How did George W Bush delay a diabetes cure by eight years?

[Seshmeister]

http://usvsth3m.com/post/99646475693...-cure-by-eight

How did George W Bush delay a diabetes cure by eight years?

Today’s seen exciting news for Type 1 diabetics everywhere - a potential cure!
But this is with absolutely no thanks to George W Bush who hindered the development of this treatment for the entire length of his Presidency.



It’s hoped that an effective cure will be available to all Type 1 diabetics within a few years. Not the first time something like this has been announced, but it is the first time it genuinely looks like it might actually happen.

As we talked about recently Diabetes is chronic and life-threatening condition caused when the body stops producing insulin, the hormone which breaks down sugar in the blood.


Professor Doug Melton

Harvard University researchers lead by Professor Doug Melton have developed an industrial method of manufacturing mature, insulin-creating islets using human stem cells and SCIENCE.

The hope is that, in the near future, Type 1 diabetics could be implanted with new carbohydrate sensing and insulin secreting cells, housed inside a special device that protects them against the body’s auto-immune system.

This is the first time a process for manufacturing these cells on an industrial scale has been possible.

When he came to power (we’re still reluctant to say “was elected”) George W Bush actively stopped research into stem cell technology
Speaking on behalf of God, in 2001 Dubya banned the use of Federal dollars to fund human stem cell research - effectively shutting down widespread medical research in America into curing diabetes, Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, and even some work towards heart disease. This curtailed research for the length of his Presidency.

His objection was because the human stem cells came from ‘spare’ embryos created in the process of IVF treatment. Spare embryos which would be, and in fact carried on being, destroyed anyway.

When Congress tried to overturn the ruling in 2006, Dubya used his Presidential veto for the first time and refused to sign the change

Two months after being elected, Obama reversed this decision
It had been a campaign promise.

On the 9th March 2009 he signed an Executive Order reversing the ban on Federal funding of human stem cell research. And, to stop any future president U-turning again, asked Congress to make it law.

When he signed his Executive Order Barack Obama said “All right, there we go.”
Understated. We like that.

In the lab at Harvard, Professor Doug Melton gathered all his staff together, to watch Obama signing the Executive Order on TV.

They celebrated with cake

[Nitro Express]

It's really not George W Bush or Obama. It's dividing the public with political parties and then catering to demographics. Since elections are always close you have to cater to anyone who will help put you over the top. Since the Republicans depend on votes from people who have a religious problem using fetuses for research support for stem cell research is not at the levels as it would be on the Democratic side.

To be honest. I don't think George W Bush gives a ratt's ass about using fetuses for research. He didn't give a ratt's ass about killing people with bombs based on lies. Neither does Obama. I view both of them as two cold blooded war criminals who really should be sharing a prison cell.

It's simply demographics and who whatever political party caters to. Basically the average politician doesn't give a ratt's ass about anyone or anything besides their own selfish interest. That is common ground both the Democrat and Republican parties share.

[cadaverdog]

To be honest. I don't think George W Bush gives a ratt's ass about using fetuses for research. He didn't give a ratt's ass about killing people with bombs based on lies. Neither does Obama. I view both of them as two cold blooded war criminals who really should be sharing a prison cell.

Unlike most of the other people here I don't think George W is the villian he's made out to be. I think he was just used by other people who convinced him that Saddam was a threat to the U S to further their agendas. He can't be an evil genius and an idiot. I don't think he's a total moron but he's not real bright either.

[DONNIEP]

Just wait until I'm president....

[FORD]

Unlike most of the other people here I don't think George W is the villian he's made out to be. I think he was just used by other people who convinced him that Saddam was a threat to the U S to further their agendas. He can't be an evil genius and an idiot. I don't think he's a total moron but he's not real bright either.

And in this case, he was convinced by religious science deniers that stem cell research was a threat to the US, to further their agenda. Which sucks for the diabetics and anybody else whose health was put at risk for 8 more years while this medical research was unecessarily blocked.

[cadaverdog]

And in this case, he was convinced by religious science deniers that stem cell research was a threat to the US, to further their agenda. Which sucks for the diabetics and anybody else whose health was put at risk for 8 more years while this medical research was unecessarily blocked.

Some people believe life begins in the womb. Has science proved otherwise? You can get stem cells from cord blood. Why is it necessary to use fetuses?

