Join 3,551 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Stem cells target cancer tumors
November 3, 2004 4:26 PM   Subscribe

Stem cells target cancer tumors. There has been some promising research with embryonic and adult stem cells in the fight against cancer. Meanwhile, California approved $3 billion for stem cell research, good news (debatably) since the 22 stem cell lines available for federally-funded research are contaminated with mouse cells and unusable for treatment in humans, but I wonder if California might end up in a federalism showdown with the new Senate over this. Maybe it will be less of an issue now that researchers have figured out how to derive stem cells from a morula, a four-day old embryo, without destroying it.
posted by homunculus (10 comments total)

 
Don't those tumors have rights?
posted by dong_resin at 4:37 PM on November 3, 2004


No, nobody cares about little tumors, just big fat cat tumors.

Does anyone have any news on the application of stem cell research to arthiritis, juvenile/rheumatoid arthiritis in particular?
posted by Mossy at 4:42 PM on November 3, 2004


I hope there is a showdown. Let's put the ignorance of the anti-science wingnuts on display for the world to witness.
This administration gets nothing, not shit, no quarter.
posted by 2sheets at 7:01 PM on November 3, 2004


California also passed a proposition to provide mental health care for children and adults. This comes thirty years after Reagan gutted the mental health system.
posted by euphorb at 7:20 PM on November 3, 2004


BabyKillers!

Keep your filth out of my JesusLand!

You all are going to hell for this!

(cough)
posted by nofundy at 5:07 AM on November 4, 2004


I think the California proposition should have included a little more, like assurances that if we fund stem cell research we should own a financial stake in the treatments that result.

And I would like to see the evangelicals make the commitment not to accept any form of medical treatment derived from stem cell research. In fact, such refusal should be on one's driver's license, like with organ donation.
posted by troybob at 6:28 AM on November 4, 2004


troybob: there was actually a case a few years ago where a Jehovah's witness was injured in a car accident. Since her religion forbade her from accepting blood transfusions, she was not given one in the hospital. She summarily died, and the driver in the accident was charged with manslaughter. I don't recall the outcome of the trail, but precedent already exists.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 7:17 AM on November 4, 2004


Prop 71: The New Gold Rush
posted by homunculus at 9:41 AM on November 4, 2004


Experts anticipate friction between state and federal science policies.
posted by homunculus at 11:51 PM on November 4, 2004


The Times on Prop 71

Can Science Stand Four More Years?
posted by homunculus at 10:27 AM on November 5, 2004


« Older 1 year performance video (aka samHsiehUpdate)...  |  Electing to Leave... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments