Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News Promise anything

  1. Oct 12, 2004 #1
    Talk about pure b*llsht!

    Edwards on the campaign trail -

    "When John Kerry is president, people like Christopher Reeve are going get up out of that wheelchair and walk again.' Edwards made the unprecedented campaign promises during 30-minute speech at Newton High School gym in Newton, Iowa... "

    If he promises to cure old age, I might vote for him.

    ..
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Oct 12, 2004 #2
    Lmao... aww poor Edwards.

    Of course, he was talking about if Kerry is elected there won't be a ban on human stem-cell research which could ultimately lead to a cure for paralysis. I don't know...might not be too far from the turth.
     
  4. Oct 12, 2004 #3
    There's a ban on stem cell research?
     
  5. Oct 12, 2004 #4

    kat

    User Avatar

    There's no BAN on human stem-cell research. Bush did not ban stem cell research, in fact he lifted the ban he inherited from the Clinton Administration on federal funding for stem cell research.
     
  6. Oct 12, 2004 #5

    chroot

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Duh, GENERIE. What, did you think he meant he was going to faith-heal him or something? :rolleyes:

    Bush enacted a ban on federal funding of research on new stem cell lines.

    - Warren
     
  7. Oct 12, 2004 #6
    And Bush said in 2002 that he'd create over 5 million jobs...

    And I've read in Scientific American that they have paralyzed rats in laboratory situations and injected stem-cells into their spine, and the rats regained astonishing amounts of movement. It's not like stem-cell therapy is something that's so far off from helping people who are parapalegic from an injury walking, especially for a science that's only been around for 6 years.
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2004
  8. Oct 12, 2004 #7

    chroot

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    No, he enacted the ban on federal funding for stem-cell research.

    - Warren
     
  9. Oct 12, 2004 #8

    kat

    User Avatar

    He lifted the ban on funding for existing EMBRYONIC stem cell lines.
     
  10. Oct 12, 2004 #9

    kat

    User Avatar

    Chroot- NEW EMBRYONIC are the key words, I believe.
     
  11. Oct 12, 2004 #10
    Ha! I love it!

    Bush banned stem cell research.

    No he didn't, he LIFTED the ban.

    No, he enacted it.

    No, he lifted it.

    No, he enacted it.
     
  12. Oct 12, 2004 #11
    Bush vs. Kerry

    Aliens vs. Predator 2: Whoever wins, we lose
     
  13. Oct 12, 2004 #12

    chroot

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    There was no ban of any sort under the Clinton administration. I don't know where you're getting your "facts" from.

    - Warren
     
  14. Oct 12, 2004 #13

    chroot

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Right, Bush enacted a ban on federal funding of new embryonic stem cells on August 9, 2001. Such a ban did not exist before him, and did not exist under the Clinton administration.

    - Warren
     
  15. Oct 12, 2004 #14

    kat

    User Avatar

    Bush did not ban stem cell research. He is the first president to fund stem cell research. Federal funding of stem cell research prior to the BUsh was $0. The 2003 budget included $24.8 million for human embryonic stem cell research, an increase of 132 percent from 2002 and $190 million in funding for adult stem cells. There is no ban on private research of stem cells at all.
     
  16. Oct 12, 2004 #15

    chroot

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Listen closely kat:

    He enacted a ban on August 9, 2001, that prohibited the US government (including the NSF, the largest grantor in the world) from funding new embryonic stem cell research.

    Paradoxically, he is indeed the first president to put money into existing stem cell lines, but he cut off funding for new stem cell lines. That's akin to funding black and white television. Who cares?

    - Warren
     
  17. Oct 12, 2004 #16

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Bush's policy on embryonic stem cell research is just plain self-contradictory. He's against it, because it involves killing. But he's okay with maintaining some limited number of lines. But he's not okay with funding the use of discarded embryos from fertility clinics because...that involves killing :confused:
     
  18. Oct 12, 2004 #17

    kat

    User Avatar

    Federal funding on New Embryonic.....there is no ban on stem cell research! and I agree! Just like there should be no federal funding of abortions! Why should people have to pay for acts that they deem to be murder?
    I'm very pro-choice. In fact if one of my children(2 of which are adults) were to become pregnant or get someone pregnant I would gladly pay for or assist in attaining an abortion, if that is what they wanted. I think if you want to fund embryonic stem cell research YOU SHOULD! But people who believe it is murder and unethical should not have to have their money funding it.
    BE THAT AS IT MAY....


