inducing cells from connective tissue in mice to revert back to their embryonic state

[Stealth Hunter]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Let me guess, they will still want embryonic babies anyway after this breakthrough

Well it's not like we should just completely abandon research on embryonic stem cells. We still have a lot to learn about them, but we have even more to learn about these new iPS cells. Furthermore, what valuable knowledge might we gain from comparing the two? That's the real question I'm interested in.

Oh and for the record- embryos are not babies; if you're a baby, then you're out of the womb. If you're an embryo, then you're not even in the fetal stage yet. You're just a mass of clumped cells that are undergoing the earliest possible stages of growth and differentiation. You have no capacity to think, you have no feelings, hell none of your vital organs have even formed properly yet.

[Aramike]

Oh and for the record- embryos are not babies; if you're a baby, then you're out of the womb.

So wait, you're saying that a bunch of embrionic cells out of the womb and in a dish are babies?

[Stealth Hunter]

Originally Posted by Aramike

So wait, you're saying that a bunch of embrionic cells out of the womb and in a dish are babies?

If you're an embryo, then you're not even in the fetal stage yet. You're just a mass of clumped cells that are undergoing the earliest possible stages of growth and differentiation. You have no capacity to think, you have no feelings, hell none of your vital organs have even formed properly yet.

[Platapus]

<Microwaving the popcorn>

Anyone got some beer?

There is a good show starting on Subsim!

[Aramike]

Originally Posted by Stealth Hunter

If you're an embryo, then you're not even in the fetal stage yet. You're just a mass of clumped cells that are undergoing the earliest possible stages of growth and differentiation. You have no capacity to think, you have no feelings, hell none of your vital organs have even formed properly yet.

I don't disagree. I was referring to the specifics of your previous post, and making a point about the grey areas when it comes to life.

[antikristuseke]

Personaly, I think that both areas of research should be open.

[SUBMAN1]

I don't know, but maybe you guys didn't read the fine print, but what exactly would you call the difference between an embryonic stem cell, and a cell that is now in an embryonic state? Hello? Lucy? Anyone home in your brains up there? They are now one and the same. Maybe you guys missed that point when you called for a comparison of the two.

-S

[Stealth Hunter]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

I don't know, but maybe you guys didn't read the fine print, but what exactly would you call the difference between an embryonic stem cell, and a cell that is now in an embryonic state? Hello? Lucy? Anyone home in your brains up there? They are now one and the same. Maybe you guys missed that point when you called for a comparison of the two.

"They are now one in the same"?

Yeah, that's exactly what people thought about adult stem cells and embryonic stem cells five years ago. That did indeed appear to be the case; derived from different sources but producing the same effects in the same manner. Then more research was done and it was found that their original conclusion was wrong.

You are aware, for example, that embryonic stem cells have the ability to divide and replicate faster than adult stem cells, right? Were you also aware that they have several protein compounds not found in adult stem cells? These things were previously unknown until further research was done, something which you'd be quick to abandon in this case.

When you get into this kind of stuff, it is imperative for the sake of future research and results-and for separating fact from opinion from fiction-- that you find what is and is not different between the two. Which is, as I also mentioned, precisely why we need to do more research between the two and not suddenly just cease all studies in one or the other.