[FORD]

Some people believe life begins in the womb. Has science proved otherwise? You can get stem cells from cord blood. Why is it necessary to use fetuses?

The embryos used for stem cells never got anywhere near a womb. They were "leftovers" from in vitro fertilizations that would have been thrown away otherwise. Nobody was "killin' babies" to do research.

[cadaverdog]

The embryos used for stem cells never got anywhere near a womb. They were "leftovers" from in vitro fertilizations that would have been thrown away otherwise. Nobody was "killin' babies" to do research.

You didn't answer my question. Why can't they use cord blood instead if you can get stem cells from cord blood?

[DONNIEP]

The embryos used for stem cells never got anywhere near a womb. They were "leftovers" from in vitro fertilizations that would have been thrown away otherwise. Nobody was "killin' babies" to do research.

Even I didn't have a problem with this. If some goo destined for the incinerator can possibly save lives then I say go for it.

[cadaverdog]

Just wait until I'm president....

President of what? President of the chat box? I'd vote for ya for president. I'd vote for Ford for president if the only other choice was Hillary. I'd rather see another 4 years of Obama. Not Michelle Obama though. If she and Hillary were my only two choices I'd pick none of the above.

[cadaverdog]

Even I didn't have a problem with this. If some goo destined for the incinerator can possibly save lives then I say go for it.

If they're not turning these embryos into fetuses it doesn't bother me either. I'm a borderline diabetic myself. I have to take a blood test every three months to make sure I'm not one. I hit the numbers a couple times but not enough in a row. Since I lost a shitload of weight my numbers are down. So is my blood pressure. I quit drinking soda pop. That was my worst habit. I was addicted to Coke.

[FORD]

You didn't answer my question. Why can't they use cord blood instead if you can get stem cells from cord blood?

V. What are the similarities and differences between embryonic and adult stem cells?


Human embryonic and adult stem cells each have advantages and disadvantages regarding potential use for cell-based regenerative therapies. One major difference between adult and embryonic stem cells is their different abilities in the number and type of differentiated cell types they can become. Embryonic stem cells can become all cell types of the body because they are pluripotent. Adult stem cells are thought to be limited to differentiating into different cell types of their tissue of origin.

Embryonic stem cells can be grown relatively easily in culture. Adult stem cells are rare in mature tissues, so isolating these cells from an adult tissue is challenging, and methods to expand their numbers in cell culture have not yet been worked out. This is an important distinction, as large numbers of cells are needed for stem cell replacement therapies.

Scientists believe that tissues derived from embryonic and adult stem cells may differ in the likelihood of being rejected after transplantation. We don't yet know for certain whether tissues derived from embryonic stem cells would cause transplant rejection, since relatively few clinical trials have tested the safety of transplanted cells derived from hESCS.

Adult stem cells, and tissues derived from them, are currently believed less likely to initiate rejection after transplantation. This is because a patient's own cells could be expanded in culture, coaxed into assuming a specific cell type (differentiation), and then reintroduced into the patient. The use of adult stem cells and tissues derived from the patient's own adult stem cells would mean that the cells are less likely to be rejected by the immune system. This represents a significant advantage, as immune rejection can be circumvented only by continuous administration of immunosuppressive drugs, and the drugs themselves may cause deleterious side effects.

http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/pages/basics5.aspx

[DONNIEP]

Oh who cares about this. Build me some cloned Stormtroopers!!

[cadaverdog]

V. What are the similarities and differences between embryonic and adult stem cells?


Human embryonic and adult stem cells each have advantages and disadvantages regarding potential use for cell-based regenerative therapies. One major difference between adult and embryonic stem cells is their different abilities in the number and type of differentiated cell types they can become. Embryonic stem cells can become all cell types of the body because they are pluripotent. Adult stem cells are thought to be limited to differentiating into different cell types of their tissue of origin.

Embryonic stem cells can be grown relatively easily in culture. Adult stem cells are rare in mature tissues, so isolating these cells from an adult tissue is challenging, and methods to expand their numbers in cell culture have not yet been worked out. This is an important distinction, as large numbers of cells are needed for stem cell replacement therapies.

Scientists believe that tissues derived from embryonic and adult stem cells may differ in the likelihood of being rejected after transplantation. We don't yet know for certain whether tissues derived from embryonic stem cells would cause transplant rejection, since relatively few clinical trials have tested the safety of transplanted cells derived from hESCS.

