Are you for it? Against it?

Explain.

Are you for it? Against it?

Explain.

I am for it. There is much to be learned and we already know of so much that can be done with stem cells, we should support these findings and see what else is out there.

I really dont know too much about it, but, what I do know, I support it. I am sure that a lot of important information has come from the research

It depends on the way the stem cells are acquired.

I am for it. There is much to be learned and we already know of so much that can be done with stem cells, we should support these findings and see what else is out there.

i agree

I'm for it, there are so many things we can learn from it and I would hate to think that DH, my parents, or any of my future kids would develop something that could have been cured/fixed by stem cell research.

It depends on how they are harvested. I've found that there is a great benefit in stem cells, but I don't know how I feel in some of the ways they are acquired.

I'm not so sure how I feel about embryonic stem cells. It definately seems to push moral boundaries abit and I am, really not sure where I stand with it. I guess my major concern with them using embryos is that they are creating life only to disect it. And even though the embryos are just a few days old, you have to ask yourself when life begins? Time of conception or a heart beat?

I'm 110% for it

I am for it.

I am for it. While I am uncomfortable with creating an embryo solely to harvest its cells, SO much good can come from all of this research. To me, the pros heavily outweigh the cons.

For it. The benefits outweigh the negatives.

Posted via Mobile Device

It depends on how they are harvested. I've found that there is a great benefit in stem cells, but I don't know how I feel in some of the ways they are acquired.

I agree.

For it.

I'm for it.

I've taken care of multiple quads. After seeing someone's daily struggle and knowing that research that could possibly help those people is only fingertips away... kills me. Honestly unless I've missed some way they are harvested. I think I agree with all of it.

I am against it solely for the way it is acquired . The Germans experiments on jews in WW2 gave some research that has been helpful to future generations . A lot of it was quack but there were some foundations set .All in the name of science yet we balk at that .

Most would not advocate such things whether they were to save lives or not . Christian or not I have always believed that life began at conception . If this is my belief then I believe that there are humans being killed for the greater good . What is the greater good and who has the right to determine if a life means more then another ? Should we rejoice that life is created and taken so that other life can be saved ?

It is already a concept that a lot of life saving care is for those that can afford to . Those without insurance or poor are shut out of cutting edge treatements all the time . Heck even those with insurance at times are denied . Those are the facts and we all know it , have been close to it or have at least heard about it. I worry that the "cost" of such treatments would be out of reach for many . The cost because of moral objection , finances and other things as wel.

If there was a way to harvest stem cells without committing murder then I would be for it . Slash me for my moral compass that is tied to my religion . That is my faith and as the father in Fiddler on the Roof said "Bend me too far and I will break"

For it. 100%.

If there was a way to harvest stem cells without committing murder then I would be for it . Slash me for my moral compass that is tied to my religion . That is my faith and as the father in Fiddler on the Roof said "Bend me too far and I will break"

I could be wrong, but last I heard it was possible to harvest stem cells from the umbilical cord? In that case I am completely for it.

I am for adult stem cell research. I think huge advances can be made. Stem cells collected from the umbilical cord are also ok.

I am 100% against embrionic stem cell research. I belivie that life starts at conception and we have no right to kill one person to save another.

Are people killing fetuses just to harvest stem cells somewhere?

I am for it for the purposes of finding cures or treatments for medical issues. I am against it for ANY Purposes of actual Cloning of people or animals.

I am for it for the purposes of finding cures or treatments for medical issues. I am against it for ANY Purposes of actual Cloning of people or animals.

Yeah cloning is a no-go for me.

for it for finding treatments but not for cloning

Are people killing fetuses just to harvest stem cells somewhere?

If you belivie that life begins at conception (when the sperm enters the egg) then yes. Embrionic children are being killed for their cells.

Are people killing fetuses just to harvest stem cells somewhere?

I know they can use aborted fetuses and/or the cells from the umbilical cord

There are other methods of Stem Cell harvesting other than creating embryos.

There are other methods of Stem Cell harvesting other than creating embryos.

can you share? that isn't snarky i'm genuinely interested

If you belivie that life begins at conception (when the sperm enters the egg) then yes. Embrionic children are being killed for their cells.

So, there are woman out there somewhere getting pregnant just so that the stem cells can be harvested? I thought that the embryonic stem cells that were already there were harvested from eggs that were fertilized but never implanted, not fetuses that were aborted so they could be harvested.

There is a big difference between aborting FOR stem cells and taking stem cells from an egg that was fertilized for implantation and never ended up being used and would have "died" anyway.

So, there are woman out there somewhere getting pregnant just so that the stem cells can be harvested? I thought that the embryonic stem cells that were already there were harvested from eggs that were fertilized but never implanted, not fetuses that were aborted so they could be harvested.

There is a big difference between aborting FOR stem cells and taking stem cells from an egg that was fertilized for implantation and never ended up being used and would have "died" anyway.
I agree with that.

can you share? that isn't snarky i'm genuinely interested
You mentioned two methods in your post - cord blood and aborted fetuses.

So, there are woman out there somewhere getting pregnant just so that the stem cells can be harvested? I thought that the embryonic stem cells that were already there were harvested from eggs that were fertilized but never implanted, not fetuses that were aborted so they could be harvested.

There is a big difference between aborting FOR stem cells and taking stem cells from an egg that was fertilized for implantation and never ended up being used and would have "died" anyway.

agree with this too. i don't like the idea of aborted fetuses used but as long as women are having abortions then at least something positive (in my opinion) should come of it

I thought they fertilized an egg in the lab, not in a babymaker :puzz

They use a spem and a egg in a perti dish. Then harvest the stem cells before the next stage of growth.

I'm for it if they used anything but embroys.

I am for it. There is much to be learned and we already know of so much that can be done with stem cells, we should support these findings and see what else is out there.
:agree i'm for it.

Sperm hits egg ...grows ...life . I dont care if it happens in a petri dish or in a womb . The umbilical cord harvesting I dont mind at all . Not opposed to the idea of stem cell research . I dont agree though with farming from embryos.

I am for it for the purposes of finding cures or treatments for medical issues. I am against it for ANY Purposes of actual Cloning of people or animals.

Clones are people 2!

(Sorry, bad joke, couldn't resist.)

