Stem Cell Research - What Do You Think?

[Zen Curmudgeon]

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=8562196

In the House of Representatives, supporters of a bill sponsored by Republican Rep. Mike Castle of Delaware and Democratic Rep. Diane DeGette of Colorado that permits expanded embryonic research hope for a vote next week and believe it will be close.

Bush said the bill would violate his principles.

"I've made it very clear to the Congress that the use of federal money, taxpayers' money, to promote science which destroys life in order to save life -- I'm against that. And therefore if the bill does that, I will veto it," Bush told reporters during a picture-taking session with Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen.

What's the consensus of the forum? Is a 200 cell blastocyte, aka "embryo", the moral equivalent of an 8 month fetus? Is harvesting a few dozen stem cells from a blastocyte the same as an abortion?

And is it appropriate for the President to impose his personal religious principles on a bill passed by the Congress? What about respecting the will of the people? What would you say to someone like Nancy Reagan, who is now an advocate of stem cell research?

Take Care -

ZC

[sweet_chin_music]

What's the consensus of the forum? Is a 200 cell blastocyte, aka "embryo", the moral equivalent of an 8 month fetus? Is harvesting a few dozen stem cells from a blastocyte the same as an abortion?



As long as abortion is legal, then I believe that stem cells should be made available from the aborted fetus. Personally, I don't support abortion but as long as it's legal, why not?



And is it appropriate for the President to impose his personal religious principles on a bill passed by the Congress? What about respecting the will of the people? What would you say to someone like Nancy Reagan, who is now an advocate of stem cell research?



It is appropriate for the President to do whatever he feels is right as long as he doesn't break the law. If he makes his choices based on religious principals that is his choice to make. Remember, when we elected him (and yes, I know a lot of people didn't vote for him, but the majority did...except in 2000 when they didn't, but he still won ;-) ), we elected him for the whole package that he is and that includes his religious principals. If we elected an atheist and he signed bills based on his belief of there is no God, I would bet dollars to doughnuts we wouldn't be hearing any talk about his religious views.

(The following is not directed at anyone...just a little rant)

I'm tired of the whole "He's a Christian so that makes him biased and that isn't fair!"

Well guess what? Each and every single person on this planet is biased in one way or another and that bias shapes who we are. Some are biased based on religious views, some on race, some on sexual orientation, some on gender, some on political makeup....it goes on forever. If someone tells you they aren't biased, they are lying to you (which means they are biased to the truth!)

[masonranch]

As long as abortion is legal, then I believe that stem cells should be made available from the aborted fetus. Personally, I don't support abortion but as long as it's legal, why not?


I would go further and say as long as a woman is going to have an abortion anyway, isn't it a better thing to use the embryo rather than flush it down the sewer. The caveat is that the stem cell people offered absolutely no incentive or inducement for the abortion to happen in the first place.

In other words life that can help life rather than death for both.

[Sandra]

Originally Posted by sweet_chin_music View Post
As long as abortion is legal, then I believe that stem cells should be made available from the aborted fetus. Personally, I don't support abortion but as long as it's legal, why not?


Heck, as long as abortion is legal why don't we just donate the little bodies to homeless shelters for food then...

[Sandra]

PS - my remark is strictly sarcastic to point out that two immoral acts don't don't cause either one of them to suddenly become moral.

[large]

Gotta ask . . what's the difference between stem cell donation from an embryo or stillborn and an organ donation from a just dead teenager?

Just throwing that in for glee and discussion . .

[Sandra]

Is the organ donation willful on the part of the deceased teenager?

I'll never donate my childrens organs to anyone for any reason. When my children grow up and turn 18, if they want to be organ donors, that's their choice, but until then, those organs are theirs - no on else gets 'em.

Organ doning has become such an ugly industry. On the outside we think we're doing such a wonderful thing, saving lives. On the inside, they're largely harvesting organs from people who may not really be dead yet, who may have recovered had they been on life support a little longer.

Surgical nurses have started to come forward asking to please use anesthesia on donors because in the operating room they writhe in pain as their organs are being harvested. Dead bodies wouldn't be doing that.

Legally they say that no brain wave activity is what determines death, but now they're finding that no brain wave activity may not be enough - sometimes the waves aren't measurable, or sometimes they seem to stop but then start back up again.

It's at the point where parents who's children are in accidents or seriously ill are being asked to donate their children's organs - what a horrible and rude time to approach parents for something like that, then to play on their consciences and heartstrings with, "give another child the gift of life".

So now we're allowing people to die so someone else can live.

If my child's life isn't worth saving, why is someone else's? I don't want to sound mean or rude, but heck - I'm even hearing that body parts and organs are being sold by funeral homes to organ donor agencies and researchers - and that the families of the deceased aren't informed of this.

I don't believe in donating organs because people are being seen more for their parts than as people, there's a kind of greed going on there.

I also have spiritual reasons for being against it - your body is your body and if you want to share it, fine, but if you don't, then no one should force that on you.

[large]

OK, got yer opinion on why you don't counsel Organ donation . .

but go back and read the question again . .

Another is the difference between Abortion and Euthanasia . . ?

Orrrr . . . how about the difference between "Counseled" Euthanasia and Suicide?

[Sandra]

Re Suicide:
I think that if a person wants to end their life, then let them. Sounds mean, I know, but decisions like that should be left to the person considering it.

I believe, though, and very strongly, that if a person is despondent enough to want to end their life because the world is on their shoulders, I feel that others should reach out to them, but not forcably.

I do think counseling should be offered - and if someone really wants to end it all, it's a good idea to at least have their final arrangements in order, if at all possible so that those they leave behind aren't left with that burdon.

If the person is terminally ill and they'd rather die sooner than later, then let them, and let it be quick and swift enough to not cause any suffering. I've seen a good friend of mine die - he was so very ill with cancer, and he suffered so terribly - he was afraid to die and afraid to live. Basically he was drugged to death because that was the only humane thing to do for him - I think the morphine killed him quicker than the cancer would have without it. But even that wasn't quick, and he suffered for weeks in this drug induced coma, TRYING to respond when someone would visit him, but unable because of the heavy dosage of drugs. He was locked in his own body, unable to call for help, unable to talk, unable to eat, unable to get up and walk - I felt so helpless just seeing that, I'll never get over that.

We have this religious stigma that if you take your own life you'll go to hell, and I really am not so sure that I believe that. I've never found that in the bible, either, or anything that even comes close to supporting that idea.

So that's my thoughts on suicide.

Well, here's one more - if a person is using suicide as an attention seeking tool, let them do it. Sounds mean again, but if you keep rescuing them then they keep doing it knowing they're going to get rescued. Maybe Chuckie can address this better than me, but I'm not so sure there's a cure for that behavior, and eventually people like that end up succeeding anyway, don't they? Maybe I'm wrong on that, but the pain and suffering that such manipulators put others through is a living hell that nobody should ever have to go through.

