an organ such as an eye, to the point where it becomes embryonic enough to RE-differentiate into another organ, such as a nose?
You disgust me.
An infected appendix is human too, and has more cells and a more complex structure than a fertilized egg.
@Xaulted It seems to me that embryonic stem cell research continues on because Democrats and scientists are desperate to “prove its worth” so that abortions can be validated.
@InnerHealingCenter Quick question: why does his “pro-life” views matter? Are his arguments any less valid because he’s pro-life? The question is whether or not the unborn child is a person with value. Pro-lifers say yes, killing living humans is wrong and that every member of our species is valuable. Pro-choicers say no, a human is not a valuable person until some arbitrary point in his/her development (usually birth or viability) making everyone valuable at different points in time.
While I like the fact that you report about adult stem cells helping to return sight to the blind, when I listened to your take on the difference between adult and embryonic stem cells your “Prolife” stance became obvious. However, you cannot take away the fact that Bush delayed the use of embryonic stem cells. Perhaps it led to greater investigation of adult stem cell research, but it wasn’t due ot scientific intentions. It was all science had left to it after Bush took away fed. funding.
@Xaulted
Interestingly enough, every single one of my posts directly pertaining to the science behind it is missing. Hmm…there have been 4 to date. That’s curious.
@Informer3X Everyone lacks understanding in everything. It’s not presumptuous to comment on a topic that interest me and I don’t have to have a PhD in the medical field to make a comment on this topic. How ridiculous is that? I have yet to presume anything about you personally or name call, unlike you with your very first comment to me, which was very rude.
None of your comments even deal with my point or the point of this video, so why are you still commenting here is beyond me.
@Xaulted
It’s not. No one is shoving anything down your throat. Was it not presumptuous of you to make comments on a topic you admit to lack some understanding on? If you want to continue going ad hominem on me, I could care less.
@Informer3X I don’t care if ES did exactly everything they thought it would do… ie, cure diseases, defects, ailments ect… It doesn’t make it right to do so. I think iPSCs are a good alternative to get the same means without having to take from embryos. There is a heavy moral component here which is the issue… otherwise why would it matter either way? What do you think the point of this video is?
@Informer3X Regardless, Even if I do lack a bit of understanding on this topic, and I’m sure I do, that gives you no reason or right to presume anything about me. Like you’re the all knowing messenger that has wondered onto this page just to set me straight by name-calling. I guess I should feel so privileged right? But how is this informing me Mr. Informer?
@Xaulted
I arrogantly presume so because your comments seem incredibly, well, extreme. “NO promise” and “ZERO evidence” and “no sense and is a waste of money” all indicate a lack of understanding of the topic.
@Xaulted
That’s peculiar. I addressed the issue of ES cells vs adult stem cells in other comments, but they seem to be missing. I don’t have the motivation to re-write all of it, so here’s the gist. ES cells require signalling, as do iPSCs, which means the time from research to treatment is slower. Adult stem cells just require extraction, culture, and implantation, so it’s quicker, yes, but affords fewer lines of differentiation.
@Informer3X Another thing, why is it that you so arrogantly presume that I’m some kind of 1500′s Amish-like young earth creationist because I disagree with using ESC’s instead of ASC’s? Makes no sense.
@Informer3X Instead of all the ad-homs, why don’t you provide some evidence that apparently your privy to that has eluded the scientific community? Not sure if you even watched this video, but I was commenting on the point of this video (imagine that), namely ESCR vs ASCR and the moral component to this whole issue. iPSC’s are different then ASC’s, so not sure why you brought that up. I wrote my comment a year ago and still ESC’s have made no headway… so where is this evidence for ESC’s?
@Xaulted
“ZERO evidence”? What science are you talking about? The same one which tells you that dinosaurs lived with humans, evolution is a lie caused by a flood, and the earth is a few thousand years old? And that the universe revolves around earth?
The issue with iPSCs (not ASCR) is that they have been experimentally found to produce tumors and cancers in immuno-compromised subjects. Gene reprogramming is exceptionally risky in these situations.
@ChristianMusician85
the zygote though is just a ball of cells when it first comes into existence.after it starts to hollow out and becomes the blastocyst. it doesnt even begin to take the form of a human until it developes into the embryo.
@ChristianMusician85
im starting to side with you more because just now i realised that the baby being aborted could possibly be the one who finds the cure for cancer
@forester9415 One with unique DNA. It’s not just a ‘strand of hair” because the zygote makes up all of the individual in that current state of development.
@forester9415 Your adoption question is a ridiculous one. There will always be families looking to adopt children. Besides which, from everything I’ve heard there are more families look to adopt than there are children to adopt. And your strand of hair is not human because a) it has your DNA and b), it’s not a separate entity. The sperm and ovum are also products of a person’s body. Once the two are joined, a unique individual is created.
a zygote is just a fertilized egg, not an individial human being. saying it is would be like saying a strand of hair is human, because after all it contains human DNA.
youre right but what if she couldnt find any one to adopt?
@forester9415 So now you’re twisting my words to say wha you want them to mean, not what they actually meant? Of course, if someone is irresponsible they shouldn’t be surprised of the consequences. But killing a child is not a solution; it only compounds one wrong on top of another. If a woman doesn’t have family support, there is always an alternative: adoption. It may not always be the more favorable alternatie, but it is better than murder.
@forester9415 Why is the mother’s right to kill her child more important than the child’s right to live (which, by the way, is the first unalienable right guaranteed in the Declaration of Independence, the right to life). The child is not just a heap of cells. In fact, when the child is a fetus he/she clearly resembles a child. The only reason for going through the zygote and embryo stages is to develop everything. At no stage in development is the unborn simply a “clump of cells.”