Human Cloners Whining About Wanting to Buy Eggs Again
"The scientists" are whining--are these people never satisfied?--again! This time it is about their inability to buy human eggs, a "problem" they complain is impeding human cloning.
A story in the San Diego Union Tribune, carries the scientists' complaint. (Kudos to the reporter, Terri Somers, for writing a generally accurate and complete report about the science and risks to women involved in egg extraction, rather than just swallowing whole the PR pitched to her as many of her press colleagues on the biotech beat so often do.) From the story:
State laws that are aimed at putting California at the global forefront of stem cell science are stymieing a promising avenue of research by creating a shortage of human eggs.An Oregon scientist also gets in on the whining:
The state's $3 billion taxpayer initiative to fund stem cell research prohibits paying women to be egg donors. But to work on therapeutic cloning, an area of research that might make patient-specific therapies possible, scientists need human eggs. "This is what I call the great stem cell debacle, and it's ridiculous," said Dr. Samuel Wood, who founded Stemagen, a San Diego biotechnology company that is trying to create human embryonic stem cells through therapeutic cloning. "The people of California passed Proposition 71 to fund billions of dollars worth of stem cell research including (therapeutic cloning) and then the legislators and leaders of the stem cell institute put guidelines in place that greatly hamper, or virtually eliminate, the possibility of this being successful."
It's clear that without having access to resources, in this case human oocytes [eggs], we cannot move forward," said Shoukrat Mitalipov, a University of Oregon scientist considered a leader in therapeutic cloning. Mitalipov led the only team known to have successfully conducted therapeutic cloning using monkey cells. He is a member of a San Diego-based team whose grant application proposing to translate his work into human cells was rejected(Query: If an Oregon scientist receives CIRM money, does that not violate Proposition 71's requirement that the funded work be exclusively from California concerns? Might be worth a lawsuit if it does.)
But I digress: What's ridiculous is scientists expecting women to line up and risk their health, fecundity, and even their lives in order for "the scientists" to potentially gain world fame and huge dollars from their biotech companies from human cloning.
The story claims that there are no statistics on the side effects. But that isn't true. About 5% of women who go through the egg extraction process--which is accurately depicted in the piece--suffer side effects that have included in the last few years, death, loss of fertility, paralysis, infection, blood clots, and other serious problems. Hands Off Our Ovaries, an alliance between pro life and pro choice feminists to prevent scientists from being able to buy eggs has many details.
The story also claims that the going rate for egg extraction will be about $3000. That's not much for such a risk, and given the thousands and thousands of eggs that would be needed to perfect human SCNT--if it can be done at all--expect the law of supply and demand to kick in and the price to shoot up if the market ever materialized.
But generally in these matters "the scientists" get what they want. Egg selling is apparently going to be reconsidered by the CIRM:
No they didn't "overcome" the egg shortage with these pittances. Indeed, the lack of human egg availability in the UK is precisely why the government authorized scientists there to use cow eggs now in human SCNT, raising the prospect of human/cow hybrids.The state stem cell institute remains committed to therapeutic cloning, said chief scientist Marie Csete. The institute's standards committee will meet in February to discuss egg payments, Csete said.
Wood plans to attend. He wants to talk about using excess eggs obtained for fertilization. Another option, Wood said, would be to use grants to reimburse fertility doctors who would reduce their rates to women donating eggs for research. In the United Kingdom, regulators overcame the egg shortage by allowing women to receive in vitro fertilization for half the normal price if they agreed to give half of their eggs to research.
Perhaps instead of whining about not being able to get their hands on enough eggs to do cloning research, these scientists should switch their emphases to more ethical and safer alternatives.
Labels: Human Cloning. Egg Dearth. Egg Buying. Proposition 71


9 Comments:
(my understanding that the philosophy of human exceptionalism is the bedrock of universal human rights. Or, to put it another way: human life matters.)?
Your lack of understanding is not exceptional nor universal, you write to a general group of conformist, and believe everyone must veiw the world as this extreme group veiws it (you make all your income and profit from this group, so please conform or else you will become poor.)or they are a enemy. Taliban?
You are pathetic and serve no purpose but your extreme (christian) groups own special interests.
Your group would rather trash/kill frozen embryoos then allow these cells to live and to help a suffering human from a disease.
the cells can have greater purpose than your group combined.
I am absolutly certain the leaders of your group profits from the suffering, and you profit from them holding your general veiws as fact.
evolution will eventually rid the world of extremeists,
The best part is that such an unhinged, hysterical rant came from someone
named "Balance." I'm grinning as I type this.
"Your lack of understanding is not exceptional nor universal, you write to a
general group of conformist, and believe everyone must veiw the world as
this extreme group veiws it (you make all your income and profit from this
group, so please conform or else you will become poor.)or they are a enemy.
Taliban?"
Yup, Taliban. One group of people is against killing human beings for
research; the other one stones women to death for wearing short sleeves. You
liken one group to another. Like I said, you are completely unhinged.