    THERE IS NO...

    Let me repeat that

    THERE IS NO>...ZERO ZIP ZING ZONG NO
    NO BAN ON STEM CELL RESEARCH!!!

    And BUSH is the first president to ever back funding for stem cell research! EVER! Hurrah for Bush!
     
  19. Oct 12, 2004 #18

    You peopel love the straw man. Don't inject a fallacy so you can argue with yoruself.

    The stated reason (I won't comment on my own views on this subject right now) is that there are moral and ethical ramifications that need to be figured out before opening the floodgates. Does using aborted fetuses create a social inclination towards abortion because the aborted fetus will go to a good cause??? I don't know, Bush doesn't know, and neither do you. It's a question worth discussion, and is one at the crux of why we have the federal ban on funding for NEW LINES. The existing lines, whether you consider their creation bad or good or neutral are already in existance, and thus federal funding to use them is in no way a government sanction to increase the populous' willingness to get an abortion.

    It is not a self-contradictory position, but more of a compromise between an alll out moratorium and doing something that may have further ramifications than we presently can see.
     
  20. Oct 12, 2004 #19

    chroot

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    That's just spin. Even if you put it in capital letters, it's still misleading to the point of being wrong.

    Virtually all research in this country is government-funded. The NSF, particularly, is repsonsible for much of the research funding in this country. The NSF is no longer able to fund research on new embryonic stem cells. Sure, it's not illegal, but scientists can't get funding to do it. Perhaps ol' Bush wanted to make sure the research was crippled without having to actually admit his religious-right purposes in actually banning it?
    Bush is also the first president to ever restrict government funding of any form of stem cell research. Why do you want to focus on the irrelevant?

    He funded old stem-cell research that is now seriously behind the times. There are almost 100 new embryonic lines around the world which are totally unaccessible to the vast majority of US researchers because they cannot receive funding to study them.

    If you want to close your ears and act like an moron and declare that this is good, I really do fear for this country's future. People like you scare me.

    - Warren
     
  21. Oct 12, 2004 #20
    *sigh* Pardon me for my reply’s factual inaccuracies with regards to the Bush administration’s policy towards human stem-cell research.

    Anyway, the point of the matter is that if the Kerry promise holds when he is elected, research on human stem-cells will be much easier than it is with the current Bush policies. Is that better?
     
  22. Oct 12, 2004 #21
    virutally of the research in this country is government funded?
    Link to this? How about specifically medical research?
     
  23. Oct 12, 2004 #22
    You realize that stem cells were only first isolated in 1998, and that with Clinton getting a blow-job and essentially being politiclaly deadlocked for the end of his second term, Bush was pretty much the only guy who even had the opportunity to fund it.

    By that logic, hippies should either be exempt from paying taxes, since the government makes bombs and guns etc., or the government should stop making weapons of war. You guys get to go bomb countries and set up fascist dictatorships to later overthrow, god damnit, just let us save lives!
     
  24. Oct 12, 2004 #23

    chroot

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    NSF's site appears to be down right now, but I'm not dodging the question. I'll be happy to provide evidence later.

    - Warren
     
  25. Oct 12, 2004 #24

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Bush caving to pressure from religious groups to stop stem cell research infuriated me. No he didn't ban it, he just hogtied it.

    He wimped out and decided that the US would only support research done on the already existing supply of stem cells, even though scientists testified that the cells involved were actually pre-embrionic "On the first issue, are these embryos human life -- well, one researcher told me he believes this five-day-old cluster of cells is not an embryo, not yet an individual, but a pre-embryo. He argued that it has the potential for life, but it is not a life because it cannot develop on its own."

    "My position on these issues is shaped by deeply held beliefs."

    I also believe human life is a sacred gift from our Creator. I worry about a culture that devalues life, and believe as your President I have an important obligation to foster and encourage respect for life in America and throughout the world. And while we're all hopeful about the potential of this research, no one can be certain that the science will live up to the hope it has generated."

    "I have made this decision with great care, and I pray it is the right one.

    Thank you for listening. Good night, and God bless America."

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/08/20010809-2.html [Broken]
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
  26. Oct 12, 2004 #25

    chroot

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I retract my previous statements. Bush quite clearly stated his religious-right purposes in enacting the ban and crippling the science.

    - Warren
     
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Loading...