posted on May 22, 2005 06:04:25 PM new
KD - Arguing??? Where?
See....no smilies in my post...means I'm serious. Otherwise..winking when I'm joking...or kidding around. And laughting smilies when I'm laughing.
Then I did my little
---
to separate one statement from another.
----------------
A long time ago when we had another of these PETA, human vs animal discussions...there were a couple of posters here who thought stepping on ants or killing spiders was just terrible. There are several levels in those of you who support some of the PETA platforms.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on May 24, 2005 04:43:33 PM new
House Approves Stem Cell Funding Changes
Tuesday, May 24, 2005
WASHINGTON House lawmakers voted to loosen restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research (search) Tuesday, despite President Bush's threat to veto the legislation.
In a second vote, lawmakers overwhelmingly approved devoting more funds to the research of stem cells collected from umbilical cord blood ? a measure the White House supported. The bill was approved 431-1.
The house approved the embryonic stem cell bill by a 238-194 vote, but that number is short of the two-thirds majority that would be needed to override the Bush's apparently inevitable veto.
Speaking at the White House on Tuesday afternoon, Bush said that grave moral issues are at stake if the federal government agreed to expand embryonic stem cell research.
"I believe America must pursue the tremendous possibilities of science and I believe we can do so while still fostering and encouraging a respect for life in all its stages," Bush said in an East Room event that include 21 "snowflake babies," or children born from "adopted" frozen embryos.
"We must remember that real human lives are involved, both the lives of those with diseases that might find cures from this research and the lives of the embryos that will be destroyed in the process. The children here today are reminders that every human life is a precious gift of matchless value," the president said.
---
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on May 24, 2005 04:51:55 PM new
My opinion, of which is probably nill in here, is that with the scientific breakthroughs we are having and the men and women dedicated to finding cures that soon we will have a cure for most everything and we won't have to destroy embroys to do it.
The American public is in such a hurry that they can't take time to smell the roses. They want a cure now and they don't care how it is gotten.
posted on May 24, 2005 05:01:40 PM new
Libra - We all want a cure. But as you say...from different methods.
And I also feel with private funding...not government. It will just become one more deep, deep hole our tax dollars will endlessly have to feed. It they think there's such GREAT potential for this....then why aren't private donors stepping up with their own dollars to fund this.
I can't only hope President Bush keeps to his word...and won't sign it if it gets to his desk.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Four More Years....YES!!!
[ edited by Linda_K on May 24, 2005 05:03 PM ]
posted on May 24, 2005 05:39:13 PM new
Linda - If you know anything about the topic you know that there are millions of private funds going into the research but it's not enough.
I realize that you don't like the concept of government spending but in the long run, isn't more money saved on public assistance, disability, welfare, medicaid, medicare and every other form of goverment funding that goes into the care of individuals that are afflicted with dieases that could be cured via stem cell research than the short term costs of the research? Do you think that the goverment should also withdraw it's funding from cancer research, infectious disease and the plethora of other medical ailments that they funnel time money and resources into? If it makes you happy, the military just cut about 100 million in cancer research....but that was to funnel it back into the war.
BTW - As someone that has consistantly stated that the US is a democratic nation where majority rules, why are you so anxious to see the wishes of the majority of the country ignored. I really don't get that. It's seems that you care about the opinion of the majority only when they agree with you.
Libra - it's wonderful that you have those hopes but if they are not rooted in reality then it becomes little more than wishful thinking.
~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on May 24, 2005 07:10:36 PM new
The house passed it today, by a pretty good margin, if I'm not mistaken....in spite of the President's threat to veto. Hopefully this will send a message regarding the majority of the voters' opinions on the matter.
I still haven't heard what the opponents of this measure are willing to do for or with all those little frozen proto-humans. Linda? Libra? How many can we defrost and send you?
____________________________________________
Dick Cheney: "I have not suggested there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11..."
posted on May 24, 2005 07:16:13 PM new
profes, i heard that many of the so-called left-over embryo's dont work, that they are ineffectual for what the scientists are trying to do - that is why they need fresh new ones.
