Dr. Andrews Using Stem Cells to Speed Recovery??

I always thought it was illegal to use stem cells in the US. Thats awsome that there is a way around it, that makes more sense ethically.

Striking how many people just don't read the article and instead start spouting off with stupid crap.

Oh my god. Read the article, people.

You can use stem cells for research in the US, as long as they are not from an embryo or a fetus. Furthermore, the only stem cell related medical procedures permitted in the US are those where the stem cells are extracted from the patient himself (specifically, from bone marrow in the hip) and re-injected back into the same patient at the site of injury/surgery.

It's all in the article. It should be a rule, you are not allowed to launch into politically charged opinions unless you first read all linked material in the thread.

Why why why this thread going nutso, anyways good for them if it works.

Whats stiking is that you would question why some people are opposed to embryonic stem cell research - whether you agree with their point of view or not.

There was arguably scientific benefit to the horrific research the nazis did experimenting on prisoners in WWII. I hate to use such a extreme comparison to prove a point, as no rational person would equate what the nazis did to embryonic stem cell research, but the underlying principle is the same - Scientists can't just perform research because of the potential benefits. Ethical concerns should be weighed against potential benefits in any type of research.

The reasons many peope oppose research using embryonic stem cells are obvious. Whether you agree with their point of view is entirely another matter, and its entirely reasonable for a person to have no problems with embryonic stem cell research.

Just for clarity, nothing in this article or thread was talking about embryonic stem cells except your post.

The REAL offseason threads have officially begun!

I've got my popcorn ready.

Bone marrow? Wow that must be extremely painful to acquire.

I remember reading an article (don't know where) that said the pain that Griffin felt after the surgery was extreme, and I was a little surprised since he had had a knee surgery. I knew this time it was on both knees (one for the graft) and thought that was it, but if he had a bone marrow operation, that would make a lot more sense to me.

I can't imagine the pain threshold these top athletes have. Crazy.

Oh my god. Read the article, people.

You can use stem cells for research in the US, as long as they are not from an embryo or a fetus. Furthermore, the only stem cell related medical procedures permitted in the US are those where the stem cells are extracted from the patient himself (specifically, from bone marrow in the hip) and re-injected back into the same patient at the site of injury/surgery.

It's all in the article. It should be a rule, you are not allowed to launch into politically charged opinions unless you first read all linked material in the thread.

Actually thats also wrong. Stem cell research is not restricted in the US the laws only porhibit federal funding for research using stem cells from embryo or a fetus.

Striking how many people just don't read the article and instead start spouting off with stupid crap.

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/33762875.jpg

Whats stiking is that you would question why some people are opposed to embryonic stem cell research - whether you agree with their point of view or not.

There was arguably scientific benefit to the horrific research the nazis did experimenting on prisoners in WWII. I hate to use such a extreme comparison to prove a point, as no rational person would equate what the nazis did to embryonic stem cell research, but the underlying principle is the same - Scientists can't just perform research because of the potential benefits. Ethical concerns should be weighed against potential benefits in any type of research.

The reasons many peope oppose research using embryonic stem cells are obvious. Whether you agree with their point of view is entirely another matter, and its entirely reasonable for a person to have no problems with embryonic stem cell research.

Of course scientific research must follow ethical paths. There is no question in that. The question is, which ethics? The ethical stance which conflates stem cell research with abortion issues? Or the ethical stance which holds that healing people is a central good, so stem cell research should be expanded?

It seems to me that RGIII's case is an example which teaches that we should be expanding stem cell research of various types rather than being, as a society, so squeamish about stem cells. Just my opinion. :twocents: