 |
 |
another opinion The fact that we are killing is not acceptable. War is not acceptable. Murder is not acceptable. Abortion is not acceptable. Unfortunately, there are no good simple answers to many hard questions. To profit from a wrong and to propagate the wrong is not acceptable. We are living to die not to live for ever. Man is here for a reason, concentrate on that reason. Keep in mind the human condition is only temporary. keep in mind there is a GOD. mleo Barb_MSN wrote: > VERY thought provoking questions/comments, J.P. VERY.... > > Barb Mallut > [log in to unmask] > > -----Original Message----- > From: Joao Paulo Carvalho <[log in to unmask]> > To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]> > Date: Wednesday, September 15, 1999 12:55 PM > Subject: Re: NEWS-Panel Urges Embryo Donation Policy > > >The decision of some ethicists will have a great impact in how to > find a > >cure for PD and many other terrible diseases . > >It is hard to me to understand the logic of some human fellows : > > > >1 . It is LEGAL to kill and be killed during wars ( men and > women ) . If > >one can think of how many billions and billions of potential > embryos are > >destroyed with these deaths ? > >But killing , or even using few embryos for research and cure is > NOT > >LEGAL .... > > > >2. It is LEGAL for couples to plan how many children they want > to have . > >For that they may utilize any of the many anticonceptive methods > . And > >what these methods are ? In some way they avoid the junction of > the male > >and the female cells to form the embryos . In other words they > let these > >cells to die , or be killed It is LEGAL . > >But using the junction of these cells , the embryos , well it is > NOT > >LEGAL . > > > >Maybe I am looking the problem as a martian ..... :-) > > > >Cheers , > > > >Joao > > > > > >judith richards wrote: > > > >> Panel Urges Embryo Donation Policy > >> > >> WASHINGTON (AP) _ Women with embryos left over from > infertility > >> treatments should be allowed to donate them to taxpayer-funded > >> medical research _ meaning a federal law that prohibits such > >> research should be changed, President Clinton's top ethics > advisers > >> said Monday. > >> The National Bioethics Advisory Commission's report comes > even > >> though the White House previously indicated it disagrees with > that > >> recommendation. > >> At issue are embryonic stem cells, unique ``master cells'' > that > >> in early embryos generate all the other tissues of the body. > Stem > >> cells are causing huge scientific excitement, because > researchers > >> hope the cells one day could regenerate body parts or create > new > >> therapies for Alzheimer's and other devastating diseases. > >> But their use has raised troubling ethical questions, > because > >> culling stem cells destroys the embryo. Federal law prohibits > >> taxpayer-funded human embryo research, and about 75 members of > >> Congress have opposed a move to get around that prohibition to > >> enable the National Institutes of Health to study the cells' > >> medical potential. > >> So Clinton ordered his ethics advisers to study how the > nation > >> should proceed. > >> Citing the cells' great promise, the panel said embryos > left > >> over from infertility treatment _ which otherwise would be > thrown > >> away _ should be allowed to be donated to taxpayer-funded > >> scientists. > >> Privately funded researchers last year culled stem cells > from > >> donated embryos, and multiplied the cells in a laboratory. > Despite > >> the federal law, the NIH contends it would be legal for its > >> researchers to use those lab-grown supplies because government > >> scientists never touched the original embryos. > >> But the ethics panel said that relying on those supplies > ``could > >> severely limit scientific and clinical progress'' because more > >> embryos may be needed. The federal ban should be changed > because it > >> ``conflicts with several of the ethical goals of medicine ... > >> especially healing.'' > >> Embryos could not be sold, and couples could not be > pressured to > >> donate, the panel stressed. > >> Clinton issued a statement thanking the ethicists for ``a > >> thoughtful report.'' But the White House in July said it > didn't > >> plan to try to get the law changed, instead backing the NIH > >> proposal. > > > > +----| Joao Paulo de Carvalho |------ + > > | [log in to unmask] | > > +--------| Salvador-Bahia-Brazil |------+