PDA

View Full Version : Obama Aims to Shield Science from Politics



Facial_King
2009-03-09, 16:19
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/08/AR2009030801476.html?hpid=topnews

bodie54
2009-03-09, 18:09
:thumbsup: :hatsoff:

maildude
2009-03-09, 20:13
Didn't JFK try to do this?

ChefChiTown
2009-03-09, 20:17
^^^^^
HA!!! Nice custom title!!!

Friday on my mind
2009-03-09, 20:26
What this really means is shielding science from religious based politics.There was a time even most republicans were with that idea but when the pubs starting using the religious whacks as a constituency the influence of the right wing evangelical pro-life etc whacko's really became a problem.The only real solution if they insist on standing in the way of progress and enlightenment is for us to be as dogmatic and demanding as they are about things and push for the total abolition of these age old backward belief systems from our culture.Its not like don't they have a long history of standing in the way of progress and truth and still try to.Creationism etc etc etc.Just outlaw the nonsense lol.:thumbsup:

DukeLaCrosse
2009-03-09, 21:35
finally america has an intelligent president after so many morons

Philbert
2009-03-09, 22:34
finally america has an intelligent president after so many morons
Yeah...I forgot...you were/are a Rhodes Scholar, right? Unlike GW who only went to Yale, or Bill, or GB1...wait, weren't any of the past Presidents as smart as BHO or you? Thank God for the smartest President ever...he sure fed you a line of hooey, and now he's President! Wow! He is smart...:thumbsup:


What this really means is shielding science from religious based politics.There was a time even most republicans were with that idea but when the pubs starting using the religious whacks as a constituency the influence of the right wing evangelical pro-life etc whacko's really became a problem.The only real solution if they insist on standing in the way of progress and enlightenment is for us to be as dogmatic and demanding as they are about things and push for the total abolition of these age old backward belief systems from our culture.Its not like don't they have a long history of standing in the way of progress and truth and still try to.Creationism etc etc etc.Just outlaw the nonsense lol.:thumbsup:

So much wisdom so fast...let me try to understand what you're saying; you're not too clear, but I'll try...
So...there was a time: umm, when was this "time"? Middle Ages? Last year?
Did you mean no Democrats were ever down with religion dictating how we pursue research and science teaching?
Millions of Democratic Southern Baptists were all for Evolution Theory and not the Bible-based Creationism Theory, right?
Suddenly Republicans went far Right...all of them...and controlled the entire Government. There weren't any Democrats smart enough or numerous enough to stop them.
But...overnight Democrats took over...where were these vast numbers of enlightened voters hiding? In your neighborhood?
Now, there's hope because these wonderful enlightened Democrats have reappeared (I still want to know where they were all this time), and evil Republicans must be stopped. Is there a Law that Creationism is the only Theory allowed in schools? When did this happen? Got a timeline?
Since the Republican Right either appeared recently, or "they have a long history of standing in the way of progress and truth and still try to", I don't see where this conflict is resolved in your post.
You want to outlaw this nonsense? What nonsense? The rule of Law...where voters and their reps decide the way things go, or where one group decides what everyone does.
It's amazing how years of time pass, and suddenly the same folks who were here all the time aren't the least bit responsible for anything that happened...either all the Republicans who are pretty much mainstream or the religious Democrats who let it all go down, 'til what...a few months ago?
Since you seem to have a clear vision of how this all happened, could you please just clear up the slight discrepancy in the actual timeline?:dunno:

I eagerly await enlightenment...

morison1954
2009-03-09, 22:53
religion is a primitive curse on mankind and progress

Philbert
2009-03-09, 22:56
religion is a primitive curse on mankind and progress

Easy for you to say.

Prove it...

Facetious
2009-03-09, 23:08
George Soros sends his pre set telepromptor wherever Obama goes it seems.


These aren't Obama's ideas, they're György Schwartz's, aka -
george soreohhz's / Mr moveon.org's ideas.

Next up - pure unadulterated infanticide i.e. 11th hour, end of third trimester, whole baby abortion :D :party:

Facetious
2009-03-09, 23:20
religion is a primitive curse on mankind and progress

What are you talking about ? How many of the russian communists were slaughtered by members of the russian orthodox church ? :spin: :updown: :turnturn:

Philbert
2009-03-09, 23:24
George Soros sends his pre set telepromptor wherever Obama goes it seems.


These aren't Obama's ideas, they're György Schwartz's, aka -
george soreohhz's / Mr moveon.org's ideas.