OK, now - euthanasia - that is, the mandated kind:
I am as against this in human beings as can be except for dire circumstances and I mean dire and rare. I would not have euthanised Terry Schiavo, but she was.

If a person has a living will and they say, "Don't force me to live like a veggie" then fine. That's already legal anyway.

But if they don't have that then it should be assumed that they wanted to be left alive and they should be.

OR maybe it's a private decision that family and loved ones should be able to agree upon. In the case of Terry - her family wanted to take care of her, her ex wanted her dead. Her family should have been allowed to take care of her.

In cases where there is no one to take care of them or pay the bill, then maybe they do need to be allowed to p**** but at least with some dignity and no suffering.

I don't think that there should be a rule, as we see with the health care issue, that commands that anyone has a duty to die. If a person is 120 years old and they want a hip replacement, that's their choice.

If a person is 80 and they have cancer, yes, they should be offered life saving treatments - if they want it let them have it. If they don't, then that should be their choice.

BUT, you might say, "Well, who's paying the bill?" If the government is paying for it shouldn't the government have a say? My answer is HELL NO!!!

If the government wants to be nice enough to pay the bill, let it be a gift, not a title of enslavement or ownership.

Some things are personal choices.

ABORTION:

I'm against elective abortion outside of a life and death situation for the mother. Otherwise it's murder.

I don't believe it's something the government should be involved in, though.

That it's legal doesn't mean the rest of us should be desecrating the aborted ones' bodies and stealing its body parts and stem cells. What are we, vulchures??? Carrying on our own lives at the expense of someone else's?

I'm not against stem cell research from birth blood - IF the woman who just gave birth is fully informed and gives consent before hand. I found out that they took my cord blood when I gave birth to my kids and sold it for research WITHOUT my knowledge or consent! And that STILL pisses me off! I feel violated - like someone stole from me and my child.

But it's hospital policy. What about MY policy that my body and everything in it is sacred to me and it's nice to want me to share but howsabout asking my permission first?!

To sum it all up - we live in our bodies. I don't live in yours, you don't live in mine, we all have our own bodies to live in.

What we do with our bodies is our own business so long as we aren't hurting or directly jeopardizing anyone else. For example, should pregnant women be on drugs or booze or smoke? No. Those hurt her baby, that baby is someone else and is being endangered whenever his mother elects to use harmful substances during pregnancy.

Should the law get involved? I'm not so sure of that, but she should be the one to pay for her child's care, not the state. And if she can't mother that child past birth, then maybe the child needs to be placed elsewhere.

I don't think that the law or government should dictate to us what we do with our bodies. Someone else's body, yes, but not our own so long as we're not hurting or endangering someone else.

There are times when abortion is necessary to save the life of the mother - I have no problem with those.

If a person wants to end their own life, it's one thing, but to want to end someone else's is a completely different ball of wax.

At the same time, we also need to realize that all life must end someday - hopefully later than sooner, all the stem cell research in the world won't stop that fact, although it can have some good outcomes.

But to make an industry out of it through abortion is, in my opinion, exploitation of the aborted unborn. It's the other half of what keeps abortion clinics in business.

I once read this saying, I think it's the perfect way to close my post:
"Your life is God's gift to you. What you do with it is your gift to God." I don't know who said it, but it's a wonderful remark!

[Bob Nattering]

Re Suicide:
I think that if a person wants to end their life, then let them. Sounds mean, I know, but decisions like that should be left to the person considering it.

I believe, though, and very strongly, that if a person is despondent enough to want to end their life because the world is on their shoulders, I feel that others should reach out to them, but not forcably.

I do think counseling should be offered - and if someone really wants to end it all, it's a good idea to at least have their final arrangements in order, if at all possible so that those they leave behind aren't left with that burdon.

If the person is terminally ill and they'd rather die sooner than later, then let them, and let it be quick and swift enough to not cause any suffering. I've seen a good friend of mine die - he was so very ill with cancer, and he suffered so terribly - he was afraid to die and afraid to live. Basically he was drugged to death because that was the only humane thing to do for him - I think the morphine killed him quicker than the cancer would have without it. But even that wasn't quick, and he suffered for weeks in this drug induced coma, TRYING to respond when someone would visit him, but unable because of the heavy dosage of drugs. He was locked in his own body, unable to call for help, unable to talk, unable to eat, unable to get up and walk - I felt so helpless just seeing that, I'll never get over that.

We have this religious stigma that if you take your own life you'll go to hell, and I really am not so sure that I believe that. I've never found that in the bible, either, or anything that even comes close to supporting that idea.

So that's my thoughts on suicide.

Well, here's one more - if a person is using suicide as an attention seeking tool, let them do it. Sounds mean again, but if you keep rescuing them then they keep doing it knowing they're going to get rescued. Maybe Chuckie can address this better than me, but I'm not so sure there's a cure for that behavior, and eventually people like that end up succeeding anyway, don't they? Maybe I'm wrong on that, but the pain and suffering that such manipulators put others through is a living hell that nobody should ever have to go through.

OK, now - euthanasia - that is, the mandated kind:
I am as against this in human beings as can be except for dire circumstances and I mean dire and rare. I would not have euthanised Terry Schiavo, but she was.

If a person has a living will and they say, "Don't force me to live like a veggie" then fine. That's already legal anyway.

But if they don't have that then it should be assumed that they wanted to be left alive and they should be.

OR maybe it's a private decision that family and loved ones should be able to agree upon. In the case of Terry - her family wanted to take care of her, her ex wanted her dead. Her family should have been allowed to take care of her.

In cases where there is no one to take care of them or pay the bill, then maybe they do need to be allowed to p**** but at least with some dignity and no suffering.

I don't think that there should be a rule, as we see with the health care issue, that commands that anyone has a duty to die. If a person is 120 years old and they want a hip replacement, that's their choice.

If a person is 80 and they have cancer, yes, they should be offered life saving treatments - if they want it let them have it. If they don't, then that should be their choice.

BUT, you might say, "Well, who's paying the bill?" If the government is paying for it shouldn't the government have a say? My answer is HELL NO!!!

If the government wants to be nice enough to pay the bill, let it be a gift, not a title of enslavement or ownership.

Some things are personal choices.

ABORTION:

I'm against elective abortion outside of a life and death situation for the mother. Otherwise it's murder.

I don't believe it's something the government should be involved in, though.

That it's legal doesn't mean the rest of us should be desecrating the aborted ones' bodies and stealing its body parts and stem cells. What are we, vulchures??? Carrying on our own lives at the expense of someone else's?

I'm not against stem cell research from birth blood - IF the woman who just gave birth is fully informed and gives consent before hand. I found out that they took my cord blood when I gave birth to my kids and sold it for research WITHOUT my knowledge or consent! And that STILL pisses me off! I feel violated - like someone stole from me and my child.

