The Energon Pub

by **Marcus Rush** » Wed Jun 20, 2007 9:46 pm

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070620/pl_ ... ggXjQE1vAI

Bush vetoes stem-cell bill, disappoints advocates By Thomas Ferraro

Wed Jun 20, 7:00 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush vetoed legislation on Wednesday that would expand federally funded embryonic stem cell research, triggering an uphill battle to override him in the Democratic-led U.S. Congress and likely pushing the issue onto the 2008 election agenda.

Two-thirds majority votes would be needed in the Senate and House of Representatives to overcome Bush's opposition and make the bill law. Backers admitted they were short of support. A few dozen of Bush's Republicans in Congress back the measure.

The president and other critics condemn the legislation as morally offensive because it would lead to the destruction of human embryos to derive stem cells.

"If this legislation became law, it would compel American taxpayers for the first time in our history to support the deliberate destruction of human embryos," Bush said. "I will not allow our nation to cross this moral line."

Advocates such as the nonprofit Society for Women's Health Research said Bush's decision was the unethical one, especially as the embryos that would be used are left over from fertility treatments and destined to be discarded.

"There should be no ethical debate between throwing away embryos that already exist and using them in the scientific quest for treatments and cures of fatal and life-threatening diseases," the group said in a statement.

"It is a tragedy to allow embryos to be wasted and discarded, when we could be exploring their unique potential to alleviate human suffering."

Embryonic stem cells are the source of every cell, tissue and organ in the body. Scientists study them to understand the biology not only of disease, but of life itself, and want to use them to transform medicine and find cures for such debilitating illness as Parkinson's, cancer and diabetes.

In addition to vetoing such legislation for the second time in two years, Bush issued an executive order to encourage scientists to work with the federal government to derive new methods to obtain stem cells without harming human embryos. He announced no new funding.

The Campaign for the Advancement of Medical Research, a lobby group made up of medical and advocacy groups, called the executive order a sham.

"The new approaches addressed by the order are still in the early stages of development and appear to already be eligible for National Institutes of Health funding," the group said in a statement.

WIDE BACKING

Polls show the stem-cell bill is backed by more than 60 percent of American voters.

"Once again, the president has ignored the will of the American people, of leading medical researchers, and of a bipartisan majority of the Congress," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat.

Republican Sen. George Voinovich of Ohio backed Bush, saying, "We can and must find cutting-edge techniques to cure disease and ease suffering without destroying life."

The National Right to Life Committee also praised Bush.

Shortly after Bush took office in 2001, he allowed federal funding on 78 stem cell lines then in existence. Most are now of limited use to scientists, who have urged the president to lift his restrictions.

Democrats promised to push to expand stem cell research in winning control of Congress last year, and it appeared certain to be an issue again next year when U.S. voters elect a new president and Congress.

An estimated 400,000 embryos are unused and frozen at fertility clinics. A poll released on Wednesday showed about 60 percent of parents of those embryos would donate them for stem cell research. Just 22 percent would donate them for adoption by other couples, which is what Bush says should be done with them.

Bush noted that scientists this month reported that in tests with mice they had made progress on alternative ways to produce stem cells without destroying embryos -- an advance, which if it works in humans, could ease ethical concerns.

Those scientists cautioned there was no guarantee of quick success with human cells, and urged passage of the bill.

News Credits: 1 · by **Dr Buffalo** » Thu Jun 21, 2007 3:42 pm

So the government doesn't get involved. That could be a good thing. Research would be bogged down in red tape and regulations (not to mention the increase in taxes). Progress wouldn't be seen until long after the Iraq War was over and in the end whatever they develop will be as crappy quality as government cheese. Best leave it to the private sector where they can get the job done faster.

News Credits: 3 · by **muswp1** » Thu Jun 21, 2007 6:44 pm

This is not suprising. Bush has been against this from day one. It's stupid, but not suprising.

by **Just Negare** » Thu Jun 21, 2007 8:07 pm

Hah, good job.

I honestly am so amazed that the media loves to peddle this as some big horrid defeat for humanity and meany-weeany-bofeany Bush stopping people with horrible diseases from being cured!

There's been more success with adult stem cells, and you can easily get stem cells from the umblical cords of BORN babies, why the hell can't people focus on that for once? Plus, you don't get the risk of rejection if its you're own stem cells. Concurrently, there's no ethical delimma in mooching the cells from umblical cords. Do people only think science can work if something has to get killed?

