funkymonkey Posted July 31, 2008 Report Share Posted July 31, 2008 Howdy! Does anyone know if the church has an official stance on stem cell research? Just curious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kona0197 Posted July 31, 2008 Report Share Posted July 31, 2008 Touchy subject... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honor Posted July 31, 2008 Report Share Posted July 31, 2008 Embryonic Stem-cell Research - LDS Newsroom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hemidakota Posted July 31, 2008 Report Share Posted July 31, 2008 At this time, the brethren has not taken a position regarding the use of embryonic stem cells for research. Thanks to Honor in using the appropriate link. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moksha Posted July 31, 2008 Report Share Posted July 31, 2008 Senator Hatch is in favor of it, so that seems a tacit approval. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RachelleDrew Posted July 31, 2008 Report Share Posted July 31, 2008 Honor beat me to it. No official stance on it at this point. Thinking about it, the members in my ward are pretty evenly split about the issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeuroTypical Posted July 31, 2008 Report Share Posted July 31, 2008 It's nice to know what we're talking about. There are 4 categories of stem cell research. 1- Non-embryonic animal SCR 2- Non-embryonic human SCR 3- Embryonic animal SCR 4- Embryonic human SCR I don't think much of anyone has a problem with #2. Animal rights activists might have a problem with #'s 1 and 3, but nobody else does. #4 is the biggie. Last I heard, the latest discoveries in #'s 1-3 had made #4 a more or less moot point. Meaning, you could run just about any experiement you could think of on 1-3, you didn't need to destroy a human embryo. LM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john doe Posted July 31, 2008 Report Share Posted July 31, 2008 Senator Hatch is in favor of it, so that seems a tacit approval. I wouldn't put much stock in that. Harry Reid is a member of the church too, but I wouldn't ever consider his positions on issues to be approved by the church. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HiJolly Posted July 31, 2008 Report Share Posted July 31, 2008 I wouldn't put much stock in that. Harry Reid is a member of the church too, but I wouldn't ever consider his positions on issues to be approved by the church. RoFL. So true. I am glad Harry Reid joined the Church, and I'm sure you are, too. HiJolly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RachelleDrew Posted July 31, 2008 Report Share Posted July 31, 2008 I wouldn't put much stock in that. Harry Reid is a member of the church too, but I wouldn't ever consider his positions on issues to be approved by the church.Lol! :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john doe Posted July 31, 2008 Report Share Posted July 31, 2008 RoFL. So true. I am glad Harry Reid joined the Church, and I'm sure you are, too. HiJolly Of course I am. Just goes to show you there's a little bit of good in everybody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
funkymonkey Posted August 1, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 1, 2008 It's nice to know what we're talking about.There are 4 categories of stem cell research.1- Non-embryonic animal SCR2- Non-embryonic human SCR3- Embryonic animal SCR4- Embryonic human SCRI don't think much of anyone has a problem with #2. Animal rights activists might have a problem with #'s 1 and 3, but nobody else does. #4 is the biggie.Last I heard, the latest discoveries in #'s 1-3 had made #4 a more or less moot point. Meaning, you could run just about any experiement you could think of on 1-3, you didn't need to destroy a human embryo.LMCool. :)I had heard about #2, but not about the #1 and #3 options.The research that is cropping up is showing some promising results for numerous conditions. I wonder if with the recent developments of non-embryonic human SCR will mean that congress will allow this research back in the states. (if they haven't already...?)If I remember correctly, chord blood banks are legal in the States. I bet in the next 20 years there will be labs in the states that will know what to do with it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
funkymonkey Posted August 1, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 1, 2008 Maybe I should back up... If human embryos are taken out of the equation for other methods, this takes the controversy out of it right? Or is there still a potential issue with the animal embryos? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Islander Posted August 1, 2008 Report Share Posted August 1, 2008 Cool. :)I had heard about #2, but not about the #1 and #3 options.The research that is cropping up is showing some promising results for numerous conditions. I wonder if with the recent developments of non-embryonic human SCR will mean that congress will allow this research back in the states. (if they haven't already...?)If I remember correctly, chord blood banks are legal in the States. I bet in the next 20 years there will be labs in the states that will know what to do with it!I would, in principle, be in favor of non-embryonic (sourced) stem cell research. In terms of promise, that is quite an optimistic position. In theory, stem cell based pharmaco-therapies could lead to treatment of certain degenerative conditions. That is a view, quite a long view, thru a pbc pipe. There are lots of pieces of the jigsaw puzzle still missing. I would not jump on the wagon so soon. There are conditions of which we know etiologically a lot more, like diabetes, asthma, arthritis, among others; and we still don't have a cure or even truly effective treatments for them. Manufacturing "replacement" organs in a petri dish in the lab using stem cells as a source material is still Star trek material. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WANDERER Posted August 2, 2008 Report Share Posted August 2, 2008 (edited) Um yes...from what I know on stem cell research ....which is limited... there are other ways and avenues and things have moved along from this is the only way. Neural crest stem cells might hold promise (they persist in adult hair follicles). Some current research looking at whether stem cells are related to tumours and the application of neural stem cells Neural crest stem cells - not guilty : article : Nature Reports Stem CellsLong way to go yet. I'll leave out the latest rat experiment with transplanted neural crest stem cells to repair ummmm *vague look*...feel free to look it up *successful apparently*.Edit to add on: I'm a bit vague because it was the rat's penile erectile dysfunction that they repaired. Decided it was false modesty on my behalf LOL...not fair to people with terminal illnesses that are looking for hope. Edited August 2, 2008 by WANDERER Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kona0197 Posted August 2, 2008 Report Share Posted August 2, 2008 I bet you this thread becomes political as well... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
funkymonkey Posted August 2, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 2, 2008 Hmmm. Lucky rat. I'm sure there were plenty of guys on that research team. To me it would only make sense that we could make the research legal again, provided all the new options. I think there's a lot of potential money for researching this kind of stuff...would help out the little college research groups right now. I really like the nervous system therapies they're working on. I thought they were doing some stuff with people's severed spines in Europe?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.