But it's hospital policy. What about MY policy that my body and everything in it is sacred to me and it's nice to want me to share but howsabout asking my permission first?!

To sum it all up - we live in our bodies. I don't live in yours, you don't live in mine, we all have our own bodies to live in.

What we do with our bodies is our own business so long as we aren't hurting or directly jeopardizing anyone else. For example, should pregnant women be on drugs or booze or smoke? No. Those hurt her baby, that baby is someone else and is being endangered whenever his mother elects to use harmful substances during pregnancy.

Should the law get involved? I'm not so sure of that, but she should be the one to pay for her child's care, not the state. And if she can't mother that child past birth, then maybe the child needs to be placed elsewhere.

I don't think that the law or government should dictate to us what we do with our bodies. Someone else's body, yes, but not our own so long as we're not hurting or endangering someone else.

There are times when abortion is necessary to save the life of the mother - I have no problem with those.

If a person wants to end their own life, it's one thing, but to want to end someone else's is a completely different ball of wax.

At the same time, we also need to realize that all life must end someday - hopefully later than sooner, all the stem cell research in the world won't stop that fact, although it can have some good outcomes.

But to make an industry out of it through abortion is, in my opinion, exploitation of the aborted unborn. It's the other half of what keeps abortion clinics in business.

I once read this saying, I think it's the perfect way to close my post:
"Your life is God's gift to you. What you do with it is your gift to God." I don't know who said it, but it's a wonderful remark!

Sandra,

That's a bit complex, but a belief system you're certainly entitled to hold. How about everyone, including you, makes their own decision about their own life and the life within them. If they don't share your belief system, is it that important to you that the laws of the land don't require them to follow your beliefs as it affects their own life?

[masonranch]

Re Suicide:
I think that if a person wants to end their life, then let them. Sounds mean, I know, but decisions like that should be left to the person considering it.


Thread drift. What does organ donation, suicide, abortion, and euthanasia have to do with stem cells. Especially if there are strict assurances that the people harvesting stem cells from 4 to 8 week old embryos have nothing whatsoever to do with the cause or choice to do the Abortion in the first place.

I personally think abortion is murder and do not and can not support it. Unlike organ donation, the embryo is ripped from the womans body and flushed down the drain. It has no chance whatsoever to survive outside the womans body. It is honoring life to have these cells perform some usefull function rather than being destroyed.

Morally then, stem cells may offer cures and life extention that can not be acheived any other way. Including parkinson's disease, diabetes stabilization, cardiovascular and vascular system repair and more.

As long as they are voluntarily and freely given, I've searched and can see no moral violation in using them to increase quality of life or cure diseases that are presently incurable..

I have more than an academic interest in it. Google EmCell

[Colleen]

...Morally then, stem cells may offer cures and life extention that can not be acheived any other way. Including parkinson's disease, diabetes stabilization, cardiovascular and vascular system repair and more.

As long as they are voluntarily and freely given, I've searched and can see no moral violation in using them to increase quality of life or cure diseases that are presently incurable..

I have more than an academic interest in it. Google EmCell

Also consider cures for: Cancer, MS, MD, Lupus, Arthritis, Spinal cord injuries/damage... The list goes on and on!

And did you ever stop to think that "Healthy people = A lesser need for Health Care."

[Chuckie]

And did you ever stop to think that "Healthy people = A lesser need for Health Care."

That only goes so far. Healthier people live longer...and eventually require MORE healthcare.

[large]

Basically, the reason I threw that out there is that there's more to "Pro-Life" or "Pro-Choice" than just the abortion Issue when the Government starts making decisions about life care . . The Government being "The People" . .

And, just to throw someone a bone here . . So far . . And I read quite a bit, about a lot of things . . There have been no medical cures or curing procedures developed using fetal stem cells . . There have been several breakthroughs using Adult Stem cells though, leading to several new medical procedures and treatments in both Diabetes and Cancer.

[masonranch]

There have been no medical cures or curing procedures developed using fetal stem cells . . There have been several breakthroughs using Adult Stem cells though, leading to several new medical procedures and treatments in both Diabetes and Cancer.

What I have found is that Adult stem cells have Telomeres that are truncated with age, while embyonic stems cells have full length Telomeres. Remember Dolly the sheep? Her baby clones were her biological age.

The advantage of adult stem cells is that they are harvested from ones own body, so there are no moral issues or immune reaction issues only one big fat issue if stem cells are successful and that is what Chuckie alluded to life extension. That means more services for a longer period of time.

Well I'm off to Kiev and EmCell.

[large]

OF course, the longer a population lives, the greater the health care costs related to that . .

I doubt seriously, that I saw a doctor more than 20 times (for Physicals mostly) in the first fifty years of my life, barring one giant miscue in a Midget Race Car when I was 23 (10 feet tall and bulletproof, right up to the time of the crash!).

But after 50, the Medical Profession and society in general (as well as your wife) begin to insist that you see a Physician regularily and get colonoscopies and all that other "preventative" stuff . . and it's expensive, depending, of course, on the Insurance Policy you have and the benefits provided . . Medicare is a hell of a plan . . for the patient. And if you have a Supplemental policy that takes care of the co-pay . . it's really great . . for the patient.

The providers, different story . .

And you go into a provider's office, especially the specialists, the population in the waiting room at any time is mainly seniors . . for two reasons . . One, they need the care more often than younger people . . Two . . as Medicare patients, they don't worry a whole lot about paying for it . .

Emergency Rooms are a different story . . full of mostly young women and kids, and in appearance, mostly below the deigned poverty levels, some of questionable citizenship (No exhibited language skills) . . Some on Medicaid, some with no coverage of any kind . . And for the most part, they, too, have no worries about paying for treatment . . Unless, of course, the treatment goes beyond the Emergency Room . .

And . . although I haven't dug up any numbers, my guess is that the largest number of malpractice suits filed, come from those using the emergency room services and the doctors there . . anyone with a little time might either correct me on that of reinforce the theory with facts and numbers . . .

Gotta go . .

[Sandra]

Sandra,

That's a bit complex, but a belief system you're certainly entitled to hold. How about everyone, including you, makes their own decision about their own life and the life within them. If they don't share your belief system, is it that important to you that the laws of the land don't require them to follow your beliefs as it affects their own life?

That's pretty much what I was trying to say, mostly. I mean, there has to be boundaries drawn, I'm not an anarchist, but there are some things that I believe should be left to the individual or their loved ones and not the government or any other agency.

We all answer to our maker someday, whether we believe that or not won't change the fact of the matter. And God knows our hearts, if we're earnestly trying to please Him then He's understanding. But if we're trying to be control freaks, well, that's another story.