I think that is what the Bush admin is against, if i am understanding it correctly.
posted on May 24, 2005 07:30:53 PM new
Dbl - not true. Have you seen clips of his press conference today? He carted out 20 some children and the parents that "adopted" them in emboitic stage. The proposal is to use frozen fertilized eggs that the owners have decided not to use. These are the same types of eggs used in state and privately funded research and are where the approved prexisting (but for the most part contaminated) lines came from. Bushes big "tug the heartstrings" arguement today was that these eggs hould not be used for stem cell research because they can be "adopted" by others couples wanting to have a child,. Of course he conveniently completely ignored the fact that the owners of these eggs might not want their biological child to be grown and raised by complete strangers. He completely ignored that the eggs that are used in stem cell research are donated by their owners for that express purpose.
~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on May 24, 2005 08:40:56 PM new
fenix - To be honest I don't think the average American has done any research into this subject. Don't think some could tell you the difference between the different types of stem cell studies. Imo, I think most here a little news on it...think 'hey that sounds good' and that's pretty much how they've formed their opinion.
that could be cured via stem cell research than the short term costs of the research?
depends on which type of SCR you'r speaking about. I haven't read of any successes with the embryonic cell research...but have with adult stem cell and nothing except encouraging news on cord blood research too. So...while many see it all as one...it's not.
Do you think that the goverment should also withdraw it's funding from cancer research,
no, but I believe KD once stated she felt that money was being wasted...maybe there are others that do too. I'm not one of them though.
If it makes you happy, the military just cut about 100 million in cancer research....but that was to funnel it back into the war.
Haven't read anything about that. But please understand the reason for my being suspecious that's true. Because the dems have said the republican have made cuts in many things that when it's checked out...they didn't.
BTW - As someone that has consistantly stated that the US is a democratic nation where majority rules, why are you so anxious to see the wishes of the majority of the country ignored. I really don't get that. It's seems that you care about the opinion of the majority only when they agree with you.
I can understand how some might see it that way. But it's not...least for me. This is different because it involves creating human life to destroy it. Unlike so many of the other issues...where it's just a disagreement on policy or the way that policy will be carried out.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on May 24, 2005 09:16:45 PM new
I find you can't debate with fenix is because she is always right. Get it she sees all, and knows all.
Tell me how much will the private labs or government have to pay for each frozen empbro that the donor's don't want anymore? I asked that earlier. I bet they aren't going to give them away free and then when others here about the get rich quick scheme more will become available. That is the american way.
posted on May 24, 2005 09:30:37 PM new
As a physician and a futurist I have been monitoring the future of stem cells for over two decades, and advise corporations on these issues. Stem cell investment, research effort, and treatment focus is moving rapidly away from embryonic stem cells (ethical and technical challenges) to adult stem cells which are turning out to be far easier to convert into different tissues than we thought in 2000-2003.
posted on May 24, 2005 09:41:30 PM new
fenix, yes I saw the press conference. But i also watched some scientists discuss it and in a round about way that is what I thought they were saying. The already made embryos cannot do what they want in the research as far as medical cures. I will have to read/listen to more but that is what I gleaned from it at the time.
edit to add:
okay maybe it was a parade. But I never knew these 'snowflake' kids existed. Surely, it cant be a bad thing for people who want children and are unable to produce them?
.
[ edited by dblfugger9 on May 24, 2005 10:08 PM ]
posted on May 24, 2005 09:57:23 PM new
Libra - Excellent article. Describes in easy-to-understand detail the differences between what is working, what's not and how quickly they're already moving ahead in this research. Nothing like trying to read all those scientific research papers either.
And explains why they're finding more positive results using peoples own stem cells than the embryotic ones.
Hope many take a look, might explain a few things to them.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Four More Years....YES!!!