There is also a big difference between embryonic stem cells and adult stem cells. Embryonic stem cells are pluripotent and adult stem cells are not. That means that embryonic stem cells can become ANYTHING, adult stem cells are very limited in what they can become and treat. There is also a big difference in how easy they are to use. Embryonic stem cells can be grown very easily and in large numbers, making them ideal for regenerative research (and eventually, therapy). Adult stem cells are rare in mature tissues, therefore hard to harvest, and the numbers that are even viable or the potential for growth has not even been determined yet because they are so hard to work with. This is very important because in order for regenerative therapies to work, a very large number of stem cells are needed.

The most ideal use for adult stem cells is that a patients own cells could be expanded in culture and reintroduced into themselves. That would be a great way to help prevent things like immune system issues. Not the kind of regenerative therapies that would be needed to treat things like Parkinsons, spinal cord injuries, alzheimers, etc.

IMO, denying the use of embryonic stem cells greatly reduces the chance that we will ever find a treatment for any of these things. I am all for regulations on how the stem cells are obtained (i.e. no stem cells taken from aborted fetuses, only from eggs stored in fertility clinics that would otherwise be discarded), but I would never support a ban on using embryonic stem cells.

I am also anti-cloning, but honestly, cloning is not even possible for a LONG time so denying possibly life saving research to people who need it NOW because of something that may or may not happen in the future... That is throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Sperm hits egg ...grows ...life . I dont care if it happens in a petri dish or in a womb . The umbilical cord harvesting I dont mind at all . Not opposed to the idea of stem cell research . I dont agree though with farming from embryos.
do you agree with embryos wasting away to never be used? There are a lot of frozen embryos that will never be implanted and will ultimately wind up being medical waste.

Pros and Cons of Embryonic and Adult Stem Cells
Cell Comparisons: Embryonic vs. Adult


There are significant medical and scientific differences between embryonic and adult stem cell research and therapy. Here is a comparison between the two types, including some of the advantages and disadvantages of each.

Embryonic Stem Cell Advantages
1. Flexible—appear to have the potential to make any cell
2. Immortal—one ES cell line can potentially provide an endless supply of cells with
defined characteristics
3. Availability—embryos from in vitro fertilization clinics

Embryonic Stem Cell Disadvantages
1. Difficult to differentiate uniformly and homogeneously into a target tissue
2. Immunogenic—ES cells from a random embryo donor are likely to be rejected
after transplantation
3. Tumorigenic—Capable of forming tumors or promoting tumor formation
4. Destruction of developing human life

Adult Stem Cell Advantages
1. Special adult-type stem cells from bone marrow and from umbilical cord have been
isolated recently which appear to be as flexible as the embryonic type
2. Already somewhat specialized—inducement may be simpler
3. Not immunogenic—recipients who receive the products of their own stem cells will
not experience immune rejection
4. Relative ease of procurement—some adult stem cells are easy to harvest (skin,
muscle, marrow, fat), while others may be more difficult to obtain (brain stem cells).
Umbilical and placental stem cells are likely to be readily available
5. Non-tumorigenic—tend not to form tumors
6. No harm done to the donor

Adult Stem Cell Disadvantages
1. Limited quantity—can sometimes be difficult to obtain in large numbers
2. Finite—may not live as long as ES cells in culture
3. Less flexible (with the exception of #1 above)—may be more difficult to reprogram to
form other tissue types

Pros and Cons of Embryonic and Adult Stem Cells
Cell Comparisons: Embryonic vs. Adult


There are significant medical and scientific differences between embryonic and adult stem cell research and therapy. Here is a comparison between the two types, including some of the advantages and disadvantages of each.

Embryonic Stem Cell Advantages
1. Flexible—appear to have the potential to make any cell
2. Immortal—one ES cell line can potentially provide an endless supply of cells with
defined characteristics
3. Availability—embryos from in vitro fertilization clinics

Embryonic Stem Cell Disadvantages
1. Difficult to differentiate uniformly and homogeneously into a target tissue
2. Immunogenic—ES cells from a random embryo donor are likely to be rejected
after transplantation
3. Tumorigenic—Capable of forming tumors or promoting tumor formation
4. Destruction of developing human life

Adult Stem Cell Advantages
1. Special adult-type stem cells from bone marrow and from umbilical cord have been
isolated recently which appear to be as flexible as the embryonic type
2. Already somewhat specialized—inducement may be simpler
3. Not immunogenic—recipients who receive the products of their own stem cells will
not experience immune rejection
4. Relative ease of procurement—some adult stem cells are easy to harvest (skin,
muscle, marrow, fat), while others may be more difficult to obtain (brain stem cells).
Umbilical and placental stem cells are likely to be readily available
5. Non-tumorigenic—tend not to form tumors
6. No harm done to the donor

Adult Stem Cell Disadvantages
1. Limited quantity—can sometimes be difficult to obtain in large numbers
2. Finite—may not live as long as ES cells in culture
3. Less flexible (with the exception of #1 above)—may be more difficult to reprogram to
form other tissue types

Ah thank you. I was looking for a list like this and couldn't find one!

This is why I support research with BOTH types of stem cells. They could both be used in different ways to help with different problems. :tu

I am against it solely for the way it is acquired . The Germans experiments on jews in WW2 gave some research that has been helpful to future generations . A lot of it was quack but there were some foundations set .All in the name of science yet we balk at that .

Most would not advocate such things whether they were to save lives or not . Christian or not I have always believed that life began at conception . If this is my belief then I believe that there are humans being killed for the greater good . What is the greater good and who has the right to determine if a life means more then another ? Should we rejoice that life is created and taken so that other life can be saved ?

It is already a concept that a lot of life saving care is for those that can afford to . Those without insurance or poor are shut out of cutting edge treatments all the time . Heck even those with insurance at times are denied . Those are the facts and we all know it , have been close to it or have at least heard about it. I worry that the "cost" of such treatments would be out of reach for many . The cost because of moral objection , finances and other things as wel.

If there was a way to harvest stem cells without committing murder then I would be for it . Slash me for my moral compass that is tied to my religion . That is my faith and as the father in Fiddler on the Roof said "Bend me too far and I will break"


I sincerely understand your point, especially regarding determining who has the right to make such a decision. May I then offer you some information about how they have possibly found stem cells in menstrual blood.

Here is a link to one of the articles I have read on the subject: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21996417/

can you share? that isn't snarky i'm genuinely interested

there is upcoming technology about skin cells being converted to stem cells and/or finding stem cells in menstrual blood. see the article i posted above.