And not everyone believes in God, either, but that doesn't mean that those who don't do not have decent morals or are generally good people. Should they have someone else's religious or spiritual beliefs forced on them? No.

Lead the horse to the water, but don't drown him in it! Live and let live. When your time comes to stand before your maker you'll answer only for you and those you're in charge of - like your children and maybe even your pit bulls. But you won't answer for what I do, and I won't answer for what you do unless I deliberately misled you or something.

So what's it to me if you want to have an abortion or end your own life? As a caring person, I may try to talk you out of it and help you in any way I can, but the ultimate decision is yours to make, not mine, so I need to respect that even if it makes me squirm.

If you see someone is headed for disaster, counsel them, but if they continue on, you have to, at some point, let them run their own life, we can't live other people's lives for them, we can only live our own.

As for stem cell research, adult stem cell research shows tremendous promise, but body parts is a big industry whether we care to open our eyes to that or not, and the abortion industry's diet largely consists of this. How much money does the abortion industry take in under the table from selling newly aborted fetuses for research?

It used to be that aborted babies, still borns, body parts and so on were incinerated. Now everything is sent to science labs for research.

This quest to eradicate disease and find the fountain of youth has turned us into a bunch of vultures!

And as long as pharmaceutical companies are in business there will ALWAYS be sickness, even if they have to manufacture a new one just so they can sell their drugs.

The more pollutants we put into the air, the more non natural things we do, the more health issues we'll find we have.

Methinks that God created a beautiful, self containing life system and put mankind in it. Mankind promptly destroyed it, and in the process, destroyed himself. God had everything in such balance, everything took care of itself and all of man's needs were provided for.

Think about it - How much money did Adam and Eve have to pay at the store for their groceries? How much was his health insurance? Retirement? Taxes? Mortgage? Did he smoke? How much money did it cost to have children? How many financial concerns and other worries did they have? Did Cain and Abel make straight A's in school? Were their wives anorexic looking starlets?

In our quest to make life better for ourselves all we've succeeded in doing is making it more miserable. In our quest to find the meaning of the universe, we've become more lost. Why? Because we weren't content with what we had to begin with, and we weren't content to live our own lives and let other people live theirs.

And so it goes, which came first, the chicken or the egg? Wouldn't healthier people mean less healthcare? Mankind is said to have inhabited this earth for millions of years, how did we come this far without embryonic stem cell research in the first place?

[large]

Watch the sermons . . Remember Pastor Ted . . .

The people who destroy the earth, the ones who get lost in their quests, are generally people who "game" the system, or attempt to . .

Used to be, those who didn't work didn't eat . . or they stole to do so . . usually ending up in a bad or terminal way . . not so much anymore, because the Christian Ethic towards charity for all supports some of them . . that not being good enough, now the government is expected to be the provider . . It does that by taking from those who have and giving it to the have nots, who are perfectly happy with their gifts from the haves . .


As for technology? If ya got a beef with it . . don't use it! Get rid of your phones, TV, Computers, don't go to the doctor, don't get your kids vaccinated, walk, don't drive or ride public transportation . . grow your own food . . You won't be a bit healthier than you are now, and matter of fact, probably have more health problems . . But, maybe your conscience will be better . . dunno, I pretty much love all the neat stuff, Medical Care and Jet Airplane Travel, Hot Rods and great Foods, and the places to get it . . Y'kno why? Because I remember the late 1940's, with it's Polio, Smallpox, Rheumatic Fever and all the other diseases you could catch and all they could do was put you in an Iron lung or watch you die or become crippled in unimaginable ways . . I remember 100+ degree days, that everyone worked, traveled and slept in because THERE WAS NO AIR CONDITIONING! I remember spending two days and a night on a train that was cold at night and hot during the day, to go someplace that would take two hours today in a commuter Jet . .

And lemme comment on;Wouldn't healthier people mean less healthcare? right up to the time they got unhealthy . . Veeerrry few people die healthy!

[Sandra]

There are a lot of healthy people who die in accidents, large.

Not saying I have a problem with technology - in a way I do, but we're at the point where we have developed a need for it - I rely on it heavily for my company, in fact.

I'm just looking at the over all picture of what we've done to our planet and, in so doing, our lives. Not one thing anyone has done has added an inch of life, in general, to mankind. People still die - if not by illness then by accident or as a victim of a crime or even as the perp of one.

We may get rid of some illnesses, but then new ones pop up and take us by surprise, like the Mexican swine flu of recent. Remember hantavirus?

Some people think that maybe someone did some bio warfare thing to start those.

Also, and most importantly, as long as we have third world countries that have hygiene problems - diseases will breed. Improper sewage, eating things we shouldn't, engaging in risky activities - all these things can turn healthy people into sick ones.

History proves that the vast majority of flu bugs originate in China. No wonder, Chinese people are filthy! I'm sorry, someone will probably call me racist for that, but it's a fact we can't ignore.

And they just don't care, that's what makes it so bad. And if they spread it around, they don't care about that either. Look at SARS - had the WHO not gotten on to them do you think they'd have worked so hard and fast to contain the deadly contagion that started in China to begin with?

And China isn't the only country living in filthy conditions, but China has no excuses, they aren't poor by any means - they can afford to live cleaner, but they choose not to.

Other countries where there are sanitary problems breed diseases like typhoid, malaria, dysentery, cholera - and we see these things will mutate, too, and become resistant to anti-biotics so they are hard to treat.

Additionally we can't not look at biological warfare here - another thing capable of killing people.

So I don't think that "healthier people means less healthcare" is realistic, because someone somewhere will create unhealthy conditions - it's apparently the nature of mankind, and that's the point I'm trying to make.

[large]

The closer people live to one another, the easier it is for a disease to evolve from one host, most often our livestock, to another . . Once it makes that transfer, the evolution becomes easier, as does the ease of it's spread, dirty living or no.

Of course most of the Southeastern Asian People live in close proximity to each other and their livestock as well . . thus, more viral evolution and contagion, naturally, and as the world gets "Smaller", contagion becomes more serious and the spread of a virus is very quick.And because of travel technology, we cannot isolate ourselves as was attempted years back.

All that being said, we're always gonna have flu, and we're always gonna have one thing or another that needs Medical Care . . Can't get around it . . Geriatric diseases and infirmities will continue and as we have longer life spans we'll need both better Preventative Health Care and more Geriatric care . . . and well may need some sort of euthaniasa . . who knows . . we know already that the "Morphine Drip" is about as close to "Euthaniasia" as we currently can legally commit.

And by the way, that "Healthy Person" that got hit by a Bus . . They were healthy, right up to the meeting with the bus . . . !

[Colleen]

That only goes so far. Healthier people live longer...and eventually require MORE healthcare.

Age aside, explain to me how "healthy" folks need more healthcare?

[Sandra]

And by the way, that "Healthy Person" that got hit by a Bus . . They were healthy, right up to the meeting with the bus . . . !