Next up - pure unadulterated infanticide i.e. 11th hour, end of third trimester, whole baby abortion :D :party:

Inspite of all the spiteful posting here on FreeOnes, when those ideas are outed, I have confidence the large majority of all Americans will speak with one voice...absolutely positively NOT!
Somewhere between 5-6 months the baby has definately entered the building.
My girl was born perfect and healthy at just 8 months...

DukeLaCrosse
2009-03-09, 23:28
Yeah...I forgot...you were/are a Rhodes Scholar, right? Unlike GW who only went to Yale, or Bill, or GB1...wait, weren't any of the past Presidents as smart as BHO or you? Thank God for the smartest President ever...he sure fed you a line of hooey, and now he's President! Wow! He is smart...:thumbsup:



So much wisdom so fast...let me try to understand what you're saying; you're not too clear, but I'll try...
So...there was a time: umm, when was this "time"? Middle Ages? Last year?
Did you mean no Democrats were ever down with religion dictating how we pursue research and science teaching?
Millions of Democratic Southern Baptists were all for Evolution Theory and not the Bible-based Creationism Theory, right?
Suddenly Republicans went far Right...all of them...and controlled the entire Government. There weren't any Democrats smart enough or numerous enough to stop them.
But...overnight Democrats took over...where were these vast numbers of enlightened voters hiding? In your neighborhood?
Now, there's hope because these wonderful enlightened Democrats have reappeared (I still want to know where they were all this time), and evil Republicans must be stopped. Is there a Law that Creationism is the only Theory allowed in schools? When did this happen? Got a timeline?
Since the Republican Right either appeared recently, or "they have a long history of standing in the way of progress and truth and still try to", I don't see where this conflict is resolved in your post.
You want to outlaw this nonsense? What nonsense? The rule of Law...where voters and their reps decide the way things go, or where one group decides what everyone does.
It's amazing how years of time pass, and suddenly the same folks who were here all the time aren't the least bit responsible for anything that happened...either all the Republicans who are pretty much mainstream or the religious Democrats who let it all go down, 'til what...a few months ago?
Since you seem to have a clear vision of how this all happened, could you please just clear up the slight discrepancy in the actual timeline?:dunno:

I eagerly await enlightenment...
you don't know anything about me so shut up

Philbert
2009-03-09, 23:43
you don't know anything about me...

I can tell deep thinking isn't taking up too much of your time...:rofl:



... so shut up

...or what? You'll post again?
:rofl2:

ChefChiTown
2009-03-09, 23:56
...or what? You'll post again?
:rofl2:

HAHAHA, oh dear God, please don't encourage it.

Violator79
2009-03-10, 00:12
I'm in favor of it. Science has been obstructed by politics, both gov't and religion for so long that it's amazing that we've accomplished everything we have so far. Science can cure diseases, save lives, etc. Yes there are many, many good things that science can do, but make sure that with this "freedom", science doesn't fall into the wrong hands and another Hitler or Stalin is unleashed on the world.

D-rock
2009-03-10, 00:35
Considering Bush was part of a family that was extremely rich and extremely politically elite when he went, I would say his Yale degree probably isn't worth the paper it's printed on. His actions over the past 8 years have pretty much proven he a couple cards short of a deck and more or less confirms that. His father wasn't anything to write home about in the brains department either.

While there are religious people on both sides of the aisle, and ones that that let that cloud their judgment, no objective neutral observer could come to any conclusion other than the fact that things are definitely skewed very heavily the Republicans way when it comes to religious nut fundamentalist as of the present.

It doesn't matter if they allow other theories besides creationism in schools. creationism isn't science, AT ALL. It's a philosophy. I suppose if a child is in a private school that his parents put him into and they want to teach theology or philosophy then so be it. It has no place in a public school. As far as science goes the theory of creationism has about as much merit as somebody saying that the world isn't real and we are all hooked up into a Matrix like device that powers some extraterrestrial's spaceship throughout the galaxy. Both have about the same level of proof you can attach to it.

As far as human embryos go, it's the mother's choice what she wants to do with it as far as I'm concerned (or both parents choice if it's outside the mother's body. I‘ll also admit not all their choices are what I would do or are what I‘m happy with, but I don‘t make it a point to dictate other people‘s lives.) It might be life, but until it's born it's not a person in my opinion. While some people don't like that, they probably think that way also even if they don't admit or don't realize it. I'm sure if some fire broke out in a fertility clinic and they have the chance to save either some person knocked out lying on the floor or thousands of cryogenically frozen embryos in a metal container but not both almost everybody is going to save the guy knocked out on the floor. The fact most people won't even think about it pretty much goes to show even they don't think of pre-born life as equivalent to what a person is.