[ edited by Linda_K on May 24, 2005 09:59 PM ]
posted on May 24, 2005 10:37:03 PM new
DBL - Don't get me wrong, I don't believe that it is a bad thing at all. I think it's great. I also think it's completely irrelevant to the stem cell issue. Some people will have wish to donate their fertilized eggs to someone wanting a child, others will wish to donate their eggs to stem cell research and the fact is that one should not have great rights than the other.
Libra - I find that you are,for the most part, an uninformed individual that argues based on opinion rather than fact and when presented with actual facts disguises her inability to take counter them with condescending bullsh*t. But at least you hold moral superiority over everyone else right?
As far as your question regarding how much researchers will have to pay? I guarantee you that it is less than they curently pay for access to the existing trademarked lines that are approved. You also seem to be ignoring the fact that there will be many individuals that DONATE their eggs, just as there are now for the private and state funded research and that the other great aspect of the american way is that as some may attept to exploit a situation, others will come forth to donate expressly to countermand thier actions.
Linda - Embryonic stem cell research has been shown to cure partial paralysis in lab rats. Given the limited scope of current research I'd say thats something to trumpet.
The military numbers were announced on Fox and CNN on Friday I believe, the bulk of the funds were coming from cuts in breast cancer research however Prostate and another form that I cannot remember were also cut. I think Ovarian cancer did receive a small increase. I tried to find a link that listed the numbers but couldn't find one - if Helen comes by she might be able to find it.
~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on May 24, 2005 10:46:39 PM new
fenix - Embryonic stem cell research has been shown to cure partial paralysis in lab rats. Given the limited scope of current research I'd say thats something to trumpet.
So has adult stem research and they're not having as many tumor growths from using the adult cells as they are from using the embryonic ones. They're finding, more and more that the he embryonic ones are too unreliable - can't be controlled as easily...whereas the adult ones aren't presenting those problems. That's why the research that is going on has mostly headed to the adult cells.
Like I previously said...some scientists have stated that to go down the embryo path...is to be going backwards rather than forwards in this research.
Anyone wanting to understand this can read the link Libra posted. It put it into simply perspective for those who don't keep up with this research. As I'd bet MOST American's don't.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on May 24, 2005 10:57:37 PM new
fenix Read the article I posted then tell me what you think. I will bet you skipped right over it as you thought it wasn't important or you think I don't know anything. You make such outlandish statements about me that you know nothing about.
As far as your question regarding how much researchers will have to pay? I guarantee you that it is less than they currently pay for access to the existing trademarked lines that are approved. You also seem to be ignoring the fact that there will be many individuals that DONATE their eggs, just as there are now for the private and state funded research and that the other great aspect of the American way is that as some may attempt to exploit a situation, others will come forth to donate expressly to countermand their actions.
Ya right and if you believe that.......
You don't have to capitalize donate as there will be no donating. Labs will be begging for embros and probably paying a lot of money for them. Why do they pay now for scientific experiments? It is in our paper often how they want certain individuals for research and they pay pretty good. The University of Wisconsin is always having those kind of medical experiments and they pay and that is state run. Abbott Laboratories advertises for them. They also use their own employees that is if the employee consents, but they pay them also.
posted on May 24, 2005 11:14:56 PM new
Okay...did a little searching of my own since your statement that the DoD was going to make your mentioned cuts. Thought it was weird that they'd be in the DoD's budget to begin with.
It appears that our military is taking all non-military related items out of the military budget. Most all are covered under other departments....where, imo, they should be since they aren't at all related to the military.
Breast cancer and the others you mention being some of those items.
===
[b]Non-defense items
clog Defense budget[/b]:
Breast cancer research, marijuana eradication,
lack college aid, Native American health care
In fact, for the last seven years, the administration has altered the Defense Department's budget in such a way as to increase non-defense-related spending, while giving the appearance that the overall defense budget has not decreased, say defense analysts.
"The Pentagon's key positions are filled with former Democratic staffers from Capitol Hill," said a key Pentagon official who asked not to be identified in this report, noting that Defense Secretary William Cohen, a former Republican senator, is "just a figurehead who has no idea what's going on" inside the department.
