On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 08:41:06 -0600, "Kerry Evans"
wrote:

Actually, embryonic stem cell research shows very little positive promise.
Adult stem cell research, OTOH, could perhaps produce some positive results.
KE


OK, but I'm not sure that's correct, and certainly not what I was trying
to convey. From what I know about it (which, admittedly, is pretty
limited), both types show promise for certain and differing things, but
the embryonic cells are, at least in theory, more versatile because they
are what would, in nature, develop into everything. Frankly, I think
the whole thing has become more political than scientific, including for
the scientists themselves, and none of the cells show short-term promise
as cure-alls, ala Edwards' campaigning.

But again, most importantly IMO, the only real question is should the
Fed fund embryonic cell research or not. Also IMO, given the complete
overview and current knowledge to this point, the Fed should stay
_completely_ out of it as far as funding or beyond anything other than a
limited control as to methodology.

TC,
R