Philbert
2009-03-10, 00:36
I'm in favor of it. Science has been obstructed by politics, both gov't and religion for so long that it's amazing that we've accomplished everything we have so far. Science can cure diseases, save lives, etc. Yes there are many, many good things that science can do, but make sure that with this "freedom", science doesn't fall into the wrong hands and another Hitler or Stalin is unleashed on the world.

Not that I like quoting Hillary, but "it takes a village"...
Science and people need to co-exist...if one doesn't serve the other, like most things a balance is upset.
People of pure intellect and people of morals are needed together, to find that balance, and as long as this is accomplished the end results are lasting and good.
Hitler and Stalin are examples of an unbalanced environment...you and I may have differing views, but in the end we find a balance we can live with.
:fight:......:glugglug:......:lovecoupl........ :thumbsup:

Philbert
2009-03-10, 00:55
Considering Bush was part of a family that was extremely rich and extremely politically elite when he went, I would say his Yale degree probably (guessing, are you?)isn't worth the paper it's printed on. His actions over the past 8 years have pretty much proven he a couple cards short of a deck and more or less confirms that. His father wasn't anything to write home about in the brains department either.

While there are religious people on both sides of the aisle, and ones that that let that cloud their judgment, no objective neutral observer could come to any conclusion other than the fact that things are definitely skewed very heavily the Republicans way when it comes to religious nut fundamentalist as of the present.

It doesn't matter if they allow other theories besides creationism in schools. creationism isn't science, AT ALL. It's a philosophy. I suppose if a child is in a private school that his parents put him into and they want to teach theology or philosophy then so be it. It has no place in a public school. As far as science goes the theory of creationism has about as much merit as somebody saying that the world isn't real and we are all hooked up into a Matrix like device that powers some extraterrestrial's spaceship throughout the galaxy. Both have about the same level of proof you can attach to it.

As far as human embryos go, it's the mother's choice what she wants to do with it as far as I'm concerned (or both parents choice if it's outside the mother's body. I‘ll also admit not all their choices are what I would do or are what I‘m happy with, but I don‘t make it a point to dictate other people‘s lives.) It might be life, but until it's born it's not a person in my opinion. While some people don't like that, they probably think that way also even if they don't admit or don't realize it. I'm sure if some fire broke out in a fertility clinic and they have the chance to save either some person knocked out lying on the floor or a thousands of cryogenically frozen embryos in a metal container but not both almost everybody is going to save the guy knocked out on the floor. The fact most people won't even think about it pretty much goes to show even they don't think of pre-born life as equivalent to what a person is.


That was a lovely speech...but are you really saying Creationism is being taught anywhere in an American Public school?
Please share with us where that might be...last time I noticed there was nowhere Creationism was being taught as science curriculum.

And...while we are there...just how many Republicans and how many Democrats are in favor of Creationism?
Since you seem to have access to actual numbers...
Please don't tell me there aren't large numbers of Black, Latino, and White Baptist, Evangelical, and other Uber Religious Democrats...that wouldn't be very honest. They all believe in the Bible as the Literal Word of God.

And if you want to wear blinders, that's ok...but I'm sure most people don't think a 6, 7, or 8 month old fetus isn't a viable baby.
I watched an 8 month old baby removed from her mother and she was perfect...she could have just as easily been 7 months old, and just as viable.
Embryos aren't a real issue with the largest segment of the population...however, since most voters don't show up at poll time, religious forces have managed to get a lot of concessions in the past...but pendulums swing both ways.

Friday on my mind
2009-03-11, 07:56
So much wisdom so fast...let me try to understand what you're saying; you're not too clear, but I'll try...
So...there was a time: umm, when was this "time"? Middle Ages? Last year?
Did you mean no Democrats were ever down with religion dictating how we pursue research and science teaching?
Millions of Democratic Southern Baptists were all for Evolution Theory and not the Bible-based Creationism Theory, right?
Suddenly Republicans went far Right...all of them...and controlled the entire Government. There weren't any Democrats smart enough or numerous enough to stop them.
But...overnight Democrats took over...where were these vast numbers of enlightened voters hiding? In your neighborhood?
Now, there's hope because these wonderful enlightened Democrats have reappeared (I still want to know where they were all this time), and evil Republicans must be stopped. Is there a Law that Creationism is the only Theory allowed in schools? When did this happen? Got a timeline?
Since the Republican Right either appeared recently, or "they have a long history of standing in the way of progress and truth and still try to", I don't see where this conflict is resolved in your post.
You want to outlaw this nonsense? What nonsense? The rule of Law...where voters and their reps decide the way things go, or where one group decides what everyone does.
It's amazing how years of time pass, and suddenly the same folks who were here all the time aren't the least bit responsible for anything that happened...either all the Republicans who are pretty much mainstream or the religious Democrats who let it all go down, 'til what...a few months ago?
Since you seem to have a clear vision of how this all happened, could you please just clear up the slight discrepancy in the actual timeline?:dunno:

I eagerly await enlightenment...

I guess that since you are a republican supporter although I thought you had posted in other threads that science should not be interfered with and that stem cell research should be left to scientists without religious interefence you are trying to make a point here which will just not stand up to scrutiny.
While there may be some dems who are believers it has been clear since at least the 80s when pubs put things like wanting constitutional amendment banning abortion in party platform which party was much less secular in regards to public policy and religious interference.The pubs have tried to use the religious angle to their favor and catered to the extreme religious groups while the dems have been staunchly pro choice etc.
And yes religion has always been anti science if it found that it was in conflict with its dogma and still is.From the earth being the center of the universe to creationsim etc.While creationism may not be in schools now its not from a lack of trying by the religious right who has now tried to use the new phrase of intelligent design and get it back in schools.Bush advocated intelligent design be presented in schools as an alternative theory to evolution,even though there is zero scientific evidence for it.That is religion being brought into public policy.
So bottom line is when pubs drop the pro life-anti choice ,advocating for intelligent design type stuff they can call themselves secular.Till then the dems are clearly much less captive to religious dogma being part of public policy.

Facetious
2009-03-11, 08:15
What I don't like about this stem cell issue is that it has become nothing more than a bandwagon. The dems know the side that they're supposed to take and the reps know the side of the issue that they're supposed to take. For me, I'm pro choice on up to the third trimester. after that point, it seems somewhat "infanticidic", if I may create a word. :D

After all, the woman carrying the pregnancy identifies the growing lump in her gut as as "her baby" never her fetus ! :rofl:

So yea, I don't have a problem with women sacrificing embryos.

Here's my compromise - Life begins at the conclusion of the 23rd hour of the 89th day.

:hatsoff:

Member2019
2009-03-11, 09:22
One thing I'm tired of hearing is how W. outlawed stem cell research. He did no such thing. He only placed a ban on federal funding of the research. Private industry was free to research stem cells.

The lift of this ban only allows federal funding to be used for stem cell research. I personally applaud this change, as do even some Republicans, like Nancy Reagan and others. At the same time, let's not overstate what the ban was.

It's the difference between fact and rhetoric. I know a lot of people like to spew rhetoric here and elsewhere. But don't overstate what the ban was. It was merely a federal funding ban.

Some Republicans do not like to fund anything that is related to aborted children and select, other things. Yet they completely respect the right of private citizens and institutions to do what they wish. They are not in the business of telling people what they can do with their own money, time and lives.

calpoon
2009-03-12, 03:36
They are not in the business of telling people what they can do with their own money, time and lives.

you mean other than banning gay marriage?

stampede2873
2009-03-12, 08:26
insulating scientific decisions across the federal government from political influence

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!! I think I busted a gut!!!!

How much scientific research IS funded by the Federal Government?!?!? You can't seperate it any more than I could karate chop the Earth in half!!!

As for stem cell research....

If the research was viable, then the public sector would have been THROWING money into it.

It would not need Federal Funding!!!.

But like education the thought, " If we throw a shit ton of money it has to work, right?" comes into play.

The science at this time is unfeasible. Until we have the human genotype mapped, the science will never bear fruit.

pikachar
2009-03-12, 09:39
How much scientific research IS funded by the Federal Government?!?!? You can't seperate it any more than I could karate chop the Earth in half!!!
Yeah no doubt, think of this, a majority of medical advances comes from what.... Direct Combat, and the Army/Navy Medical departments.

Yup that's right kiddos, if you seen it on ER, we've seen it 10 years before it aired at least. ATLS is a F'n joke (except for advanced cardiac drug therapies)... Try TCCC or TCMC on for a change. Really helps having a patent airway when someone's heart isn't pumping. History of note: ATLS, BTLS, Trauma AIMS, COCH, EMT, TCCC, and TCMC are all federal medical programs. Go figure, that Department of Defense and the Department of Transportation, along with OSHA decided to be funded by the government.

Well when it comes to Stem Cell research... President 'W' as you label him, only banned new federal stem cell research. Private sectors continued to do cultivations of specific stem cell branches, otherwise the FDA wouldn't be approving stem cell therapy trials for CNS and myocardial infarctions.

lovejoy
2009-03-12, 10:18
The only country that claimed success in stem cell research and its practical use is China.
Currently well over 10,000-15,000 patients go to China each year for diseases related to stem cell injection. The result is horrible. It gives false hope to many spinal cord injury patients in US and Europe that stem cell can cure everything. Also recent advance in China to cure a young American girl with optic nerve hypoplasia may just be another "trick".

So I believe Obama is right to let N.I.H., the Federal arm of granting research funding to universities for stem cell research and advance the "cure" of many diseases. Let hundreds of universities to compete and cure diseases and live better lifes.

This has nothing to do with politics (?) Wrong ! One day China may break through and patent different treatment plans of incurable diseases such as spinal cord injurie. So the President should order NIH immdiately to start funding stem cell research to compete with other countries to better our lives instead of spending $50,000-$75,000.00 to travel to China for false hope !

stampede2873
2009-03-12, 10:45
So I believe Obama is right to let N.I.H., the Federal arm of granting research funding to universities for stem cell research and advance the "cure" of many diseases. Let hundreds of universities to compete and cure diseases and live better lifes.


No, no, no, no, no!!! The N.I.H. as you said is funded by the Federal Government. Which means they are subject to Government oversight. The science behind stem cells and their purported "miracle" uses, as of now, is a JOKE. Private sector money never made its way to the research because they know the research will bear ABSOLUTELY no fruit!

As I said in my earlier post, until we map out the human genome, we will never be able to USE, let alone make any progress with stem cells!!

Obamas claim to seperate science from politics is in itself a covert political move, a way to garner votes to funnel money into government controlled stemcell and other research. Seperation my ass! The two might as well have just become conjoined twins!!

Let me be clear, as far as stem cell research is concerned, I am all for it. However, the scientific community is NOT READY to take on that type of research yet. Genetic research is so far in its infancy it might as well be a zygote. What needs to be done is for the egomaniac scientists to be sent off to pasure so other scientists, with NO EGO or AGENDA can take their shot and conduct genetic research in the order it must be done... WITHOUT government oversight.

By the way, Government Oversight = Rushed results for political agendas. Meaning the scientific results will he hack jobbed and worthless, causing millions in dire need left with dashed hopes from empty promises.

pikachar
2009-03-12, 11:09
As I said in my earlier post, until we map out the human genome, we will never be able to USE, let alone make any progress with stem cells!!

Genetic research is so far in its infancy it might as well be a zygote.
Actually we've made leaps and bound in the past few years on this... I know I posted something before on this company called Genron (http://board.freeones.com/showpost.php?p=3013011&postcount=9) before. Their overall goal is to use a map of the genome and knows virus codes, bacteria codes, and stem cell lines to develop user specific treatments. So yeah I'd agree with you... we're a Zygote, but yet again... we're getting closer.

Philbert
2009-03-12, 13:41
No, no, no, no, no!!! The N.I.H. as you said is funded by the Federal Government. Which means they are subject to Government oversight. The science behind stem cells and their purported "miracle" uses, as of now, is a JOKE. Private sector money never made its way to the research because they know the research will bear ABSOLUTELY no fruit!

As I said in my earlier post, until we map out the human genome, we will never be able to USE, let alone make any progress with stem cells!!

Obamas claim to seperate science from politics is in itself a covert political move, a way to garner votes to funnel money into government controlled stemcell and other research. Seperation my ass! The two might as well have just become conjoined twins!!

Let me be clear, as far as stem cell research is concerned, I am all for it. However, the scientific community is NOT READY to take on that type of research yet. Genetic research is so far in its infancy it might as well be a zygote. What needs to be done is for the egomaniac scientists to be sent off to pasure so other scientists, with NO EGO or AGENDA can take their shot and conduct genetic research in the order it must be done... WITHOUT government oversight.

By the way, Government Oversight = Rushed results for political agendas. Meaning the scientific results will he hack jobbed and worthless, causing millions in dire need left with dashed hopes from empty promises.


Actually we've made leaps and bound in the past few years on this... I know I posted something before on this company called Genron (http://board.freeones.com/showpost.php?p=3013011&postcount=9) before. Their overall goal is to use a map of the genome and knows virus codes, bacteria codes, and stem cell lines to develop user specific treatments. So yeah I'd agree with you... we're a Zygote, but yet again... we're getting closer.