Or when they drop dead of a heart attack or other condition that they didn't know they had.

Remember Officer Heine? (And it couldn't have happened to a nicer guy, too!)

As long as there are toxins in the air, as long as there are germs, as long as people don't wash their hands or cover their mouths when they sneeze; as long as there is cross contamination - whether in one's household or the local meat plant or any given medical facility - improper waste disposal, sewage spills, and so on - yes, we're going to always have illness.

As long as man continues to upset the balance of nature, nature will continue to try to re-balance itself, it's a never ending battle, so our bodies will adapt to some things but are unable to adapt to others without a little help, like immunizations - but even immunizations can kill people because some people's bodies can't handle the preservatives in them - those preservatives most often used in immunizations are poisonous to humans, but are supposed to be small enough amounts to not make a difference.

So we see people dying of subdural hematoma because of some of them, or the autism factor because of others. And pharmaceutical companies are quick to deny this and so are some physicians, because they trust the pharmaceutical companies.

BUT - how many medical people trusted aspartame, too, which is now being quietly attributed to the maiming and deaths of millions of people over a 20 year period? Some people think that Michael J. Fox may be suffering from aspartame poisoning rather than Parkinson's just because of how early his came on. It's not normal for Parkinson's to hit someone at the age that his allegedly struck him.

So we can also add "as long as we have an FDA" to the list of "as long as we have's".

Viruses and bacteria are both living organisms who's quest, just like that of humans, is to survive. They survive by "learning" and mutating. Bacteria will become stronger over time if they aren't completely killed off by effective anti-biotic treatment, believe it or not. Yet good bacteria is weaker than bad bacteria and can be killed off a little easier leaving a person vulnerable to the bad bacterias.

Ever hear of someone dying from cutting their finger? I've heard of it. There's a bacterium that lives on the skin that sometimes can get into the blood stream through something as simple as a paper cut, and it's fast acting and can kill a person in a matter of a few days. One serious case, the person survived, but they were almost dead 4 days later. It took about 3 of those 4 days for doctors to figure out what the problem was, and they almost didn't figure it out, but it's lucky that the patient responded so well to the anti-biotics when it was figured out.

Life is a risk, and the bible is right where it poses the question, "who can add a cubit's length to their life span"? When you think about it, we may increase our lifespan a little, but we're all "scheduled" by nature to die at some point - if not sooner, then later.

Not to be defeatist, but as far as science has taken us, life is still something we can't predict, so it's up to us to determine our own quality of life somehow and to try to take the blows that life gives us and make the best of them anyway and maybe then we can at least enjoy and appreciate what we do have while we have it.

For some people that's far more difficult than for others.

[large]

Age aside, explain to me how "healthy" folks need more healthcare?

As it's been explained to me, an important part of "Health Care" is "Preventative Medicine" . . Flu shots, PSA Testing, Cholesterol Testing, PAP Smears, Mammograms, etc . . Numerous tests and non invasive procedures that catch disease and geriatric infirmities before they become serious or catastrophic . .

We all assume that we're "Healthy" (Well, most of us, anyway) but I believe "Healthy" is more of a frame of mind than a fact in most people . . I know (and have known) people who would tell you that they, indeed were ""Healthy", Never been to a doctor, Never needed a doctor" . . Right up to the time they got a pain . . and found out they had a serious but treatable cancer . . Or were thrown onto a gurney and given a Quad Bypass . . or worse, had a treatable cancer, had they found it sooner, and spent 2 or three years fighting the same cancer, only to die after laying in a Hospice (Not cheap) for six months . .

My Primary Care Physician's Office frequently has people come in, new patients or old ones who haven't been there for years, and end up leaving in an ambulance of being transported directly to the Hospital . . They, too, were "Healthy", with "just a little pain here, and I thought you ought to look into it, Doc!"

Then, of course, there's the Automobile . . A device that creates thousands of unhealthy people a year, of all ages, of all conditions . . And, even if you have Blue Cross, Kaiser or some other good Health Insurance, guess what? Chances are they won't cover you or your's until all other avenues of payment for care are exhausted, and you run a lawyer in on them . . Unless you have (and pay for) "Med Pay" on your automobile liability policy . . In theory, it has been made mandatory after a notable absence (Since tort became the method of Automobile liability, rather than "No Fault") which your state legislators, in all their wisdom, failed to enact . . Bottom line, get whacked by an un-insured driver (believe it or don't there's a lot of 'em out there!), you could end up paying for your injuries and the un-healthy conditions that come with all that, out of your pocket!

So, Who's really "Healthy"?

[Colleen]

http://www.wiels.nl/blog/images/Jerry_Goldsmith_-_Logan-s_Run_sm.jpg

[large]

Lemmee add another "Healthy" cost that comes with Medicare . . Bad shoulders and Hips . . under a private insurer, "Elective Surgery" most normally, unless it disables the person and prevents them from working . . BUT . . After 65, all an Orthopod has to do is say: You need a new Hip (or Shoulder) . . and you got one with the therapy to go with it . . kinda odd really, because Medicare won't pay for an annual Physical . . (Preventative Medicine, y'kno)

[Colleen]

http://www.wiels.nl/blog/images/Jerry_Goldsmith_-_Logan-s_Run_sm.jpg

Synopsis: In a 23rd-century world of pleasure and perfection, Logan's job is to kill anyone past the age of 30. But when his turn for sacrifice comes (at age 30), he decides to flee the bubble-domed paradise... In a 23rd-century world of pleasure and perfection, Logan's job is to kill anyone past the age of 30. But when his turn for sacrifice comes (at age 30), he decides to flee the bubble-domed paradise and find a mythical "sanctuary" that lies outside.

Gee, this sounds like the perfect solution to Health care, stem cell research, and much more!! Wouldn't you agree?

[Chuckie]

Funny you should mention Logan's Run. Getting rid of the elderly. That was all mentioned on the healthcare bill thread.

http://forums.pueblochieftain.com/showthread.php?t=2520

That's what all the furor is about over "death panels". It really is in the bill, no matter how much Obama says it isn't. There is a part in the bill pertaining to "end of life counsling". It's on page 432 of the bill.

It's there because on page 430 the bill has a list of things that it will NOT cover, such as things related to heart disease. (old people usually) They have included end of life counseling so they can say, "Sorry, we're not gonna cover that pacemaker. You're too old and it's just not a good investment. Here. Let us help you plan for your impending death".

[Sandra]

Colleen, I really hope that you're being facetious.

You know, in the bible, when Jesus was born, King Herod ordered the death of all male babies in his kingdom - especially first born. Newborns up to about the age of 2, I think it was.

His motive then was just as stupid as Obama's is today. Trying to get rid of the savior baby.

Obama's healthcare reform is certainly inconsistent.