Py korrie!

by **Tammuz** » Thu Jun 21, 2007 9:14 pm

neither of those type of stem cells are totipotent, embryonic stem cells are. I thought you'd know that poohey? or are you just ignoring the biology to support your own agenda?

basically Embryonic stemcells can become ANY type of cell in the human body they are called totipotent, Umbilical Blood stemcells and adult stemcells aren't totipotent, they are pluripotent, they can be come many, but crucially, not all types of cells.

these Embryoes ARE GOING TO DIE ANYWAY, by not harvesting the stem cells we don't save a human life, we just lose the chance to advance human knowledge.

liken the situation to this; in one bed we have a guy with no brain function, if we turn off the machines he would die, other than his brain being dead he is in perfect physical condition, his next of kin have no wish to keep him alive. in another bed we have a person who needs a heart transplant, without which he dies, is it wrong to transplant the heart? to give one man a chance, rather than doom both of them?

stem cell research gives millions a chance, who would otherwise die.

stem cell research IS NOT creating embryoes to be destroyed, it's salvaging some scientific merit from their inevitable destruction.

News Credits: 4 · by **General Magnus** » Fri Jun 22, 2007 6:10 am

Great..another example why religion and science should never be together.

by **Nightracer GT** » Fri Jun 22, 2007 1:07 pm

Hooray for the new congress off to a spectacular good start by pushing legislation that the older congress wouldn't do.

"Oh wait, there's still a die hard religious conservative in office. Ooops, well there goes that idea. If only we waited one more year." *sigh*

:roll:

by **ShockwaveUK** » Fri Jun 22, 2007 6:20 pm

Alpha Strike wrote:
Bush vetoes stem-cell bill, disappoints advocates By Thomas Ferraro

Wed Jun 20, 7:00 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush vetoed legislation on Wednesday that would expand federally funded embryonic stem cell research, triggering an uphill battle to override him in the Democratic-led U.S. Congress and likely pushing the issue onto the 2008 election agenda.

Good call IMO. Taxpayers shouldn't be forced to contribute to a cause they're morally opposed to. The statement just prevents federally funding stem cell research but does not outlaw the act.
I think stem cell research is an important advancement in modern medicine but as someone who respects others opinions and moral stand points I think this is the right decision to be made by someone elected to represent the people.

by **Nightracer GT** » Sat Jun 23, 2007 1:20 am

Dick wrote:Taxpayers shouldn't be forced to contribute to a cause they're morally opposed to.

Then why are we still in Iraq?

Actually, citizens have no control over where their tax money goes because it would be a fiasco to try and designate that.

I'm paying for horrible **** that I don't agree to. But at the same time, I'm paying to live well. Doesn't balance out, no, but at least I can have the satisfaction of knowing that those I disagree with also have to pay for things they hate.

by **Tammuz** » Sat Jun 23, 2007 5:44 am

Dick wrote:
Alpha Strike wrote:
Bush vetoes stem-cell bill, disappoints advocates By Thomas Ferraro

Wed Jun 20, 7:00 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush vetoed legislation on Wednesday that would expand federally funded embryonic stem cell research, triggering an uphill battle to override him in the Democratic-led U.S. Congress and likely pushing the issue onto the 2008 election agenda.

Good call IMO. Taxpayers shouldn't be forced to contribute to a cause they're morally opposed to. The statement just prevents federally funding stem cell research but does not outlaw the act.
I think stem cell research is an important advancement in modern medicine but as someone who respects others opinions and moral stand points I think this is the right decision to be made by someone elected to represent the people.

very true, yet i still find it very odd that people are opposed to stem-cell research as the embryoes are going to die anyway. it just seems so wasteful. you know don't fund the only positive aspect, but carry on destroying the embryoes....

surely even Pro-lifers can see this as the worst possible scenario, if they can get over there knee jerk reaction.

by **Loki120** » Sat Jun 23, 2007 7:23 am

So it can't be federally funded. Turn to the private sector, I've always been a big proponent of privitization. Stop looking toward the government to solve the world's ills, it's never going to happen. Real change happens with the people.
I've said the same thing about schools, but people don't like to hear that either.

News Credits: 487 · by **Darth Bombshell** » Mon Jun 25, 2007 8:56 am

Dark Zarak wrote:Then why are we still in Iraq?

Cause Bush is a whiny crybaby used to getting what he wants, and now that he can't, is resorting to threatening others to make sure that, at least till November 2008, he still has the chance to rape the reputation of the US.

by **Loki120** » Mon Jun 25, 2007 1:49 pm

Darth Bombshell wrote:
Dark Zarak wrote:Then why are we still in Iraq?

Cause Bush is a whiny crybaby used to getting what he wants, and now that he can't, is resorting to threatening others to make sure that, at least till November 2008, he still has the chance to rape the reputation of the US.

As opposed to the whiny crybaby democrats who didn't get what they want so they lampoon everything before it has a chance to even work, all the while turning a blind eye to their own threats and incompetence to others? Or how about the whiny crybaby antics of those who want the government to solve all their problems and not resort to the private sector where there is actually a success ratio? But then, that would be taking care of our own problems and we can't possibly have that.

Bush isn't the problem with Stem Cell research, people. Everyone want to believe that this will be the cure to all the worlds ills when you're just deluding yourselves. It's a key that could unlook the door to an answer...not the answer itself.

by **Tammuz** » Mon Jun 25, 2007 7:30 pm

Loki120 wrote:Bush isn't the problem with Stem Cell research, people. Everyone want to believe that this will be the cure to all the worlds ills when you're just deluding yourselves. It's a key that could unlook the door to an answer...not the answer itself.

and denying it funding unlocks the door how?

by **Nightracer GT** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:06 am

General Magnus wrote:Great..another example why religion and science should never be together.

Damn, I can't believe I didn't notice this post sooner.

Actually, religion and science being separate are the reason this whole problem is happening. Think about it.

Don't you mean, "another example of why religion and the state should never be together"? Because that actually makes sense.

News Credits: 4 · by **General Magnus** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 10:00 am

Dark Zarak wrote:
General Magnus wrote:Great..another example why religion and science should never be together.

Damn, I can't believe I didn't notice this post sooner.

Actually, religion and science being separate are the reason this whole problem is happening. Think about it.

Don't you mean, "another example of why religion and the state should never be together"? Because that actually makes sense.

sorry..my bad

by **Loki120** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 12:57 pm

Tammuz wrote:
Loki120 wrote:Bush isn't the problem with Stem Cell research, people. Everyone want to believe that this will be the cure to all the worlds ills when you're just deluding yourselves. It's a key that could unlook the door to an answer...not the answer itself.

and denying it funding unlocks the door how?

And giving it funding does what? Hinges that results can actually be expected from the government?

News Credits: 2 · by **Shadowman** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 4:40 pm

Loki120 wrote:
Tammuz wrote:
Loki120 wrote:Bush isn't the problem with Stem Cell research, people. Everyone want to believe that this will be the cure to all the worlds ills when you're just deluding yourselves. It's a key that could unlook the door to an answer...not the answer itself.

and denying it funding unlocks the door how?

And giving it funding does what? Hinges that results can actually be expected from the government?

Funding means they can do more and better research, and produce actual results. And who has more money than the government?

by **Loki120** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 5:12 pm

Shadowman wrote:
Loki120 wrote:
Tammuz wrote:
Loki120 wrote:Bush isn't the problem with Stem Cell research, people. Everyone want to believe that this will be the cure to all the worlds ills when you're just deluding yourselves. It's a key that could unlook the door to an answer...not the answer itself.

and denying it funding unlocks the door how?

And giving it funding does what? Hinges that results can actually be expected from the government?

Funding means they can do more and better research, and produce actual results. And who has more money than the government?

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
Do more...better research...hahahahahahahahahahahahah!
Oh god, my side hurts....hahahhahahaahah!

by **DesalationReborn** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 5:33 pm

Loki120 wrote:
Shadowman wrote:
Loki120 wrote:
Tammuz wrote:
Loki120 wrote:Bush isn't the problem with Stem Cell research, people. Everyone want to believe that this will be the cure to all the worlds ills when you're just deluding yourselves. It's a key that could unlook the door to an answer...not the answer itself.

and denying it funding unlocks the door how?

And giving it funding does what? Hinges that results can actually be expected from the government?

Funding means they can do more and better research, and produce actual results. And who has more money than the government?

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
Do more...better research...hahahahahahahahahahahahah!
Oh god, my side hurts....hahahhahahaahah!

Federal subsidies make up a large portion of the funding for scientific research. Considering that one of the hundreds of DNA sequence-mapping machines used for the Human Genome Project alone costed over $250,000, such fields of research require all the money they can get. Estimated federal funding for the HG Project amounted to over $3 billion. This is not a field that can achieve on a light budget.

by **Tammuz** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 6:25 pm

The Avatar of Man wrote:
Loki120 wrote:
Shadowman wrote:
Loki120 wrote:
Tammuz wrote:
Loki120 wrote:Bush isn't the problem with Stem Cell research, people. Everyone want to believe that this will be the cure to all the worlds ills when you're just deluding yourselves. It's a key that could unlook the door to an answer...not the answer itself.

and denying it funding unlocks the door how?

And giving it funding does what? Hinges that results can actually be expected from the government?

Funding means they can do more and better research, and produce actual results. And who has more money than the government?

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
Do more...better research...hahahahahahahahahahahahah!
Oh god, my side hurts....hahahhahahaahah!

Federal subsidies make up a large portion of the funding for scientific research. Considering that one of the hundreds of DNA sequence-mapping machines used for the Human Genome Project alone costed over $250,000, such fields of research require all the money they can get. Estimated federal funding for the HG Project amounted to over $3 billion. This is not a field that can achieve on a light budget.

no field is anymore.

and the problem with letting the coporate sector do the work is that their bastards who are only in it for the money; despite the chronic need for new antibiotics, they research anti depressants. antibiotics are used occiasionally for maybe 3 weeks at a time, anti depressants are used daily for the rest of the person's life.

by **Nightracer GT** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 8:57 pm

Loki, wasn't there a post earlier in the thread that actually illustrated this whole issue is moot? That the embryos were already dead anyway, and doing the research does not, in fact, cause more unborn children to die?

Or am I missing something? If I am tell me, and don't think I'm 100% for abortion just because I support this research. I actually find abortion to be a horrible practice that is a necessary evil in some cases like rape, but I totally see where the Pro-Lifers are coming from.

But it's my understanding that this research does not in fact cause further killing, but can actually be looked at as making the best of a bad situation.

General Magnus wrote:sorry..my bad

s'allright.

by **Loki120** » Wed Jun 27, 2007 7:17 am

Dark Zarak wrote:Loki, wasn't there a post earlier in the thread that actually illustrated this whole issue is moot? That the embryos were already dead anyway, and doing the research does not, in fact, cause more unborn children to die?

Or am I missing something? If I am tell me, and don't think I'm 100% for abortion just because I support this research. I actually find abortion to be a horrible practice that is a necessary evil in some cases like rape, but I totally see where the Pro-Lifers are coming from.

But it's my understanding that this research does not in fact cause further killing, but can actually be looked at as making the best of a bad situation.

At no point did I argue otherwise, I couldn't care one way or another. scavenge human carcasses to your hearts content, that's not the arguement I was making and never indicated otherwise. I'm just sick of people thinking that all these cures are right around the corner if only those heartless bastards in Washington would solve all the world's ills by just passing this bill, when nothing could be further from the truth. I'm just advocating to stop hanging all your hopes that the government will do anything to improve your lives.
This post is moot.

by **Duo Prime** » Wed Jun 27, 2007 7:57 am

Loki120 wrote:So it can't be federally funded. Turn to the private sector, I've always been a big proponent of privitization. Stop looking toward the government to solve the world's ills, it's never going to happen. Real change happens with the people.
I've said the same thing about schools, but people don't like to hear that either.

Yes, the government can provide for it's people, just as long as it's not run by greedy criminals like the current one. You can probably ask any of our members from overseas about how great their country has it with socialized medicine and the like. Privitization is going to be the death of us all, including you. Corperations only care about money, and an ass load of it to boot, so that means only a select few would ever get to be helped by those stem cells if it were privitised.
And yes, change does happen with the people, as long as they are not affraid and oppresed by the wealthy, law and government hijacking minority. "People should not fear their government, the government should fear it's people", thats how change occurs.

by **Loki120** » Wed Jun 27, 2007 10:42 am

Duo Prime wrote:
Loki120 wrote:So it can't be federally funded. Turn to the private sector, I've always been a big proponent of privitization. Stop looking toward the government to solve the world's ills, it's never going to happen. Real change happens with the people.
I've said the same thing about schools, but people don't like to hear that either.

Yes, the government can provide for it's people, just as long as it's not run by greedy criminals like the current one. You can probably ask any of our members from overseas about how great their country has it with socialized medicine and the like. Privitization is going to be the death of us all, including you. Corperations only care about money, and an ass load of it to boot, so that means only a select few would ever get to be helped by those stem cells if it were privitised.
And yes, change does happen with the people, as long as they are not affraid and oppresed by the wealthy, law and government hijacking minority. "People should not fear their government, the government should fear it's people", thats how change occurs.

I couldn't agree more about the government should fear it's people, so why do you all want to hang all your hopes and integrate them so much into your lives?

Privitization is going to be the death of us all, including you.

This is perhaps the most ignorant statement I've ever heard.

Let me give you a few lessons on socialization versus privitazation. Yes, socialization seems like a dream come true, it give health care to the unprivleged masses who seemingly can't afford it. It's a good tag line to cull in the votes, especially when you a have-nothing Senator from Illinois, or a Senator who hangs all her popularity on her husband. But when it comes down to it, it gives you no choices. You are stuck with what the government says you can have. You want a catscan to look for that possible life threatening tumor in your brain? That's fine, get on the waiting list for six months, because there are a million other people ahead of you who want to cash in on their free catscan. How about that great doctor you've heard so much about. Too bad you don't live in his area, now you're stuck with the doctor that you're convinced doesn't know what he's talking about. Forget a second opinion. How about that medicine that could help you, well, that's not an option, it's not the government's list of approved medicines.
Now given the difference between that and the insurance I currently have, where I can have a catscan when it's needed, the medicines I could chose to get, and the doctors I want to see...I'll take the privitazation anyday. We'll see who suffers the worst fate.