5 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Unwritten…
Lexi's Life, Loves and Laughter
© 2012 Unwritten… Provided by WPMU DEV -The WordPress Experts
Daisy Rae Gemini developed by Root.
Hosted by Edublogs.org.
June 19, 2011 @ 5:11 pm
I agree with your points on savior siblings, Lexi. As long as the baby is not harmed to give stem cells to its sibling(and if only the umbilical cord was used they wouldn’t be), then I don’t see a problem.You said this was controversial because of the discarded embryos. I find it ironic that people get up in arms when an embryo is discarded, but if a mother has a miscarriage, everyone responds with “the poor mother lost a child”. Isn’t the embryo that was miscarried basically the same as the embryo that is discarded after in-vitro? I know the in-vitro embryo was discarded on purpose and the miscarried one wasn’t, but the reactions are very different. Just another example of how human ethics can get in the way of facts.
-Michelle
PS good job on your TED Talk:)
June 19, 2011 @ 5:57 pm
First off I’d like to say I really like your TED Talk. (:
It was really interesting hearing you discuss the ethical issues surrounding stem cells as opposed to simply the scientific fact. It is this controversy which makes stem cells unique from other forms of curing diseases. Also, it was nice to hear you say what your own opinion was, because it made it seem more meaningful then simply repeating some opinions from different groups of people in the world.
What I was wondering, however, is how the number of stem cells which can be found in cord blood compares to that of an embryo? Is cord blood or an embryo better simply based on quantity? Also, would it ever be possible to only use cord blood for stem cells if every single child born saved the cord blood? That would mean that creating embryos specifically for stem cells would stop happening.
In terms of using cord blood, are there any ethical issues surrounding this, or is this method the preferred method? In my own opinion, I would be more comfortable with this seeing as an egg was not fertilized for the sole purpose of being used for stem cells.
Anyways, awesome TED talk. Really interesting, and you raise many good points.
June 20, 2011 @ 3:35 am
I would like to say…that was cool. From the first few sentences, I was thinking.
Anyways, I was going to say something….BUT THEN MICHELLE SAID IT FIRST. WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT MICHELLE.
So, anyways. Yeah.
In terms of Savior Siblings…well, not giving someone a proper life (abusing them, neglecting them, so forth) to give someone else a life…That just seems kind of not-very-well-thought-out, I’ll admit. At the same time, though, if the sibling isn’t being harmed…I know that if something were to happen to one of my siblings, and some stem cells from my umbilical cord were what was needed to survive? I’m not sure how I would understand the situation, being a newborn and all, but if I could I’m pretty sure I would tell my parents to use the fricking stem cells.
On embryos: To me, at least, I don’t see a huge problem with discarded embryos. Maybe it’s just me, but…I don’t really find them human, at that point? Or maybe they’re human, but not yet a person?
Anyways. Yeah. You did a really good job on this.
June 20, 2011 @ 9:20 am
Megan:
To answer your question about the quantity of stem cells in an umbilical cord, there are only enough in one cord to treat a child, not an adult. But if everyone, everywhere saved their cord blood, we probably would have enough to treat at least most people who need them.
Also, not many ethical issues surround cord blood, as they are usually just thrown away. The only one I can really think of is for private banking, where they save it so only their family can ever use it, which some people don’t like because they might never need it and it could just be wasted. But umbilical cords are definitely the less controversial way to get stem cells.
June 20, 2011 @ 10:39 am
In that case I find it odd that they don’t simply make that a requirement. If they were to save all the cord blood and put it into a place where anyone who needed it could access it, then couldn’t they remove the need for embryonic stem cells and remove the controversy?
It seems to me that this would be a good way to still cure people but not get others up in arms. However, I’m sure people would still find something to complain about, as they always do.