My major problem comes from...they can't "harvest" from an embryo for 5 - 7 days....the heart starts beating at 5 days.

They can get it from miscarrage babies. If people go in and sign a release form, use them. Don't create life to kill it.

JMO and I don't care on who tells me I'm "wrong"...:rolls eyes

I sincerely understand your point, especially regarding determining who has the right to make such a decision. May I then offer you some information about how they have possibly found stem cells in menstrual blood.

Here is a link to one of the articles I have read on the subject: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21996417/


I have never heard of this. Thank you. That is very interesting.

http://www.stemcellresearchcures.com/FactSheetHandouts.html

My major problem comes from...they can't "harvest" from an embryo for 5 - 7 days....the heart starts beating at 5 days.

They can get it from miscarrage babies. If people go in and sign a release form, use them. Don't create life to kill it.

JMO and I don't care on who tells me I'm "wrong"...:rolls eyes
when I had my miscarriage i wasn't in an emotional state to do much of anything. I wasn't even at the hospital when I miscarried.
People have created life already with no intent of using it. Like i stated before there are frozen embryos that people have stored with zero intention of using.

there is upcoming technology about skin cells being converted to stem cells and/or finding stem cells in menstrual blood. see the article i posted above.
That's Exciting News!!!

I certainly could get behind that . Thank you for sharing that !

I am for stem cell research. I agree with those that posted that the pros outweigh the cons.
Posted via Mobile Device

My major problem comes from...they can't "harvest" from an embryo for 5 - 7 days....the heart starts beating at 5 days.

They can get it from miscarrage babies. If people go in and sign a release form, use them. Don't create life to kill it.

JMO and I don't care on who tells me I'm "wrong"...:rolls eyes

The heart starts beating at 5 days? Where did you get that info? The embryo doesn't even implant into the uterine lining until 10-14 days after conception, and at the time of implantation a zygote is still in the initial cell division stage. The first signs of a heart is when the "heart tube" forms around day 21 to 23, as an S shaped tube.

I am not telling you that your opinion on stem cells is wrong, just trying to understand where you got the heart beat at five days thing because I have NEVER heard that.

For it. Now this is a very touchy emotional subject for me. My Dad recently died because of complications from cancer/stem cell transplant. It is still a very new treatment but of the 100 + patients that my Dads doctors had he was the first one lost. If today I were told I had cancer and a stem cell transplant were needed I would consent. I believe that if there is a way to find a cure that we should use it.

when I had my miscarriage i wasn't in an emotional state to do much of anything. I wasn't even at the hospital when I miscarried.
People have created life already with no intent of using it. Like i stated before there are frozen embryos that people have stored with zero intention of using.


And that is a tragedy in my opinion as well . I still dont think that it is ethical. I dont agree that its right to sacrifice one for another because of some "greater good" . Now if I CHOOSE to use my life for another that is another thing .

The heart starts beating at 5 days? Where did you get that info? The embryo doesn't even implant into the uterine lining until 10-14 days after conception, and at the time of implantation a zygote is still in the initial cell division stage. The first signs of a heart is when the "heart tube" forms around day 21 to 23, as an S shaped tube.

I am not telling you that your opinion on stem cells is wrong, just trying to understand where you got the heart beat at five days thing because I have NEVER heard that.

I was wondering the same thing about the heart.

For it. There are many different ways stem cells can be harvested, and certain things science can do to coerce them into functioning like embryonic even if they are not... but because the administration of this country is so hung up.... we will probably never get to realize that, or for that matter many of the benefits that come from this research.

I do not think "embryo's" should be created for research... but "embryo's" are not created, not in the standard sense of what the normal person thinks about when they think about embryo's anyway.

And as for aborted material, it is going to be wasted anyway, IMO, why not put it to good use... (with the informed consent of the woman, of course.)

I have never heard of this. Thank you. That is very interesting.

That's Exciting News!!!

I certainly could get behind that . Thank you for sharing that !

You're welcome. I find it extremely exciting as well. I think it's something we can all get behind, although the idea of my menstruation being "tapped" makes me shudder a bit.... it just leads me to believe even more in the power women have.

Sperm hits egg ...grows ...life . I dont care if it happens in a petri dish or in a womb . The umbilical cord harvesting I dont mind at all . Not opposed to the idea of stem cell research . I dont agree though with farming from embryos.

Are you also against the idea of creating 'life' outside the womb?

What do you suggest we do with the fertilized embryos that are not going to be implanted?

sorry....week 5. Was thinking wrong. :)

For it. Now this is a very touchy emotional subject for me. My Dad recently died because of complications from cancer/stem cell transplant. It is still a very new treatment but of the 100 + patients that my Dads doctors had he was the first one lost. If today I were told I had cancer and a stem cell transplant were needed I would consent. I believe that if there is a way to find a cure that we should use it.

You see, that's the hardest thing for me to understand. How can we look Reen, Joy, Heather, and so many others in the face and say "No, you're just going to have to continue to suffer with this affliction because this blob of jello has potential rights too."

I don't get that.

sorry....week 5. Was thinking wrong. :)

:lol You had me CONFUSED there.

All for it. The truth is that it is rare for aborted fetuses to be used (although that is a whole other argument) for stem cell research except in the rare instance of rare genetic diseases. I am planning on donating cord blood when sea-monkey gets here for use either for treatment or research. Who knows- maybe one day my child will need the science that is produced from this.

The way I look at it, the embryos are created in a petri dish and unless they are inserted into a womb and implanted then to me it's not a viable life in a dish. I believe life begins at implantation, not conception because even in nature there can be conception but no implantation.
I do struggle with the thought but to me the pros outweigh the cons so I do support embrionic stem cell research.

:lol You had me CONFUSED there.

It's been a long week....glad you got a laugh....:):mrgreen

Only with existing stem cell lines and I would love to see much more research done with adult stem cells.

Quick rant....

Why the hell do people care so much about things that in no way, shape, or form affect them?????????????

If I had an abortion, it WOULD NOT AFFECT YOU
If I took the morning after pill, it WOULD NOT AFFECT YOU
If I the abortion pill (different than Plan B) it WOULD NOT AFFECT YOU
If I decide to grow shit in a petri dish, it WOULD NOT AFFECT YOU

It would affect NOBODY but me. It's my body, my choice. It's NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.

You're not paying for it, you're not experiencing it, you have NO RIGHT to shove your unwelcomed, un-asked for opinions down my throat.

