 |
 |
> > 2. Since fetal stem cells are derived from the products of IVF (in > > virtro fertilization) which has as its primary goal the initiation of > > life for couples who otherwise would not be able to conceive and the > > embryos that are utilized for stem cell research are the byproduct of > > that process which cannot result in a live birth the use of Stem cells > > in research is moral and reasonable. Why do docs have to make so many more embryos than what is needed. Why can't they just make 2 or three and then implant them all. The odds for a successful pg are so low from each one that it would be highly unlikely to result in a multiple birth anyway? Do they just want to save money and make as many as possible in one go? That doesn't seem right to me. Am I missing something? Jen -----Original Message----- From: Charles T. Meyer, M.D. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2000 2:05 PM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Fwd: stem cells - Agreement between Dr. Fink and Me > > The following is a copy of messages exchange by Bob Fink and > myself. Did anybody think this could happen? Maybe there will be peace > in the Middle East >and the Messiah will come either the 1st or 2nd time depending on your >viiewpoint- but let us stay away from religion!?! > > Let's try and wrap this up and summarize where we agree. I think this > > has been one of the best debates I have participated on the issue of > > an abortion related subject and I think the people on the list enjoyed > > it also.I don't think you should have any problem with 1to4 or 7 5+6 > > probably will require some rewriting and I ask you to write what you > > think works that you think I might agree to, > > > > The areas of agreement are: > > 1. Fetal stem cell research has significant promise and should under > > close supervision continue. > > > > 2. Since fetal stem cells are derived from the products of IVF (in > > virtro fertilization) which has as its primary goal the initiation of > > life for couples who otherwise would not be able to conceive and the > > embryos that are utilized for stem cell research are the byproduct of > > that process which cannot result in a live birth the use of Stem cells > > in research is moral and reasonable. > > > > 3. While the NIH guidelines appear appropriate it is crucial that > > they be followed closely because of the fact that some Americans > > believe that human life begins at conception, feel that the use of > > embryos and pre embryos in research cheapens life and do not have > > faith in the NIH monitoring at present. > > > > 4. Based on our present state of the (scientific) art, we cannot prove > > that an embryo of younger than 8 weeks has brain activity. Relying on > > the current (legal) interpretation of "brain death" as a guide, such > > an embryo would not be considered a human being. This could change > > with either better measurement or different interpretation of the > > meaning of the EEG recording. > > > > 5. The exact moment of when human life starts is controversial and > > subject to interpretation as filtered through each individual's > > experience philosophy and religion. Science has no answer. In early > > stages of development some people believe that the loss of a > > pregnancy through spontaneous means or abortion results a death (or a > > murder) while others believe it is only the loss of potential life. > > In cases where it is a matter of faith or interpretation and there are > > no overwhelming scientific data to proceed on, the mother, and father > > in concert with their physician and clergy (if desired) are the only > > people who can make the choice of what is right for them. They should > > not be coerced in any direction > > > > 6. The rights of the mother vs. the rights of the baby are > > controversial and beyond the scope of this summary. Court decisions, > > including constitutional interpretations, the political process and > > precedent need to be our guides here. > > > > 7. Violence and is not a way to resolve this matter. This is the > > ultimate cheapener of life. > > > > > > > > >********************************************** > > >Robert A. Fink, M. D., F.A.C.S., P. C. > > >2500 Milvia Street Suite 222 > > >Berkeley, California 94704-2636 > > >Telephone: 510-849-2555 FAX: 510-849-2557 > > >WWW: http://www.dovecom.com/rafink/ > > > > > >mailto:[log in to unmask] > > > > > >"Ex Tristitia Virtus" > > > > > >********************************************* > > > > Charles T. Meyer, M.D. > > Middleton, WI > > PD DX 12 years (at age 44) > > Age 56 > >Charlie, > >You get an A+ from me. I have no problem accepting *all 7* of your >summary statements. My only caveat is in number 5, where I feel very >strongly that the *father* needs to be included in the considerations >concerning abortion and other procedures which may involve the >termination of life. I would insert a *comma* after "to proceed on", to >make this clearer. > >You may post our agreement to the List if you wish. It has been a >stimulating exercise debating with you and most of the others on this >issue. > > >Best, > >Bob > > >********************************************** >Robert A. Fink, M. D., F.A.C.S., P. C. >2500 Milvia Street Suite 222 >Berkeley, California 94704-2636 >Telephone: 510-849-2555 FAX: 510-849-2557 >WWW: http://www.dovecom.com/rafink/ > >mailto:[log in to unmask] > >"Ex Tristitia Virtus" > >********************************************* Charles T. Meyer, M.D. Middleton, WI PD DX 12 years (at age 44) Age 56