Ahhh...I feel like I'm actually learning something worthwhile. This is what a discussion is! I was beginning to forget what it was like...:D

There is always a disconnect between results oriented funding and pure research funding.
The con is obvious...the pro is also obvious: less waste and personal side projects.
With the stink being laid on high profits and successful business models, the pharm cos won't be as quick to fund their own research into cures and treatments based on genetic performance. The gov't is so efficient...not!...that it will take forever for real progress to be made.
Kinda feels like the old rock and a hard place dilema...

puffypig2
2009-03-12, 14:10
Ok then, take the politics out of the global warming "science".

Take it out of the organic food movement. Allow the growth hormones in animals. Animals on growth hormones, have a much smaller carbon foot print, and their food products are scientifically proven safe.

Allow cloned animals and plants to enter the food system. Science says they are safe.

The application of politics in science, isn't limited to religion.

E-Ann-Hilden
2009-03-12, 15:58
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!! I think I busted a gut!!!!

How much scientific research IS funded by the Federal Government?!?!? You can't seperate it any more than I could karate chop the Earth in half!!!

As for stem cell research....

If the research was viable, then the public sector would have been THROWING money into it.

It would not need Federal Funding!!!.

But like education the thought, " If we throw a shit ton of money it has to work, right?" comes into play.

The science at this time is unfeasible. Until we have the human genotype mapped, the science will never bear fruit.

delete

lovejoy
2009-03-12, 16:29
Stem cell research has been around for more than 40-50 years !

Researchers used the umbilical cord to harvest stem cells and did all kind of research. But the real issue is George W. Bush issued an executive order to NOT only ban federal funded stem cell research but to punish any institutions i.e. universitites involved in stem cells research. What it means is we are way behind France, Italy and even China for stem cell research. Whether stem cell research is in its infancy, it does not matter.

U.S. can attract the best and brightest scientists including the best German, Isreal, Japanese scientists to work on any stem cell projects.

NIH is the Federal arm to distribute and oversight the stem cell projects but US military (US Army) has the best capacity to do stem cell research including regeneration of skins, spinal cord injuries and limbs etc.

If we can have heart/face transplants, we can regenerate hopefully at least "some" neurons in the spinal cords using stem cells one day !

Philbert
2009-03-12, 16:31
you mean other than banning gay marriage?

When and where did the Republicans ban Gay Marriage?

Philbert
2009-03-12, 16:34
[/B]

delete
No!!! Don't delete!

(Is that the same as discorporate, like Michael in "Stranger in a Strange Land"?) :rofl:

stampede2873
2009-03-12, 16:39
Stem cell research has been around for more than 40-50 years!

aaaaaaaand how many times during those years did the NiH scientists claim they've made a break through, only to find in a subsequent re-trials it failed... miserably.

Believe me, I want this to work, I really do. But the reality of the situation is this.... We still don't have a clue as to how genes work. Without that knowledge, the use of stem cells to clone other cells will again, fail.

Governments always introduce a lot of beaurocricies (sp?) into EVERYTHING. Which only serve to bog down the process. Like Philbert said, we are in a catch 22 that will only fuck us all in the ass.

girk1
2009-03-12, 17:04
aaaaaaaand how many times during those years did the NiH scientists claim they've made a break through, only to find in a subsequent re-trials it failed... miserably.

Believe me, I want this to work, I really do. But the reality of the situation is this.... We still don't have a clue as to how genes work. Without that knowledge, the use of stem cells to clone other cells will again, fail.



Isn't that what science has always been about:dunno:. Theories & Experimentation.
Drugs/technological advances don't happen overnight & many have failed miserably before scientists have found an answer . Scientists build upon the successes/failures of past scientist before they figure out problems.

Jason z
2009-03-12, 17:11
It's about fucking time we actually had a president who knew what he was doing. I am about tired of all the brainwashing religion crap. It's all bullshit! Nothing but hipocrites trying to get money. Especially the Catholic Church. Has anybody hear what happend in Brazil? Fuck all organized religions. That will be mankind's ultimate defeat if we son't get rid of it. As Bill Maher said- "Grow up or die."

stampede2873
2009-03-12, 17:52
Isn't that what science has always been about:dunno:. Theories & Experimentation.
Drugs/technological advances don't happen overnight & many have failed miserably before scientists have found an answer . Scientists build upon the successes/failures of past scientist before they figure out problems.

