View Single Post
  #7  
Old October 13th, 2004, 05:14 PM
rw
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default supeman was my favorite -

wrote:

That aside, I thought the main objection to embryonic stem cells was not
related to abortions, but the fact that it HAD to be a planned thing -
create the embryo knowing you're going to destroy it - that destroyed
the embryo, and in doing so, a (potential) life.


The "planning" is done by couples being treated for infertility. Women
are treated with hormones to induce the production of eggs, which are
then fertilized in vitro and grown into blastocysts, some of which are
implanted in either the "mother's" uterus or the uterus of a surrogate.
The excess blastocysts are, as of now, discarded or kept frozen
indefinitely.

Hence, at least for
me, there is no hypocrisy in allowing research on current stocks of
already-not-viable embryos.


The currently available cell lines are corrupted with mouse cells, among
other things.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.