How is it that the sickly and elderly are going to be allowed to die off while the government funds abortion and stem cell research? What's the use of stem cell research if they're just going to ignore the elderly and the sickly anyway? Is it so that other countries, who value their elderly and care for their sickly can make use of our scientific technology and use it against us someday?

I'm telling you, this country is STUPID to have put a blathering IDIOT like Obama into office.

People complained about Bush - well at least Bush wasn't trying to kill off the sickly or the elderly.

My parents are elderly. I'm worried about them both - and I know their natural time is coming someday. I'm no spring chicken either, but I've known my parents all my life, and even though I live on my own and I have grown children of my own, if they were forced to die it would bother them and me both because there's a lifetime of memories for me, and the very idea that they would be denied necessary health care brings tears to my eyes.

As seniors they're already having a hard enough time as it is, being taken by people who tend to target seniors. My parents have always been highly intelligent, but as they get older they're not getting wiser, and they're easily taken and easily taken advantage of, and they come to me for advice often and I don't mind helping them because they're my parents and I love them. They brought me into this world, am I going to sit by quietly and let some asshole like Obama force them out of it? HELL NO!

Remember the uproar that former Colorado Gov. Dick Lamm created when he presented his "duty to die" idea concerning the elderly? The newsmedia was all over him like flies on sh!t.

Why isn't the newsmedia all over Obama, then, for the EXACT same thing only worse?

PS, no I wouldn't agree that it's the perfect solution to health care and stem cell research or anything else nor should it be considered as an alternative or "the other choice". It's not even a comparison, I can't put into words what a horrible HORRIBLE thing you're saying...

[large]

Easy, easy there, Sandra, Boiling Blood pressure isn't healthy . . . .

[masonranch]

Obama's healthcare reform is certainly inconsistent.

How is it that the sickly and elderly are going to be allowed to die off while the government funds abortion and stem cell research? What's the use of stem cell research if they're just going to ignore the elderly and the sickly anyway? Is it so that other countries, who value their elderly and care for their sickly can make use of our scientific technology and use it against us someday?

I'm telling you, this country is STUPID to have put a blathering IDIOT like Obama into office.

People complained about Bush - well at least Bush wasn't trying to kill off the sickly or the elderly.

PS, no I wouldn't agree that it's the perfect solution to health care and stem cell research or anything else nor should it be considered as an alternative or "the other choice". It's not even a comparison, I can't put into words what a horrible HORRIBLE thing you're saying...

Well Sandra, I've had those same thoughts. That is why I'm in the Ukraine right now waiting for stem cell infusion. Tomorrow Monday 8/24/2009 is independence day for them. It is a holiday so everything is closed. I'll have to wait until Tuesday. Their indendence day is not 1776 it is 1991, independence from the Soviet Union.

You bring up some great contradictions. Right now there is no lack of stem cells, because it is not a widely accepted treatment for aging and disease. But if it becomes widely accepted Governments may want to cut it off, not wanting healthy longer living elderly. So what's the point of curing anything but simple cheap cures.

Before the Jews Hitler sent the mental and infirm to die. It was a great efficiency move on his part. That's what happens when individuals have no rights and live at the pleasure of the state. It happened in the Soviet Union as milions were killed off and it may and probably will happen here if Obama isn't stopped.

How is it that the private sector can offer all these choices and the public sector can not and probably does not want to innovate or try for new options? Isn't it obvious? Bureaucrats don't innovate they suppress. Individuals see a need and go for it. Kill off the private sector and wealth and innovation stop.

P.S. The Ukrainian people are beautiful. There is hardly a fat person among them. They walk a lot. I wonder what natural selection process occured with them.

[CountryFlowers]

Before the Jews Hitler sent the mental and infirm to die. It was a great efficiency move on his part. That's what happens when individuals have no rights and live at the pleasure of the state. It happened in the Soviet Union as milions were killed off and it may and probably will happen here if Obama isn't stopped.

I am very concerned that this same thing is going to happen here in the US, as well.

It bothers me that there's this big push, though, to try to stop the aging process. But we can't avoid it - God hasn't given us the fruit of the tree of life just yet, and with good reason.

However, as we grow older, and we realize that our bodies are weaker and more susceptible to things than they used to be, I don't find anything wrong at all with treatments that will help keep the elderly healthy and functioning.

I used to work in nursing homes, and I was always driven to tears to see the forgotten elderly stuffed away in such places without visitors or anything. Some would have visitors while others wouldn't - how sad!

Our elderly were here before us, they have more knowledge than the younger set, and those who are younger can learn many wonderful things from those who are older.

We need to regard our seniors with far more respect than they're getting now, it seems to me that if anyone deserves a little extra pampering or a "health boost" it's them.

When the younger become seniors then they'll understand and wish they'd have been a little more respectful, I'm sure.

[CountryFlowers]

In my last post I forgot to mention that the latest rhetoric in the news is that what is written in the health care bill is not really what it means, and people's concerns are now being called "myths".

So despite what everyone sees in black and white, it's what people are being told that should be of concern. People tend to put more trust in what they hear than questioning what they see, and that's what has gotten this country in the fine mess that it's in today.

[Sandra]

I am very concerned that this same thing is going to happen here in the US, as well.

I couldn't agree more! And I see it happening, especially with Obama in office pushing his un-American values on the rest of us. But what do we expect from an un-American and non-American sitting in the President's chair? I refuse to call him President!

I used to work in nursing homes,

Me too! Loved it and couldn't stand it all at the same time...

[Sandra]

It's there because on page 430 the bill has a list of things that it will NOT cover, such as things related to heart disease. (old people usually) They have included end of life counseling so they can say, "Sorry, we're not gonna cover that pacemaker. You're too old and it's just not a good investment. Here. Let us help you plan for your impending death".

Chuckie, what about younger people who might need them? I had a friend on drugs who suffered damage to her heart from them and she got a pacemaker before she turned 30.

She's dead now, died of a drug overdose a few years ago.

Well Sandra, I've had those same thoughts. That is why I'm in the Ukraine right now waiting for stem cell infusion. Tomorrow Monday 8/24/2009 is independence day for them. It is a holiday so everything is closed. I'll have to wait until Tuesday.

So THAT's why you're there! Best wishes on that - I hope it goes well! Do they not do that here in the US?

Which brings me to another question - we have all these aborted fetuses along with birth blood being used for stem cell research, but I keep hearing about people having to go out of the country for stem cell treatments.

Don't they do that kind of treatment in the US? (Not questioning your going to the Ukraine for yours, was just wondering what the scoop is about the US is all.) It doesn't make sense to not have it available to us if there's so much money and whatnot being put into it by us.

Hurry back to us!

[masonranch]

So THAT's why you're there! Best wishes on that - I hope it goes well! Do they not do that here in the US?