"You are pathetic and serve no purpose but your extreme (christian) groups
own special interests."
Odd...I didn't know you had to be Christian to oppose killing human beings
for medical experiments, or to oppose putting women's health in jeopardy.
"Your group would rather trash/kill frozen embryoos [sic] then [sic] allow
these cells to live and to help a suffering human from a disease."
Actually, we don't want to see any embryonic human beings killed, whether
it's to toss them into the garbage or to destroy them for research. The
least you could do is to understand a viewpoint before you argue against it,
but that appears to be too much to ask you.
"evolution will eventually rid the world of extremeists. [sic]"
That's awfully bad news for you, isn't it, "Balance"?
bmmg39: I think Balance's reference to a "group" referred to the Discovery Institute.
Water off a duck's back.
I just think it's wrong to hurt anybody, from embryos (which are people, 100%) to old people.
Cells might live, but the embryo dies if those cells are extracted. I want to see them turn into babies, not be cut up. Especially since now skin cells can be altered into embryonic-like cells that are pluripotent.
By the by - Evolution is an engin. It runs in a very logical fashion, with many components working together to produce an end product. The components have to work together *perfectly* or they won't work at all. It's an irreducably complex engin, and all engins need engineers to make sure they work right. Suffice it to say, I doubt evolution will get rid of us. I think the Engineer liks us too much. LOL
But that's just me ;-)
Did your group only read the bible? , (bmmg39,wesly j smith, te.fine)can you not find other work?
The cells/genes used to reprogram these skin cells are from aborted fetuses. and the embryoos will be thrown away and do not have a modified virus or chemically indused to express a factor that could become uncontrolled.
your group will only see a enemy that must be destroyed when scientific facts prove that your religion is just a (violent story) book.
Who wrote this book anyway?
Did you ever ask yourself this simple question and think about the logic of your answer?
Why have so many people been murdered because thay did not believe in the top religions?
There is no logic in your veiws that you are right and they are wrong.
"Did your group only read the bible?"
Balance, maybe if I type this slowly it will penetrate your leaden skull.
I am an agnostic. I don't profess to know if anything happens to us when we die other than the breaking down of our molecules. I can hope, but I don't have inside information. However, even if we don't know if a higher power exists, we DO know that fertilization brings about a new human being's life, and we know this because it says so NOT in the Bible, but rather in SCIENCE textbooks.
ah, but the eggs will be bought from poor women in the third world...they will be desperate for money, but as the "buying kidney" studies show, they will have more complications, and little follow up care...indeed, to make a better profit, they will be given huge doses of Clomid etc. to produce a lot of eggs, and this can cause cysts and life threatening problems.
" we DO know that fertilization brings about a new human being's life, and we know this because it says so NOT in the Bible, but rather in SCIENCE textbooks."
bmmg39, I do know you have your facts mixed up. thousands of frozen oocytes, and embryoo`s are now stored in fertility clinics.
Please ask any educated women (not poor) if they believed it was her human right to donate or sell her oocytes (as men donate sperm)for
research to understand the development of a disease and maybe cure one that has devastated a family/human member, a majority would believe this to be a moral contribution/social obligation.
This blog seeks to undermine freedoms, and hinder scientific research and education.What is the agenda? Is it the collective ego of group who feel they are right?
What has the Discovery Institute done to help a poor ar suffering Patient?
My guess is nothing.
I have family members and friends that have all bee affected with diseases, and donate money and time to help the sick and believe that people with no experience, knowedge of facts, or history of helping the sick, or even compassion to try to understand should first volunteer and experience the suffering and give money to families that have been bankrupted by medical bills trying to help a child with a disease.
This blog has no moral balance, and the support you give is evidence that you are numb/dumb to facts and believe that human welfare must be compromised by your (religious)dogma.
bmmg39: " we DO know that fertilization brings about a new human being's life, and we know this because it says so NOT in the Bible, but rather in SCIENCE textbooks."
"balance" bmmg39, I do know you have your facts mixed up. thousands of frozen oocytes, and embryoo`s are now stored in fertility clinics."
Nice job writing a sentence that doesn't refute mine in the least.
"Please ask any educated women (not poor) if they believed it was her human right to donate or sell her oocytes..."
Why do you restrict the question to the non-poor? (And "educated" is not the opposite of "poor," by the way.) It is precisely poor women whom we are protecting the most with our "no money for ova" proviso. If wealthy women wish to risk their lives by donating their ova, they don't need financial compensation. If poor women think that risking their lives by donating their ova is a ticket out of poverty, then that's exactly why they need to be protected from extortion and great potential harm.
"I have family members and friends that have all bee affected with diseases."
As do we.
"This blog has no moral balance, and the support you give is evidence that you are numb/dumb to facts and believe that human welfare must be compromised by your (religious)dogma."
What part of the word "agnostic" did you not understand. Clearly, the only hope of the ESCR movement is to convince the public that their opponents are "forcing their religion" on others, even if said opponents are agnostics or atheists. Once people understand otherwise, the ESCR house of cards crashes to the table.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home