Adult stem cells, and tissues derived from them, are currently believed less likely to initiate rejection after transplantation. This is because a patient's own cells could be expanded in culture, coaxed into assuming a specific cell type (differentiation), and then reintroduced into the patient. The use of adult stem cells and tissues derived from the patient's own adult stem cells would mean that the cells are less likely to be rejected by the immune system. This represents a significant advantage, as immune rejection can be circumvented only by continuous administration of immunosuppressive drugs, and the drugs themselves may cause deleterious side effects.

That would be helpful if I was a scientist. Like I said in my previous post I thought they were using fetuses not embryos. As long as they're not using fetuses I'm not against it. I'm an agnostic not a religious fanatic but I don't believe in abortion or the killing of fetuses unless the life of the mother is in danger or she was raped. I don't believe in abortion as a form of birth control. It's their choice but I don't have to agree with it.

[cadaverdog]

Oh who cares about this. Build me some cloned Stormtroopers!!

Too bad you can't clone people like you clone some plants. Cut off an arm and grow another person.

[Nickdfresh]

Unlike most of the other people here I don't think George W is the villian he's made out to be. I think he was just used by other people who convinced him that Saddam was a threat to the U S to further their agendas. He can't be an evil genius and an idiot. I don't think he's a total moron but he's not real bright either.

He was a stubborn, insecure asshole that never listened to anyone until it was too late or he absolutely had too...

[Nickdfresh]

That would be helpful if I was a scientist...

I really don't get that impression...

[cadaverdog]

He was a stubborn, insecure asshole that never listened to anyone until it was too late or he absolutely had too...

He listened to people but they were the wrong people. People like Dick Cheney.

[cadaverdog]

I really don't get that impression...

Can't say I'd mistake you for one either. I don't think you're brainwashed like some of the other people here though. You're actually capable of independant thought. That don't mean we'll be holding hands in the moonlight in the wee hours though.

[DavidLeeNatra]

isn't inventing a cure for the people similar to socialism?

[Nickdfresh]

He listened to people but they were the wrong people. People like Dick Cheney.

He listened to very few people, whereas a president at about the same IQ range, Franklin Delano Roosevelt of about the same class and gentrification, celebrated the fact that he had a "brain trust" of multiple advisers and thinkers. Bush was "the decider" because he was an insecure jackass and intellectually lazy with daddy issues...

[Kristy]

Bush was "the decider" because he was an insecure jackass and intellectually lazy with daddy issues...

Wrong again you failed Garbage Pail Kid supermodel wannabe. Bush was "The Decider" because he is genuinely psychotic. All politicians suffer from sort of metal disorder (usually disillusionment) but Bush was a severe case. Bush got to live out his most desirable fetish: stroking his cock on a US aircraft carrier - on live TV! So before you spout off another cliche-driven, totally irrelevant and uncalled for comment, think for a seccy, Nick. You'll be glad you did.

[cadaverdog]

He listened to very few people, whereas a president at about the same IQ range, Franklin Delano Roosevelt of about the same class and gentrification, celebrated the fact that he had a "brain trust" of multiple advisers and thinkers. Bush was "the decider" because he was an insecure jackass and intellectually lazy with daddy issues...

I don't think W is an evil guy, I just think he was easily manipulated. The few people he did listen to could have convinced him he needed to kill Saddam to save the world and he bought it.

[FORD]

I don't think W is an evil guy, I just think he was easily manipulated. The few people he did listen to could have convinced him he needed to kill Saddam to save the world and he bought it.

Actually, Chimpy claimed that GOD told him to go after Saddam....


However, Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ has assured me that this is NOT the case!

[cadaverdog]

Actually, Chimpy claimed that GOD told him to go after Saddam

He might have been told to say that. I figured he'd go after Saddam because he supposedly tried to have his father killed but I think it was a big mistake after 9/11. if 9/11 wouldn't have happened we could have toppled Saddam with very little effort. That's why I don't buy into your BCE theory about 9/11. He was going to go after Saddam anyway. He didn't need 9/11 for an excuse. He had to try to tie Saddam to 9/11 anyway he could to justify going into Iraq. If it hadn't happened he could have stuck to the WMD story.