If you don't agree with abortion, morning after pills, abortion pills, and stem-cell research..... DON'T PARTICIPATE.

Okay. I feel better. :carryon

There is also a big difference between embryonic stem cells and adult stem cells. Embryonic stem cells are pluripotent and adult stem cells are not. That means that embryonic stem cells can become ANYTHING, adult stem cells are very limited in what they can become and treat. There is also a big difference in how easy they are to use. Embryonic stem cells can be grown very easily and in large numbers, making them ideal for regenerative research (and eventually, therapy). Adult stem cells are rare in mature tissues, therefore hard to harvest, and the numbers that are even viable or the potential for growth has not even been determined yet because they are so hard to work with. This is very important because in order for regenerative therapies to work, a very large number of stem cells are needed.

The most ideal use for adult stem cells is that a patients own cells could be expanded in culture and reintroduced into themselves. That would be a great way to help prevent things like immune system issues. Not the kind of regenerative therapies that would be needed to treat things like Parkinsons, spinal cord injuries, alzheimers, etc.

Wicked, I have to tell you, that you have no idea how much I appreciate you posting this! Unfortunately, lots of people are misinformed about what stem cell research actually entails because the media tends to not give the entire truth. Stories have to be sensationalized, right? Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about people here...I just mean in general.

FOR IT!! Although as someone that does research for a living, I'm slightly biased. There is a HUGE difference between adult stem cells and embryonic stem cells. The push to use embryonic stem cells only exists because those cells have the ability to become ANY cell in the body. Adult stem cells cannot do this. The problem with using previously discovered stem cell lines is that most of them are pretty old discoveries (scientifically speaking) and have already been shown to not be the best lines...as in they are of limited use in research. Science moves forward every single day, new stem cell lines are discovered all the time. We need to be able to keep up.

As for how stem cells are harvested: the vast majority of research is done with left-over eggs that had already been harvested and frozen for use in fertility clinics. Women have already signed over their rights to those eggs. Everything is done "in vitro"...meaning in a dish, not in a human or animal. They do not become fetuses. These eggs are fertilized and the cells are harvested shortly afterwards. These are eggs that were either going to sit in a freezer or be thrown out. Why not do something for the greater good with them? Doing what could be considered controversial research is the way that we have eradicated polio, perfected organ transplants, developed antibiotics, etc.

Sorry...I have a lot to say about this stuff. *putting away soapbox*

I'm for it. As long as they're not killing people to take their stem cells, I see no problem with this type of research.

I dont agree with murder , child abuse , stealing and other things either . Frankly if someone blows the head off my neighbor how does that affect me ? I didnt parcipate , I dont pay for the funeral .Not my family not my business eh?

Many of us protest things that dont directly affect us but we are morally opposed to . It is the whole thing of "first they took the jews I said nothing . then they took the Italians I said nothing because I wasnt Italian " so on and so on .

There is the thing also that "Evil flourishes when good men stand by and do nothing " I am not and I repeat not calling things evil what I am trying to point out is that we all have a form of what we believe is evil . Mine differs then yours perhaps but I cant see you standing on a corner watching a innocent get beaten , shrug your shoulders because it wasnt anyone you knew and walking off ...

I am for it. The key to SO much genetic information rests in stem cell research.

I am for it. As far as I know embronyic stemcells are from donated aborted fetuses, and can also be obtained from teeth, and umbilical cords.

You see, that's the hardest thing for me to understand. How can we look Reen, Joy, Heather, and so many others in the face and say "No, you're just going to have to continue to suffer with this affliction because this blob of jello has potential rights too."

I don't get that.


I completely agree with you. My grandfather was afflicted with Parkinson's disease when he was 45. It was early onset. He has had it now for 30 years. My grandmother has to do everything for him because he cannot contol his limbs. he takes at least 15 different pills a day. His mind is deteriorating now to the point where he no longer knows what is acceptable to do. He is very inappropriate and has no idea.

So why should my family suffer when there is something we could do about it? Just because the embryo COULD have been a child IF it had been implanted and carried to term? I do not agree with that reasoning.

I dont agree with murder , child abuse , stealing and other things either . Frankly if someone blows the head off my neighbor how does that affect me ? I didnt parcipate , I dont pay for the funeral .Not my family not my business eh?

Many of us protest things that dont directly affect us but we are morally opposed to . It is the whole thing of "first they took the jews I said nothing . then they took the Italians I said nothing because I wasnt Italian " so on and so on .

There is the thing also that "Evil flourishes when good men stand by and do nothing " I am not and I repeat not calling things evil what I am trying to point out is that we all have a form of what we believe is evil . Mine differs then yours perhaps but I cant see you standing on a corner watching a innocent get beaten , shrug your shoulders because it wasnt anyone you knew and walking off ...

Well, that is why I am for opening up more stem cell lines... Because it has been a slow, steady, constant encroachment against scientific advancement and our personal liberties by right-wing ultra-conservative religious nut jobs. First, they took away sex, and I said nothing, because I wasn't born yet. Then they took away other religions, and again, I wasn't born yet. Then they imprisoned Galileo for speaking the truth, while burning an estimated 900,000 people for having freckles, cats, or just to gain their property (while saying these people were witches), and I wasn't born yet.

More recently, they have bombed clinics that give free medical aid to pregnant women, because less than one percent of their patients have had abortions there. I said nothing. They have restricted my smoking to my car, or within spitting distance of an outdoor ashtray, and I grumbled. Then they passed the Patriot Act, and I grumbled loudly. Then they started wars, used torture, and set up unwarranted wiretaps, and I started putting together cohesive arguments and debating in public forums.

The similarities between the Nazis (who you brought up) and the ultra-conservative nut jobs are that both groups only say what you can not do... They do not say what you can do. The Nazis and the nut jobs take away people's freedoms, in the guise of security, using domestic terrorism as their battle cry, pushing for the fascist form of patriotism, and how many people are taking a stand and saying that this is all wrong?

I, for one, am not going to sit quietly while America re-enacts the horrors of 1920's Germany... Evil flourishes when good men do nothing, and evil is never done with such fervor as from one who does evil in the name of their god. I want people to stop dictating whether or not I can live or die, based on a 1,400 year old book of stories... Beware when fighting monsters, lest you become one yourself... (I consider taking away treatments such as those possible with embryonic stem cells to be monstrous, personally.)