Yes, yes it is. At least that's the way it should be. But due to pressure from the government to show results: as in tracing and identifying the human genome. Science has declared, " We did it, We know how it works!" Only to find that no.... you have failed. And made a public spectacle out of yourself and your organization. This has been done at least 3 times in the last 40 years.


This is the downside to government funding.


There are other factors as well, but I would be writing a frickin term paper.

lovejoy
2009-03-12, 19:02
Stampede2873,


Only three billion base pairs of ribonuclear acids in the human genome ! LOL !

YMIHERE
2009-03-13, 02:06
When and where did the Republicans ban Gay Marriage?

They surely would if they had the power. Below is from the 2008 Republican platform so don't tell me it's bias.



http://www.gop.com/2008Platform/Values.htm


Preserving Traditional Marriage
Because our children’s future is best preserved within the traditional understanding of marriage, we call for a constitutional amendment that fully protects marriage as a union of a man and a woman, so that judges cannot make other arrangements equivalent to it. In the absence of a national amendment, we support the right of the people of the various states to affirm traditional marriage through state initiatives.
Republicans recognize the importance of having in the home a father and a mother who are married. The two-parent family still provides the best environment of stability, discipline, responsibility, and character. Children in homes without fathers are more likely to commit a crime, drop out of school, become violent, become teen parents, use illegal drugs, become mired in poverty, or have emotional or behavioral problems. We support the courageous efforts of single-parent families to provide a stable home for their children. Children are our nation’s most precious resource. We also salute and support the efforts of foster and adoptive families.
Republicans have been at the forefront of protecting traditional marriage laws, both in the states and in Congress. A Republican Congress enacted the Defense of Marriage Act, affirming the right of states not to recognize same-sex “marriages” licensed in other states. Unbelievably, the Democratic Party has now pledged to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, which would subject every state to the redefinition of marriage by a judge without ever allowing the people to vote on the matter. We also urge Congress to use its Article III, Section 2 power to prevent activist federal judges from imposing upon the rest of the nation the judicial activism in Massachusetts and California. We also encourage states to review their marriage and divorce laws in order to strengthen marriage.
As the family is our basic unit of society, we oppose initiatives to erode parental rights.

stampede2873
2009-03-13, 05:31
Stampede2873,


Only three billion base pairs of ribonuclear acids in the human genome ! LOL !

I know:rofl:

The "point" I was trying to make. Now having some sleep, is this. We still don't know that one little piece of information that orders a cell to become a particular "type" of cell.

Without the knowledge of this "marching order" we won't/can't tell a stem cell what to transform into to make the whole damn thing work.

girk1
2009-03-13, 15:03
Yes, yes it is. At least that's the way it should be. But due to pressure from the government to show results: as in tracing and identifying the human genome. Science has declared, " We did it, We know how it works!" Only to find that no.... you have failed. And made a public spectacle out of yourself and your organization. This has been done at least 3 times in the last 40 years.


This is the downside to government funding.


There are other factors as well, but I would be writing a frickin term paper.

Sadly scientist have to really lobby for funding so I wouldn't be surprised (though I'm not certain of this ) if they are overly excited in their claims at times. Some are just excited about the slightest advances as they know what it can mean if their project does succeed.

I say they finally tax churches(who contribute nothing & even impede upon technological/scientific advancement) & use the money to help finance scientific reasearch among other things & maybe there would't be as much a need to lobby by scientist.

stampede2873
2009-03-13, 15:09
I say they finally tax churches & use the money to help finance scientific reasearch among other things...

I'm amenable to that. :thumbsup:

titsrock
2009-03-13, 16:20
Obama needs to create a Cabinet position of "Secretary of Science":2 cents:

shayd
2009-03-14, 05:33
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/08/AR2009030801476.html?hpid=topnews

And I'm all for it.

Member2019
2009-03-15, 16:32
you mean other than banning gay marriage? I said some Republicans. There is a regular demonization of all Republicans being for something, when it's not all, sometimes not even a majority.

Same deal with Democrats. People who say all Democrats want to penalize all successful people, or all Democrats want to tax all small business owners, is not true either.

Member2019
2009-03-15, 16:35
I say they finally tax churches(who contribute nothing & even impede upon technological/scientific advancement) Apparently you haven't been involved with most churches. Many of the churches I've ever been involved with have used a majority of their money to help the poor and fund many other programs. This includes 100% of the money they collect on Sunday going towards such programs, and funding church operations from membership on other days or with other fund raising efforts (although many of those go to non-church operations as well).

