Comments on: Ceding the Ethical Ground on Stem Cells http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=3931 Wed, 29 Jul 2009 22:36:51 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: james http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=3931&cpage=1#comment-5694 james Sat, 09 Sep 2006 14:19:29 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=3931#comment-5694 Progress does not mean we have to ignore ethical dilemmas while altering our genetic structures or our dependence on medicine and biotechnology. We must continue to dilligently grade our moral and ethical stances beside our advancements. Without these considerations we can become lost to understanding why we have an ethical or moral conscience. If we were to disregard harming the embroyonic cells just to appease our desire to acquire human cells than we are simply taking less intellectually strenuous and challenging routes to achieveing what appears to be in the name of financial incentives. Being ethical doesn't mean being anti-progress. As we saw in the case of Enron, exectutives and traders devoid of ethics will and did inflict pain upon people who were supposed to be benefiting from the 'rationalization' of the energy markets. We should exercise these same moral cautions when extracting human cells and should not have to benefit many at the cost of a few. Progress does not mean we have to ignore ethical dilemmas while altering our genetic structures or our dependence on medicine and biotechnology. We must continue to dilligently grade our moral and ethical stances beside our advancements. Without these considerations we can become lost to understanding why we have an ethical or moral conscience. If we were to disregard harming the embroyonic cells just to appease our desire to acquire human cells than we are simply taking less intellectually strenuous and challenging routes to achieveing what appears to be in the name of financial incentives. Being ethical doesn’t mean being anti-progress. As we saw in the case of Enron, exectutives and traders devoid of ethics will and did inflict pain upon people who were supposed to be benefiting from the ‘rationalization’ of the energy markets. We should exercise these same moral cautions when extracting human cells and should not have to benefit many at the cost of a few.

]]> By: Lab Lemming http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=3931&cpage=1#comment-5693 Lab Lemming Sat, 09 Sep 2006 01:21:13 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=3931#comment-5693 It is not a tactical blunder for ACT to describe embryo destruction as "unethical", becasue doing so gives them a competative advantage over other other stem cell producers. Assuming, of course, that they are willing to lose efficiency by actually practicing what they claim. As it is, they seem to be saying, "Well, we could make stem cells without harming the embryo, but we aren't going to bother because it lowers our productivity." I'm not really sure who that statement is supposed to appeal to. It is not a tactical blunder for ACT to describe embryo destruction as “unethical”, becasue doing so gives them a competative advantage over other other stem cell producers.

Assuming, of course, that they are willing to lose efficiency by actually practicing what they claim. As it is, they seem to be saying, “Well, we could make stem cells without harming the embryo, but we aren’t going to bother because it lowers our productivity.”

I’m not really sure who that statement is supposed to appeal to.

]]> By: bob koepp http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=3931&cpage=1#comment-5692 bob koepp Fri, 08 Sep 2006 23:14:09 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=3931#comment-5692 Hyping science is a bad idea, period. But if this technique did moot the objections of the anti-ESCR crowd (I'm not sure it does...), then the main obstacle to federal funding of this research would be removed. Not a small accomplishment, I think. That said, and despite believing that ESCR should be pursued vigorously, I don't think it should be supported with tax dollars so long as a sizable portion of the tax paying citizenry have sincere, unanswered moral objections to such research. It's my old-fashioned belief in the principle of freedom of conscience that's at work here. Those of us who do believe in the importance of this research should exercise our rights to freedom of association and freedom of inquiry to support ESCR, without compelling support from those who disagree with us about its morality. Hyping science is a bad idea, period. But if this technique did moot the objections of the anti-ESCR crowd (I’m not sure it does…), then the main obstacle to federal funding of this research would be removed. Not a small accomplishment, I think.

That said, and despite believing that ESCR should be pursued vigorously, I don’t think it should be supported with tax dollars so long as a sizable portion of the tax paying citizenry have sincere, unanswered moral objections to such research. It’s my old-fashioned belief in the principle of freedom of conscience that’s at work here. Those of us who do believe in the importance of this research should exercise our rights to freedom of association and freedom of inquiry to support ESCR, without compelling support from those who disagree with us about its morality.

]]> By: marf http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=3931&cpage=1#comment-5691 marf Fri, 08 Sep 2006 21:38:54 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=3931#comment-5691 We have to start doing science and simply ignore these Christian/Islamic backwater types who would be happy to live in the 6Th century. Get real, we live in the 21st century now, and the coming bio/nanotech advances will allow us to manipulate all the cells in the human body, so as to make it easy to reverse aging, eliminate cancer etc, boost intelligence, brain-to-brain/Internet links, storing/exchanging memories, customizing peoples looks by nanotech, the possibilities are quite open, but we have to first just ignore these rather stupid anti-progress crowd that hides under the republican and various religious tents. We have to start doing science and simply ignore these Christian/Islamic backwater types who would be happy to live in the 6Th century. Get real, we live in the 21st century now, and the coming bio/nanotech advances will allow us to manipulate all the cells in the human body, so as to make it easy to reverse aging, eliminate cancer etc, boost intelligence, brain-to-brain/Internet links, storing/exchanging memories, customizing peoples looks by nanotech, the possibilities are quite open, but we have to first just ignore these rather stupid anti-progress crowd that hides under the republican and various religious tents.

]]>