Anyways, that's my rant about stem cells... A single embryo, which would be flushed down the sink otherwise, could save thousands of people's lives... When weighed that way, which creates more life? An embryo that is already doomed to never be implanted, or thousands of people who have the potential to live?

Quick rant....

Why the hell do people care so much about things that in no way, shape, or form affect them?????????????

If I had an abortion, it WOULD NOT AFFECT YOU
If I took the morning after pill, it WOULD NOT AFFECT YOU
If I the abortion pill (different than Plan B) it WOULD NOT AFFECT YOU
If I decide to grow shit in a petri dish, it WOULD NOT AFFECT YOU

It would affect NOBODY but me. It's my body, my choice. It's NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.

You're not paying for it, you're not experiencing it, you have NO RIGHT to shove your unwelcomed, un-asked for opinions down my throat.

If you don't agree with abortion, morning after pills, abortion pills, and stem-cell research..... DON'T PARTICIPATE.

Okay. I feel better. :carryon


This is the way I see. Just my own opinion. When it come to abortions it does not just effect you. It effects another human life inside of you. That is where the debates stems from. When does a life form inside of you take importance? My opinion it takes importance from the time the egg and sperm meet. For other people, it is all other times.

This is the way I see. Just my own opinion. When it come to abortions it does not just effect you. It effects another human life inside of you. That is where the debates stems from. When does a life form inside of you take importance? My opinion it takes importance from the time the egg and sperm meet. For other people, it is all other times.

I agree with you... It matters when it affects more lives than just your own...

So, would you then agree that if an embryo was to be discarded anyways (such as if it was surplus in an in-vitro fertilization, and the mother later died), that it would be cruel to simply destroy the embryo, rather than allow the stem cells to be harvested and grow and provide life to other people? There is no chance of the embryo being implanted after the mother's death... people simply do not care about the genetics of their neighbors enough to go through pregnancy, especially considering that it is far from guaranteed that the specific embryo will even implant in the uterus. Without that implantation, there is no change of the embryo becoming a child, even with the technology that is envisioned in the next 50 years... so why waste the potential life by pouring it down a sink? Why not use that life to bring life to other people who actually have a chance to live?

Depending on how they are harvested...I am for it. My sister had a baby and they took the stem cells from the placenta and cord. My brother in law had leukemia and if he were to relapse the stem cells can be used to help him.

Well, that is why I am for opening up more stem cell lines... Because it has been a slow, steady, constant encroachment against scientific advancement and our personal liberties by right-wing ultra-conservative religious nut jobs. First, they took away sex, and I said nothing, because I wasn't born yet. Then they took away other religions, and again, I wasn't born yet. Then they imprisoned Galileo for speaking the truth, while burning an estimated 900,000 people for having freckles, cats, or just to gain their property (while saying these people were witches), and I wasn't born yet.

More recently, they have bombed clinics that give free medical aid to pregnant women, because less than one percent of their patients have had abortions there. I said nothing. They have restricted my smoking to my car, or within spitting distance of an outdoor ashtray, and I grumbled. Then they passed the Patriot Act, and I grumbled loudly. Then they started wars, used torture, and set up unwarranted wiretaps, and I started putting together cohesive arguments and debating in public forums.

The similarities between the Nazis (who you brought up) and the ultra-conservative nut jobs are that both groups only say what you can not do... They do not say what you can do. The Nazis and the nut jobs take away people's freedoms, in the guise of security, using domestic terrorism as their battle cry, pushing for the fascist form of patriotism, and how many people are taking a stand and saying that this is all wrong?

I, for one, am not going to sit quietly while America re-enacts the horrors of 1920's Germany... Evil flourishes when good men do nothing, and evil is never done with such fervor as from one who does evil in the name of their god. I want people to stop dictating whether or not I can live or die, based on a 1,400 year old book of stories... Beware when fighting monsters, lest you become one yourself... (I consider taking away treatments such as those possible with embryonic stem cells to be monstrous, personally.)

Anyways, that's my rant about stem cells... A single embryo, which would be flushed down the sink otherwise, could save thousands of people's lives... When weighed that way, which creates more life? An embryo that is already doomed to never be implanted, or thousands of people who have the potential to live?

Wow!!!

I am for it 100%

I am for it...

I am for it.

It depends on how they are harvested. I've found that there is a great benefit in stem cells, but I don't know how I feel in some of the ways they are acquired.
that's how I feel as well.

I'd like to know how people think embryonic stem cells can be obtained...

Embryonic stem cells can not be obtained from abortions... By the time a person knows they're pregnant, there are no stem cells left. The embryo has to be implanted in the wall of the uterus before pregnancy tests come up positive, and by the time the embryo is implanted, after a minimum of 10 days, the cells have already started encoding themselves for what organs they are to become. By the time a woman misses her first period and has enough hormones in her system for a pregnancy test to detect, there are no more embryonic stems cells left, and the only thing that scientists can do is create adult stem cells. Since it is far easier to take a needle or scalpel to an adult than it is to abort a fetus, there is simply no market for stem cells from abortions. It costs too much, causes too much trauma to the mother, and has too many moral implications for scientists to even consider it.

All embryonic stem cells have to come from in-vitro fertilization... again, a costly process, and one that is only done to help infertile couples to become pregnant. Since the IVF itself is so costly, scientists scrounge around the "bargain bin" of embryos, namely those embryos that were created to help in fertility treatments, but which will not be used. Right now, the only thing that can be done with those embryos is to immerse them in a solution of bleach and discard them as bio-hazard waste. There are also moral implications with creating an embryo simply to destroy it, another line which scientists simply choose not to cross... yet I see no problem with taking an embryo that is destined for destruction already, and using it in research that would save thousands of people's lives.

The question for me comes down to... If I knew that I was going to die tomorrow, would I rather die quietly, or would I rather die doing something that would save people's lives?

So... embryonic stems cells from abortions: impossible. Since the embryonic stem cells have to be taken between the 3rd and 5th day of development, and it is impossible to find the embryo before the 10th day, an egg fertilized in-utero can never be harvested for embryonic stem cells. Adult stem cells can be harvested from abortions, but it is far easier to harvest adult stem cells from adults.

Embryonic stem cells from embryos created only for stem cell research? Too costly, and there are better methods morally.

Embryonic stem cells from embryos that were already created for other reasons, but are now destined to be destroyed? Most cost effective, morally sound, and is the only way that embryonic stem cells have ever been harvested.