Which brings me to another question - we have all these aborted fetuses along with birth blood being used for stem cell research, but I keep hearing about people having to go out of the country for stem cell treatments.

Don't they do that kind of treatment in the US? (Not questioning your going to the Ukraine for yours, was just wondering what the scoop is about the US is all.) It doesn't make sense to not have it available to us if there's so much money and whatnot being put into it by us.

Hurry back to us!

We have the Harvard Stem Cell institute (HSCI). The duplicity is that while Abortion is legal trying to provide any benefit at all from a horrible proceedure is not allowed in the US. The people who have the longest track record are here in the Ukraine (since 1991, there year of independence incidentally). There is a Dr Rador, in California, that performs the treatment in the Carribean for $30,000. I came to the Ukraine because they are more experienced and do it for $11,250. A little more plane fare but more experience and a lot lower cost.

I truly agonized and got multiple assurances that EmCell provides no payment or incentive at all to encourage abortion. I want to thank Country Flowers for bringing up the point about the "tree of life". Stem cell infusion is not immortality. At least according to these people stem cells seek out damage in the body and then try to repair it. My cells, me, are 68 years old. What I hope will happen is the squaring of the aging curve. That is life will be full, we'll be able to stay on the farm longer and when I die it will be because everything fails simultaneously.

Judy is not with me. We are going to see what really happens and if it is substantially positive, then we will find some way to get her treated too, because I truly love her and can't bear the thought of separation.

Lastly I want to thank all of you for helping me and yourselves to understand and look into the future of "Our brave new world". I hope it is a bright future, but it could be very dark too.

In my view trusting private enterprise seeking ways to fill a need is much more preferable than essentially a possible Government eugenics program that Obama care is teatering on right now.

[large]

Best of Luck, Mike . . hope it works out . .

Oddly, there's a Vet in California, who has pioneered literally the same infusion for canines . . If your dog has Stenosis, or dysphasia, an amount of Fat cells from usually the flank area is drawn and sent to this Vet. He creates a stem cell compound from that and it is sent back for injection into the Dog . . And apparently, 90% of the dogs treated have recovered from their disabling problems for up to seven years . . The treatments cost around $3500 and are not approved for humans . .

Howcome?

Based upon what I have read, this treatment is not the "Fountain of Youth" but does offer relief from pain and repair of joints and spinal columns for a period of time . . Also, according to the Vet that does this and several other Doctors who are observing . . the Stem Cells must be used on the original donor . . they can't (or to this point, haven't) use outside donors . . Although, I'm guessing that this is to keep from having to use immunosuppresents to keep the body being treated from rejecting the stem cells . .

[Chuckie]

Chuckie, what about younger people who might need them? I had a friend on drugs who suffered damage to her heart from them and she got a pacemaker before she turned 30.

She's dead now, died of a drug overdose a few years ago.


You just proved my point.

She got it under the CURRENT system. She didn't and probably wouldn't get it under the OBAMA system.

[large]

I dunno about Hitler, the Soviet Gulags or eugenics . . Nor "Death panels' in H.B. 3200 . . Simply because, while we read inferences towards some kind of care or qualification for care, the whole damned thing is far too vague to argue specifics about . . and that's the problem . . what these people (the House of Repressentatives) has done is put togther a 1000 page "Guide' for bureaucratic agencies to be formed and decide what the specific pages mean and will do . .

The American People nor our legislative representatives have much to say about any of it and will probably be regulated by economics more than need . .

My nickel . . .

[Sandra]

She got it under the CURRENT system. She didn't and probably wouldn't get it under the OBAMA system.

I hadda feeling you were gonna say that....

I'm really not happy about that at all.

Too bad Obama's mother didn't have an abortion...

[large]

Here's the other problem (wrong thread I think) with the idea of adding 16 million (or more) bodies to Medicare . . or a parallel system . . .

WE CANNOT AFFORD IT!

Regardless of Obi-1's claims for fiscal responsibility or savings, Medicare will be broke somewhere around 2015 with a 11 trillion dollar debt . . add another 16 to 60 million and whaddya got? By CBO figures, something like 9 trillion more dollars. Add that to the 11 trillion, and you have a debt our children won't be able to pay at an 80% tax rate!

And with a stifiling Tax rate like that, the GDP will be sh*t! So how are we gonna pay for what we are getting now, let alone pay the additional freight Obi-1 is gonna saddle us with?

[masonranch]

I dunno about Hitler, the Soviet Gulags or eugenics . . Nor "Death panels' in H.B. 3200 . . . . .

Just a note about yesterdays independence celebration here in the Ukraine. I went to a memorial that was a surround presentation. They kept focusing on 1933, so I looked it up. They were under Soviet style rationing and had an independence movement then. So Stalin just seized all their 1932 bumper crop and cut off their rationing and 12 million Ukrainians died of Starvation. It's called the Holodrom which means Hunger Plague. 12 Million is twice the Holocaust yet I never heard of that. That's what can happen when you have no rights and Government decides who gets what. There premier is the Guy that was poisoned by the Soviets deforming his face horribly. And we revolted over no taxation without representation. I can see how they love being independent of the Russian bear. As one congress woman said "You don't trust me?" We don't and shouldn't.

Another point re: Cannine stem cells. Stem cells are also being used successfully to treat horse leg problems that used to require putting the horse down because it suffered incurable leg crippling.

Stem Cells Give Horses a Hoof Up
Kristen Philipkoski 04.13.05
SAN DIEGO -- While American scientists struggle with the science and ethics of human stem-cell research, a California company is routinely using stem cells successfully as a therapy -- in horses.

Vet-Stem in Poway is treating both prize race horses and well-loved average equines for bowed tendons, injured ligaments and fractures using stem cells derived from the animal's own fat cells. And Vet-Stem's work is instructing researchers who want to learn how stem cells can treat humans.

[masonranch]

Well I had my first stem cell IV today. It consisted of about 100cc's of something that looked like liquid placenta. Dr. Alexander Smikodub who founded EmCell in 1991, discussed what to expect. Within 6 months I should no longer need to take insulin, my fatigue, labido, cardiovascular system including blood pressure should be substantially improved. I hope he is right. If so it will be well worth it. Today I'm told to stay in the hotel and not to exercise. He also warned me if I suffer a fractured bone the stem cells will all go there (be used up) to repair it and to avoid respiratory infections. That's a danger since flying on an airplane is notorious for spreading disease via the closed air system. There is nothing I can do about it. Although this time of year flu and cough are minimum.

Embryonic stem cells reproduce. As he says the have children and grandchildren which adult stem cells do not do.

It was interesting in that they went to great effort to make sure the IV would not stop or plug up. That little bit of stuff is the major cost of the 3 hour treatment. I don't know how many embryo's were used to produce it. I'll ask tomorrow. They are going to do another IV tomorrow but it is secondary to today.