Ivan Eland, director of defense policy studies for the Cato Institute, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank, agrees, and takes the point a step further. In addition to major non-military items in the defense budget, the Pentagon -- through political patronage -- is also filled with defense-related items that service branches don't want and that the Department of Defense doesn't need, says Eland. Often, he adds, those items are bought while other more pressing line items go unfunded or under-funded.
"Besides the now-famous breast cancer funding everyone always brings up, there are other items -- C-130s, F-15s, and amphibious ships -- that the Pentagon doesn't want, but that lawmakers add into the budget anyway," Eland says.
then more of why this happened....then gore's denial about it.
Gore's claims were also disputed by the Defense official who spoke to WorldNetDaily, who noted that the extra non-defense expenditures were all contributing to the findings in congressional and defense-review reports.
"One year, [former Colorado Democratic Rep.] Patsy Schroeder was padding all kinds of health research and development, as well as [other] health programs," making the Defense Department "the leading research agency for HIV."
Administration and Pentagon staffers can then say, "'We haven't decreased defense spending,'" the official said, "but they've changed what Defense does -- and now it researches HIV, for example."
In another case, such accounting schemes have led to a tripling of the Army's Science and Technology budget every year, which has allowed the administration to "truthfully claim that more is being spent on research and development," the official said. "It's just not military R&D."
In one year, the official said, the Pentagon spent $50 million on prostate cancer research "because someone over on the Hill had a buddy who had prostate cancer, got concerned, and threw the money" into the budget.
While the Pentagon budget includes an increasing number of non-military defense expenditures, schools like those that train artillery soldiers have been receiving poor readiness ratings.
Eric Schlect, director of congressional relations for the National Taxpayers Union, is also concerned about shifts in personnel priorities from military to civilian categories.
Though military personnel have been reduced by a third over the last eight years, "civilian personnel levels have not changed much and have increased in some areas, causing the military to have to do more with less," said Schlect.
"You can't expect significantly fewer people to do significantly more with less resources," Schlect said. "It still hasn't dawned on many politicians that the military's doing a lot more in the past five to six years than it did in the 50 years of the Cold War. But they don't want to let facts confuse reality."
[i]Schlect said there were a number of non-defense related items listed in the 2001 Defense Authorization bill:
$3 million for "post-polio syndrome"
$6 million for "coronary/prostate disease reversal"
$5 million for the "Hawaii federal health care network"
$12 million for the "ovarian cancer research program"
$50 million for the "overall peer review medical research program"
$3 million for black colleges and universities
$2.5 million for marijuana eradication in Hawaii
$7.5 million for the national counter-narcotics training center
$20 million for National Guard counter-drug support
Funding for Native American health care
$5 million for public schools "that have unusually high concentrations of special needs military dependents enrolled"
[i]Schlect said "one of my favorites" was the Pentagon's $15 million funding for "arms-control technology."
"I have no idea what that one's for," he said[/i].
"On the one hand, the DoD is requesting funds to buy weapons while, on the other hand, it's funding an arms-control measure. It makes no sense."
Schlect said he did not object to some federal funding for education or health-care research, but noted, "I'm not sure what these programs have to do with enhancing the nation's defense or national security. ... You have to ask why they're in the Pentagon's budget."
There's much more on the link.
This is PRICELESS..and why they didn't call him 'slick willie' for nothing.
===
So fenix, these cuts you've mentioned appear to me to be part of what this President said he was going to do....eliminate duplication in different departments.
And possibly even work towards make the military budget ONLY for our military.
Imo, no reason these projects should have been placed there in the first place.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Now I we can see why our military didn't have what they needed when we went to war.