Completely for it!

Embryonic stem cells from embryos created only for stem cell research? Too costly, and there are better methods morally.

Embryonic stem cells from embryos that were already created for other reasons, but are now destined to be destroyed? Most cost effective, morally sound, and is the only way that embryonic stem cells have ever been harvested.

That's my feeling on it. I don't particularly like the thought of taking cells from an embryo, but if it is going to be discarded anyway, it might as well help someone.

I am 110% thoroughly against creating embryos only for the purpose of extracting stem cells.

And again about the "It doesn't involve you" argument - many things do not involve us. Genocide doesn't involve me, but I will stand against it. Gang violence does not involve me, but I want it to end. Someone kicking a puppy does not involve me, but I would gladly slap them upside the head if I witnessed it. It's called being an advocate.

It depends on the way the stem cells are acquired.

I'm not clear on the process and difference in stages - but I know that stem cells can be aquired from a child's newly lost tooth-pulp if it's processed quickly enough.
There's no need to have a birth/umbilical donation.

fyi
:carryon

I'd like to know how people think embryonic stem cells can be obtained...

Embryonic stem cells can not be obtained from abortions... By the time a person knows they're pregnant, there are no stem cells left. The embryo has to be implanted in the wall of the uterus before pregnancy tests come up positive, and by the time the embryo is implanted, after a minimum of 10 days, the cells have already started encoding themselves for what organs they are to become. By the time a woman misses her first period and has enough hormones in her system for a pregnancy test to detect, there are no more embryonic stems cells left, and the only thing that scientists can do is create adult stem cells. Since it is far easier to take a needle or scalpel to an adult than it is to abort a fetus, there is simply no market for stem cells from abortions. It costs too much, causes too much trauma to the mother, and has too many moral implications for scientists to even consider it.

All embryonic stem cells have to come from in-vitro fertilization... again, a costly process, and one that is only done to help infertile couples to become pregnant. Since the IVF itself is so costly, scientists scrounge around the "bargain bin" of embryos, namely those embryos that were created to help in fertility treatments, but which will not be used. Right now, the only thing that can be done with those embryos is to immerse them in a solution of bleach and discard them as bio-hazard waste. There are also moral implications with creating an embryo simply to destroy it, another line which scientists simply choose not to cross... yet I see no problem with taking an embryo that is destined for destruction already, and using it in research that would save thousands of people's lives.

The question for me comes down to... If I knew that I was going to die tomorrow, would I rather die quietly, or would I rather die doing something that would save people's lives?

So... embryonic stems cells from abortions: impossible. Since the embryonic stem cells have to be taken between the 3rd and 5th day of development, and it is impossible to find the embryo before the 10th day, an egg fertilized in-utero can never be harvested for embryonic stem cells. Adult stem cells can be harvested from abortions, but it is far easier to harvest adult stem cells from adults.

Embryonic stem cells from embryos created only for stem cell research? Too costly, and there are better methods morally.

Embryonic stem cells from embryos that were already created for other reasons, but are now destined to be destroyed? Most cost effective, morally sound, and is the only way that embryonic stem cells have ever been harvested.

I love when you post

I'm not clear on the process and difference in stages - but I know that stem cells can be aquired from a child's newly lost tooth-pulp if it's processed quickly enough.
There's no need to have a birth/umbilical donation.

fyi
:carryon

Yes, they can.... but those are 'adult' stem cells (the cell's age is adult); they are the precursor cells of a specific cell line (skin, bone, dental pulp, whatever). Embryonic stem cells haven't yet split into specific lines; an embryonic stem cell can grow up to be a skin cell or a liver cell or a toenail cell or anything it is encouraged to be.

Just found this thread but I have to say that I am 100% for it! I totally agree with Ghedi and everyone else that supports embryonic stem cell research. My brother became quadriplegic after a soccer injury at the age of 7. He is now 18. I would give anything to see my brother walk again. Why try and "save" these embryos that are only going to be thrown away in the trash, when you can use them to save a living human being and give them their life back?!

I am for it. The embryos will be "discarded" anyway. My mom has MS. I would love for them to find a cure, and stem cells can help that.

I am so completely and totally PRO stem cell research. Regardless of the method for acquiring the cells.

I do not like the idea of someone else's religion stopping life saving science. If these cells can help us in the curing of diseases and in learning more about them, then I say go for it.

I hate arguments of religion on this issue because if I was ill with a disease for which stem cell research would help me, someone else's religious beliefs would mean nothing to me compared to my quality of life.

To use religious reasons to prevent the possible extended life and higher life quality for other people is sad, imo.

I am, however, anti-cloning, that shit freaks me out :P




I'm 110% for it

For it. 100%.

yeah, well I am 115% for it :P

definately against it!!!! Mainly because of religion.

If that makes me "sad" then so be it I believe in something. That something doesn't support creating life for the sole purpose of destroying it.

Millions of lives have been destroyed and we don't have much to show for it, how can we justify this?

Its more then just a religious thing to me . Believe it or not there are those out there that arent religious that believe that life starts at conception . Yes it is against my faith but even besides that its against what I know to be true to me .

I have some maladys that could be helped and have those in my life that I have seen suffer , that does not mean that I would see life used in proxy just as I would not "expect" someone to die to save me or someone I loved . If they did this on their own voilition that would be a precious gift ....but in my opinion it is a slippery slope . Where do you draw the line in advancing medicine ? If your willing to sacrifice a "blob of jelly " What about someone that is brain dead ....then someone that is in a diminished capacity and cant make the decision for themselves ....slippery slope . Who has the right to make these calls ? When is my child more important in life standing then another life ?

When I have more money ? When my child has a better future ? Because my child sufferes more?

yeah, well I am 115% for it :P

:lol

I just wish people would actually research this stuff before forming an opinion. :dunno

Okay here is the thing. I have a sick kid. I agree with stem cell research. How come no one cares about ACTUAL children, they only care about "embryonic" ones? LOL. Stupid. If you care about children then you should care that there are real children suffering every day and we could end it. Putting your moral concern on a blob of cells instead of on a real life ACTUAL living, breathing, suffering child is ridiculous, IMO.

BTW, a blob of cells in a petri dish is not even considered an embryo. Its called a blastocyst and it contains the same amount of cells that are in the brain of a fly. Are you concerned that flies lives should be spared?