This statement is extremely dangerous to make. The anti-organized religion attitude on this board makes me wonder sometimes. Even though I don't believe in organized religion for myself, this above statement is rather ignorant of what many churches are about.

Should we go after the Salvation Army and anything else religious related next? What about the religion-founded, non-profit hospitals while we're at it?

pikachar
2009-03-15, 16:38
NIH is the Federal arm to distribute and oversight the stem cell projects but US military (US Army) has the best capacity to do stem cell research including regeneration of skins, spinal cord injuries and limbs etc.
Passes out in excitement, someone else agrees!!!

Holy shit what we could do if we had the time, man power, and the money... AMEDD could really start churning out great results in maybe 5-6 years.

titsrock
2009-03-15, 19:38
Should we go after the Salvation Army and anything else religious related next? What about the religion-founded, non-profit hospitals while we're at it?

When they act like for-profits, then YES. We absolutely should tax them. There are articles around from various sources which describe how many "nonprofit" and "Religion-based" hospitals turn away patients and send them to state run hospitals. And articles about many nonprofit organizations don't actually do much charity at all. Some only use 5% of their donations for charitable endeavors. 95% goes to "administrative needs":rolleyes: Really?

When religions want to "meddle" with state affairs...time to send in the tax man. :thumbsup:

Friday on my mind
2009-03-15, 19:53
When they act like for-profits, then YES. We absolutely should tax them. There are articles around from various sources which describe how many "nonprofit" and "Religion-based" hospitals turn away patients and send them to state run hospitals. And articles about many nonprofit organizations don't actually do much charity at all. Some only use 5% of their donations for charitable endeavors. 95% goes to "administrative needs":rolleyes: Really?

When religions want to "meddle" with state affairs...time to send in the tax man. :thumbsup:

You won't find me ever dropping money in a salvation army pot,was real glad last year when Target said nope to them along with anyone else collecting for anything in front of their stores.The salvation army has engaged in and been sued for discrimnation in employement with their religious demands of employees.Like firing women employees who were not married and got pregnant,the church don't approve so were firing you.Their not suppose to be able to do that of course.And giving to one of those child molesting cults like the catholic church is out of the question as well lol.Even alot of devout catholics stopped that when they found out millions of dollars had been used to pay for court cases and settlements to the victims of the priests molestations.Sure they as well as other religions have done some good things but that don't make them right or wipe away the damage they do with their varying backward stands on a whole host of issues.

Member2019
2009-03-16, 01:45
As always, I can rest my case. People take fringe, select events, and apply to "all" people, the "entire" organization, etc...

It would be extremely easy to do the same with government, even more so than private, non-profits.

And yet you guys trust the government more? Nuts!

pikachar
2009-03-16, 03:17
As always, I can rest my case. People take fringe, select events, and apply to "all" people, the "entire" organization, etc...

It would be extremely easy to do the same with government, even more so than private, non-profits.

And yet you guys trust the government more? Nuts!
As much as you and I can agree or disagree, we're pretty much on the same wavelength here.

Yes, I think government could do more, but to fully trust them.... yeah, I don't trust anyone, so having medical competition in multiple sectors is a great idea. Public, vs Government funding... it's be a debate that can go on for years.

Now for those people who label a group as broad as Democrat or Republican... Agree with you completely. No label should be smacked on this, or that, but that's yet again another thread.

------

Alas, going back through some other posts:
AMEDD vs Public debate.
The government would be able to generate a cash cow for using stem cell research for military purposes, like they do anyways. So in essence, this would be contracted out, and bingo... tons of money could be flooded into this project for new skins, heart treatments, nerve damage, whatever.

Now the interesting thing is Genron, and the Human Genome... If you could, with a vast database of DNA, make individual treatments, then imagine the donation organs being reproduced. But I have a further proposition... What about cloning yourself, and making an individual embryonic stem cell line, without the hassle of mapping the genome? Yeah, sound like science fiction, but imagine the possibilities, of having from birth... a stem cell line just for you, and ready at any given notice?

The NiH vs Anyone else...
Really wouldn't care who had oversight on this project, there needs to be some lines that have to be regulated (especially with stem cells), because you don't just want to sit back and watch people go at it just for the simple thrill of making billions of lines for no apparent reason. This is where the NiH and FDA could step in, and assist. Personally for me, they have to have a need before the lines should be crossed (example, cloning a person, and making personal stem cell lines).

I mean if I sound off beat, please send me one back, I love medical debates.