The left has been blaming Bush for not having proper supplies/etc. When in reality reports show it was because the clinton administration was 'stuffing' the military budget with all sorts of non=mililary items....to make it look like it wasn't being reduced as much as it was.
posted on May 24, 2005 11:31:52 PM new
::No you do fenix. Where do you get the idea I do. At least I am an ethical person. When I post I do not swear.::
Yes Libra - you are so much more ethical than everyone else and you take ample opportunities to point out ethical superiority over others on such a regular basis. You also regularly laud your religion around like measuring stick of your moral superiority over others.
I find it amazing that in a topic where you your first two arguements were so factually off base as to be laughable you actually have the nerve to say that you find it pointless to debate withsome else because they know everything. I don't know everything on the topic but I do at least possess basic knowledge which your early contributions show that you do not. It's no big deal, it's not a crime, but it's ridiculous petty and childish to try to take on some type of superior and condescending attitude to cover your lack of knowledge.
~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on May 24, 2005 11:40:18 PM new
Linda - you have to ease yourself into stretches like that or your really are going to hurt yourself
BTW - my point was not so much to criticize the DOD because...well... I was a little lost on why they were doing breast cancer research myself... as just to point out hat there are millions spent by our government in medical research and grants to independent researchers. If cancer a worthy cause, what is it that makes alzheiners, parkinsons, diabetes and possibly even ALS not worthy? If taxpayers create the funds and the majority of tax payers are in favor of directing part of their funds to research to fight these diseases I just don't see why it should not be done.
Oh yeah... that was a five year old article... did the DOD just now realize Clinton was gone
~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on May 24, 2005 11:57:03 PM new
Fenix you show me where I said I was superior to everyone. I can probably show you where you said I had no ethics though.
Get over it fenix you have basic knowledge on everything as you point out.
I did not put stem cell and cloning in the same paragraph. Any stupid idiot would know they are different and evidently you didn't read it right. But I will say if they allow stem cell, cloning won't be to far behind. IMHO.
posted on May 25, 2005 12:00:28 AM new
OH MY GAWD!!!! I NEVER would've voted for Clinton if I knew he was going to act like any other president and SNEAK in his own agenda. That RAT!
Imagine getting funds for breast cancer ...!!! That DOG!
Research for ovarian cancer ! What a HUGE WASTE of taxpayer's maney! That JERK!
And taking care of the special needs children of the military...what have THEY ever done for us?
Ya, that sneaky slick willy...he Must've known bush was plotting a war on Iraq loooong before 9/11 and cut military spending just for spite.
He sure wasn't an "Honest Abe" like our current"president"....did someone mention Downing Street Memo......?????
posted on May 25, 2005 12:05:15 AM new
Sob...it's all she ever wanted....
"" Linda_K
posted on May 25, 2005 12:01:10 AM new
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay...I now have control again."""
And I backed you into a corner and off you run.....do you HAVE to be so predictable?
posted on May 25, 2005 12:07:53 AM new
Gee, linduh , was it something I said.....or was it the words sneaky and Downing Street Memo in the same post that scared you?
posted on May 25, 2005 12:11:48 AM new
Libra - I'd place my bet on you in that you probably have a lot more knowledge on these subjects than do our *average* American voter. [please take that as the compliment it's intended to be]
Plus I admire the fact that you spend the time looking for links to provide info for others....to learn more about certain issues and to help educate others to some of the facts.
Most voters don't care, imo. To many of us here...we do...and it's an important issue...whatever our own opinions are. We feel strongly one way or the other or we wouldn't be posting about it.
now....nite for sure.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on May 25, 2005 09:16:30 AM newLibra - I'd place my bet on you in that you probably have a lot more knowledge on these subjects than do our *average* American voter. [please take that as the compliment it's intended to be]...
Yes Linda. And I will note I heard some things about the stem cell research controversy that DID include extensions into cloning.. so libra is not quite so stupid on that step either.
posted on May 25, 2005 09:26:31 AM new
dble, the control freak linduh..."""Linda_K
posted on May 25, 2005 12:01:10 AM
Okay...I now have control again. """
....is probably sleeping late... she posted way into the night
(until I showed up