I believe if we are going to ban stem cell research we should also ban in-vitro fertilization. Why do potential parents get to recklessly destroy the lives of blastocysts just to get pregnant? Pretty irresponsible when you consider 99% of the "potential lives" they create will be killed in the process. I guess if God makes you infertile you shouldn't reproduce.... right? Just like if God makes you sick you should just roll over and die, even if you are a child.

Okay here is the thing. I have a sick kid. I agree with stem cell research. How come no one cares about ACTUAL children, they only care about "embryonic" ones? LOL. Stupid. If you care about children then you should care that there are real children suffering every day and we could end it. Putting your moral concern on a blob of cells instead of on a real life ACTUAL living, breathing, suffering child is ridiculous, IMO.

BTW, a blob of cells in a petri dish is not even considered an embryo. Its called a blastocyst and it contains the same amount of cells that are in the brain of a fly. Are you concerned that flies lives should be spared?

I believe if we are going to ban stem cell research we should also ban in-vitro fertilization. Why do potential parents get to recklessly destroy the lives of blastocysts just to get pregnant? Pretty irresponsible when you consider 99% of the "potential lives" they create will be killed in the process. I guess if God makes you infertile you shouldn't reproduce.... right? Just like if God makes you sick you should just roll over and die, even if you are a child.



Who said anything about God making you sick and that one life is over another? No one said anything about banning stem cell research . There was a post earlier that what was needed could be obtained in another way . I said I was all for it if it didnt compromise what I consider a life . Your patronization of what was said and your back door insults are why I dont usually post here . Thank you for reminding me . I am glad to know how stupid and moronic I am .

I support it. I think it holds lots of answers.

Who said anything about God making you sick and that one life is over another? No one said anything about banning stem cell research . There was a post earlier that what was needed could be obtained in another way . I said I was all for it if it didnt compromise what I consider a life . Your patronization of what was said and your back door insults are why I dont usually post here . Thank you for reminding me . I am glad to know how stupid and moronic I am .


Sorry if I offended you. I apologize that I made you feel stupid or came off like I was trying to do so. I didn't mean to.

Stem cell research IS banned. I was simply pointing out that people use the same technology to get pregnant. Why is it ok to use this technology if you are trying to get pregnant, but not if you are using it to save the life of a child you already have? It just makes no sense to me. It seems immoral, in my view, to say a blob of cells has more of a right to life than my child, or anyone else's living child. I think we should put the rights of Actual life above the right of any type of potential life. Sorry if that makes me a godless heathen. I just see no need to waste my moral concern on stem cells when there is actual suffering of real life human beings happening in the world.

If I could I would GLADLY donate every egg I have to stem cell research if it meant a possible cure for my living daughter. In. a. heartbeat. None of my "potential children" will ever be more important than my real child.

Maybe its easier to have such high morals for those who have perfectly healthy children.

I'm for it. There's a lot to be learned from stem cell research. And I believe that life begins when a fetus has a heartbeat so there's no reason I'd be against it.

I'm 200% for it. Several cancers and diseases run in my family, so I'm all for finding better treatments and hopefully cures one of these days. I admire Michael J. Fox for doing so much work, fundraising, speeches, etc. for stem cell research.

I'm 200% for it.

I'm 3.1415926539 * 10 ^ 327 % for it. (That's a really big number, by the way)

Well, since we're saying that we're more than 100% for it, I thought I'd put how much I'm for it... ;)

I'm 3.1415926539 * 10 ^ 327 % for it. (That's a really big number, by the way)

Well, since we're saying that we're more than 100% for it, I thought I'd put how much I'm for it... ;)

I'm Avogadro's number % for it!

:P

I'm Avogadro's number % for it!

:P

:giggle Eelo, you're so cute! :)

I'm Avogadro's number % for it!

:P

ROFLMAO

stupid math jokes.

stupid math jokes.

Yeah, because math has no room in any discussion about scientific advances, right?

stupid math jokes.

Listen, once it gets past pi, all I know is "Avogadro's number," but I don't remember what it is, what it stands for........ that and the Fibonacci Sequence- I know what it's called, but I have no idea what it means, and I truly do NOT understand why someone would spend their whole life coming up with something like that.

I'd be so screwed on Jeopardy if the category was Numbers with Names. I could get the first three answers (see above) but beyond that, I can't buzz in.

Listen, once it gets past pi, all I know is "Avogadro's number," but I don't remember what it is, what it stands for........ that and the Fibonacci Sequence- I know what it's called, but I have no idea what it means, and I truly do NOT understand why someone would spend their whole life coming up with something like that.

I'd be so screwed on Jeopardy if the category was Numbers with Names. I could get the first three answers (see above) but beyond that, I can't buzz in.

e is another constant... from e=mc^2. e = energy.

Oh yeah, and c... for the speed of light.

Yeah, because math has no room in any discussion about scientific advances, right?

Uh not the ones that I dont get ADAM! :P

Listen, once it gets past pi, all I know is "Avogadro's number," but I don't remember what it is, what it stands for........ that and the Fibonacci Sequence- I know what it's called, but I have no idea what it means, and I truly do NOT understand why someone would spend their whole life coming up with something like that.

I'd be so screwed on Jeopardy if the category was Numbers with Names. I could get the first three answers (see above) but beyond that, I can't buzz in.

e is another constant... from e=mc^2. e = energy.

Oh yeah, and c... for the speed of light.

Ow. My brain.

e is another constant... from e=mc^2. e = energy.

Oh yeah, and c... for the speed of light.

No, those don't count. Those are not numbers, so it's not math. Those are letters, so it's language- a foreign language.

:grin:

I'm Avogadro's number % for it!

:P

I hate to admit this, but...




HUH??? o.O I'm a moron, durrrr, whassat mean? :confuzzle

I hate to admit this, but...




HUH??? o.O I'm a moron, durrrr, whassat mean? :confuzzle

it's used in chemistry... its like some number (i forget what :lol) times 10^34?? maybe :lol

I got a D in chem haha

Avogadro's Constant: 6.0221415 * 10 ^ 23
The number of atoms in exactly 12 grams of Carbon 12.

Dude... you nerds..... NO MATH ALLOWED in my thread.

:teehee

Avogadro's Constant: 6.0221415 * 10 ^ 23
The number of atoms in exactly 12 grams of Carbon 12.

shows how much I know :lmao

Avogadro's Constant: 6.0221415 * 10 ^ 23
The number of atoms in exactly 12 grams of Carbon 12.

