Jump to content
|Topic||Stats||Last action by|
|Welfare recipients can use debit cards for marijuana||
|Merits of using prefix vs postfix increment operator||
|[USA] Affordable Care Act (ACA)||
|Answered Office for Mac 2011||
|Apple release removal tool for unwanted U2 album||
Posted 01 May 2013 - 14:03
Posted 01 May 2013 - 15:20
Posted 01 May 2013 - 15:27
Posted 01 May 2013 - 15:30
and yet so many people (religious folk especially) are against this.... fools...
Posted 01 May 2013 - 15:47
Posted 01 May 2013 - 15:50
What they're against is embryonic stem cell research because it always destroys a fertilized embryo which is considered to be human life. In the treatment this girl received, her own post-embryonic stem cells were used; this is completely acceptable as there is no loss of life, but a life preserved. Not all stem cell research and treatment is opposed, just those that kill embryos.
Posted 01 May 2013 - 15:56
Posted 01 May 2013 - 18:37
Posted 02 May 2013 - 00:00
Posted 02 May 2013 - 00:06
Heh. We already allow faulty genetic lines to perpetuate, so I can't really see that as a valid argument. As for the rest, as long as they stick to repairing accidental damage or birth defects, that's fine. It doesn't mean that we're on the slippery slope to designer babies.
Posted 02 May 2013 - 00:36
It's been done, but it tastes bland. A lot of the tasty stuff is in the animal fats and residual cooked blood, not the proteins & cell matrix.
Posted 02 May 2013 - 00:41
Posted 02 May 2013 - 00:45
Posted 02 May 2013 - 00:50