[large]

This is beyond interesting . . it's totally educational . . It's also a basis for arguing the need for this research and approval here in the USA . .

Keep us posted . .

Thanks, Mike, for sharing it . . Because you didn't have to . .

[masonranch]

This is beyond interesting . . it's totally educational . . It's also a basis for arguing the need for this research and approval here in the USA . .

Keep us posted . .

Thanks, Mike, for sharing it . . Because you didn't have to . .

Large;

There really is no big reason to keep any of this a secret including cost so, while I don't have to I want to.

Today was the second IV. I got some answers. What has been injected is one Embyo whose cells have been separated. yesterday, the first injection, were cells specific to my diabetes problem and I had to rest, no walking. Today were general stem cells from the same embryo that treat anti aging issues and other parts of the body such as the skin, liver, lungs etc.

The amount was about 58 million cells each day for a total of 116 million cells. The first day was 1.5 milliliters and today was 1 milliliter. But as he points out the cells continue to divide producing many many more stem cells before they take on specific functions like eyes, nuerons, lungs, arteries and circulatory system.

Compared with Xcell, which harvest 2.3 million adult stem cells that do not divide and whose cells are as old as the elderly host, you can see the advantages. To compensate for this Xcell injects their stem cells with a cathater fed right to the artery that goes to the pancreas. There are almost no additional benefits as there are with embryonic stem cells. The catheter is a dangerous proceedure that is avoided by injecting many more stem cells into an arm vein.

There is follow up. Once a month I will report the progress of my diabetes and blood pressure issues via e-mail. This is easy since I measure blood sugar multiple times everyday and we have a blood pressure cuff.

Asked about hearing which he said will improve if it's related to circulation which generally will vastly improve.

Eyesight and the eye in general will improve, so I may be able to throw away my reading glasses and distance glasses

Heart arrythmias, which I have, will improve if they are related to the general atrophy of the heart.

And my hormonal balance will correct to that of a young man, making it easier to lose weight and vastly increasing endurance.

So there you have it. Friday I leave at 6:30 in the morning for Paris, a 3hr and 40 min nonstop flight getting in at 9am, then spend the day there and visit the Louve, then Saturday morning I fly back home getting into Denver at 8:20 pm (5:20 am Kiev time) so I will probably drive to Cedaredge after getting my bag that evening since it will be morning for me.

[large]

If you can . . or would, keep us posted also . .

The information is both educational and mind bending because of what it's intended to do . .



And have a good and safe trip home . .

[masonranch]

If you can . . or would, keep us posted also . .

The information is both educational and mind bending because of what it's intended to do . .



And have a good and safe trip home . .

This helps me a lot too. I need to write it down while it is still fresh. And I cut and paste it to send to my relatives too (with pictures). So now it's just let time pass and let those tiny stem cells grow and multiply and see what they do.

[masonranch]

Paula;

This is so odd. There is now a rearranged embryo in my body. An embryo that would have become a human baby had it not been aborted. Now it will facilitate repair and regeneration of an older failing body. I guess that is better than being flushed down the toliet and killed. But I wonder, if there are no accidents in the universe, then this soul chose not to die but to bring a possible fuller life to us. These are heavy esoteric, thoughts. I feel odd about them, but, at least for me, am not sorry I'm giving it a try and if there was a prelife intelligence thank whoever it was for giving it a try too.



Your Brother and now Brothers

Mike and A673

[large]

This aligns nicely with my previous question about the differences in terms . . abortion, euthanasia, Transplants and Fetal Stem Cell theories . .

Technically, you have received a transplant of a Fetuse's (sp?) Organs . . they just are developing in YOUR body . .

You see, there is no "Straight Line Argument" about this . .

[Sandra]

Somehow this reminds me of the movie Cocoon. Those seniors went swimming in the water that the alien cocoons were in and they became young again.

And the caregivers of the cocoons showed them mercy and compassion, even offered them eternal life with them on their planet, accepting the earthlings as their own.

Beautiful movie.

[masonranch]

It's now been 10-11 days since stem cell infusion on Aug 25-26, 2009 at EmCell in Kiev. I was not expecting results so soon but more likely in a 6 months time period. But I have to report that I've noticed marked increase in Libido, reduction in fitigue, slightly better eyesight in that I can now read the TV guide from the couch without glasses (it's still blurry though), better sleep and slightly lower blood pressure.

But most of all the changes in my diabetes have been nothing short of remarkable.

Even with stringent diet control my blood sugar would regularly rise to over 200 (a normal person is 85) by the end of the day requiring 20 units of insulin to bring it down for the evening. Two days ago it was 161 yesterday it was 133. These numbers are too low to be treated with insulin since the risk of hypoglycemic shock (low blood sugar) is too high. So it appears that with continued diet control my days as a insulin pin cushion might be over. I still take the maximum recommended amount of metformin for insulin resistance, but with these type of results I'm hopeful that I'll be able to roll that back too in the not to distant future. Losing weight is also a way to reduce insulin resistance so I want to work on that too.

Bottom line is that I have real hope for an end to diabetes. The increase in libido is an indication that hormonal restoration is in process which may also help me to lose weight.

So the first measureable results are very very positive. Will keep you posted.

[large]

Great . . . . . . .

[masonranch]

Great . . . . . . .

I'm now off Insulin and Glybuteride (oral pancreas stimulator) after less than a month after stem cell transplantation, but still take metformin for insulin resistance and even with that and 3 Klondike Ice cream bars yesterday which should have driven my blood sugar to 250 or more, by the end of the day it was an amazing 127. It just gets better everyday. I do believe that diabetes may be a thing of the past for me. Diabetes with all it's complications like blindness, kidney failure, heart failure, cardiovasular failure, high blood pressure, amputation, increased chance of Alzheimers is going, going, .......

I can go off metformin too if I can lose weight. By the way, before I get a lecture, I don't normally eat ice cream at all let alone 3. But then again comes the fall.

With these type of results for my pancreas, I can hardly wait to see what other effects on other parts of my body stems cells are working. It seems like my memory is returning and ah my libido, I now have one again (raging it isn't though yet)

[large]

all I can still say is . . . GREAT!


About the libido . . "If it doesn't go down in four hours" . .

[Bob Nattering]

Masonranch,

As Large has said, this stuff is amazing new information to me. I had never heard of this treatment before. Thanks for your candor in sharing this with us. Truly very interesting stuff.

Wish you the best on all of this.

Thanks

[Bob Nattering]

About the libido . . "If it doesn't go down in four hours" . .


A friend told me he was listening to one of the adds for Viagra. When they got to the part about calling the doctor, his wife looked over and said, "You're not calling any doctor until I'm finished with it."

[large]

"And then we'll beat the dog with it!"

[large]

Sorry folks, I just couldn't resist . .

Your fault Bob, it was just too good a setup . . .