I am MARRIED to this. :giggle

I second Heidi.

Dude... you nerds..... NO MATH ALLOWED in my thread.

:teehee

:agree

It's not math, it's constants.

Math would be using Avogadro's constant and e=mc^2 to figure out how much energy there is in a grain of sand.

It's not math, it's constants.

Math would be using Avogadro's constant and e=mc^2 to figure out how much energy there is in a grain of sand.

fine. No sand in my threads.

Sand is bad in a lot of places...

Just add "times infinity" to any math formula to make it bigger. That took care of it on the playground, it should fit the bill here, too. :giggle

Sorry if I offended you. I apologize that I made you feel stupid or came off like I was trying to do so. I didn't mean to.

Stem cell research IS banned. I was simply pointing out that people use the same technology to get pregnant. Why is it ok to use this technology if you are trying to get pregnant, but not if you are using it to save the life of a child you already have? It just makes no sense to me. It seems immoral, in my view, to say a blob of cells has more of a right to life than my child, or anyone else's living child. I think we should put the rights of Actual life above the right of any type of potential life. Sorry if that makes me a godless heathen. I just see no need to waste my moral concern on stem cells when there is actual suffering of real life human beings happening in the world.

If I could I would GLADLY donate every egg I have to stem cell research if it meant a possible cure for my living daughter. In. a. heartbeat. None of my "potential children" will ever be more important than my real child.

Maybe its easier to have such high morals for those who have perfectly healthy children.

Who says my kids are perfectly healthy ? I have watched my daughter suffer from headaches that are caused from a cyst on her brain . I dont think brain stem research is the answerfor her but I understand seeing a child you love in pain and having to stand by and not be able to take it away . Where modern medicine doesnt have one thing to relieve her suffering except surgery which they have elected not to do .

She is one of my heros , she still goes to college , holds down a job though she is in so much pain ...believe me I am not trying to be self rightous either but I have a line ...everyone does . My line might be further down the feild then yours but it makes it no less important or a part of me then yours.

Who says my kids are perfectly healthy ? I have watched my daughter suffer from headaches that are caused from a cyst on her brain . I dont think brain stem research is the answerfor her but I understand seeing a child you love in pain and having to stand by and not be able to take it away . Where modern medicine doesnt have one thing to relieve her suffering except surgery which they have elected not to do .

She is one of my heros , she still goes to college , holds down a job though she is in so much pain ...believe me I am not trying to be self rightous either but I have a line ...everyone does . My line might be further down the feild then yours but it makes it no less important or a part of me then yours.

Um, this has nothng to do with "brain stem research." I don't even know what "brain stem research" is, do you? Whatever it is, from what little I kow about the brainstem, that's quite a bit different from Stem Cell Research, which is the topic of this thread.

Thanks for jumping so quickly on my misquote ~ grins dryly. I understand what the thread is about .

I was up late last night my brain is still a bit muddy and I was refering to the wrong thing . My daughter goes for another MRI actually in a few hours and so my terminolgy is gone . If you noticed I have had mulitple answers throughout this thread .

Stay ...on ....target ....I get it

Ok don't get me wrong I have absolutely no problem with people being against abortion for moral reasons, being against stem cells research for moral reasons, etc. But that shouldn't stop people from doing it just because you disagree with it.

I am against eating meat for moral reasons. I'm not trying to get the government make it illegal. Because I do realize that people have different forms of moral concern. However, I don't think that entitles anyone to force their beliefs on others by making sure NO ONE can benefit from stem cell research. It's absolutely wrong for the government to be forcing morality on people. Especially on medical scientists who know more about it than the people who are against it.

I'm for it!

Just cause I might not be against say .....torture to prisoners in prison should I be offended if someone else trys to stop it ? We all have our moral compasses as I said earlier I dont disparage yours , dont disparage mine . You is general term here ...

I dont see anyone against the research if it can be done like was pointed out before through umbilical cord blood and one lady had said menstral blood I believe ...been a long time so if I get that quote wrong forgive me .

I am opposed to creating life to destroy it to get the stem cells .

so are you opposed to invitro? Cause its the same thing. They get the blastocysts from invitro people who don't use them.

Just cause I might not be against say .....torture to prisoners in prison should I be offended if someone else trys to stop it ? We all have our moral compasses as I said earlier I dont disparage yours , dont disparage mine . You is general term here ...

I dont see anyone against the research if it can be done like was pointed out before through umbilical cord blood and one lady had said menstral blood I believe ...been a long time so if I get that quote wrong forgive me .

I am opposed to creating life to destroy it to get the stem cells .

Umbilical cord blood and menstrual blood are adult cells (adult, as in the age of the cell, not the age of the patient); they have already differentiated into their specific lines. Embryonic stem cells have not yet differentiated into specific cell lines so they can grow into any form, not just one specific one.

Compare it to a raw egg: that egg in the fridge is raw, and it can become scrambled, fried, poached, an omelette, it can be put into a cake, whatever.

But the boiled egg in the drawer next to it can never be anything but a bloied egg. Sure it can be put into egg salad, but it's still a boiled egg and it can't be made into any of those other forms.

Umbilical cord blood and menstrual blood are adult cells (adult, as in the age of the cell, not the age of the patient); they have already differentiated into their specific lines. Embryonic stem cells have not yet differentiated into specific cell lines so they can grow into any form, not just one specific one.

Compare it to a raw egg: that egg in the fridge is raw, and it can become scrambled, fried, poached, an omelette, it can be put into a cake, whatever.

But the boiled egg in the drawer next to it can never be anything but a bloied egg. Sure it can be put into egg salad, but it's still a boiled egg and it can't be made into any of those other forms.

I think that's the best explaination I've ever heard

Umbilical cord blood and menstrual blood are adult cells (adult, as in the age of the cell, not the age of the patient); they have already differentiated into their specific lines. Embryonic stem cells have not yet differentiated into specific cell lines so they can grow into any form, not just one specific one.

Compare it to a raw egg: that egg in the fridge is raw, and it can become scrambled, fried, poached, an omelette, it can be put into a cake, whatever.

But the boiled egg in the drawer next to it can never be anything but a bloied egg. Sure it can be put into egg salad, but it's still a boiled egg and it can't be made into any of those other forms.

Wow...really good explanation. I think that's something really easy for the masses to understand. :D