A "yes" vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to allow and set limitations on stem cell research, therapies, and cures which will:
* ensure Missouri patients have access to any therapies and cures, and allow Missouri researchers to conduct any research, permitted under federal law; [Under federal law, Missouri patients already are secured all therapies and cures legal under federal law. No law in Missouri attempts to deny this.]
* ban human cloning or attempted cloning; [actual text from amendment: "(1) No person may clone or attempt to clone a human being... (2) 'Clone or attempt to clone a human being' means to implant in a uterus or attempt to implant in a uterus anything other than the product of fertilization of an egg of a human female by a sperm of a human male for the purpose of initiating a pregnancy that could result in the creation of a human fetus, or the birth of a human being."]
* require expert medical and public oversight and annual reports on the nature and purpose of any stem cell research;
* impose criminal and civil penalties for any violations; and
* prohibit state or local governments from preventing or discouraging lawful research, therapies and cures. [actual text of the Amemdment, "no state or local governmental body or official shall eliminate, reduce, deny, or withhold any public funds provided or eligible to be provided to a person that (i) lawfully conducts stem cell research." The government is required to fund human cloning, and is never allowed to reduce funding!]
A "no" vote would not ensure that stem cell research permitted under federal law is allowed to be conducted in Missouri and that Missouri patients have access to stem cell therapies and cures permitted under federal law.
This measure will have no impact on taxes.
"Sarcasm: intellect on the offensive"
"What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."
A "yes" vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to allow and set limitations on stem cell research, therapies, and cures which will:
* ensure Missouri patients have access to any therapies and cures, and allow Missouri researchers to conduct any research, permitted under federal law; [Under federal law, Missouri patients already are secured all therapies and cures legal under federal law. No law in Missouri attempts to deny this.]
But are Missouri researchers explicitly permitted to conduct any research permitted under federal law?
* ban human cloning or attempted cloning; [actual text from amendment: "(1) No person may clone or attempt to clone a human being... (2) 'Clone or attempt to clone a human being' means to implant in a uterus or attempt to implant in a uterus anything other than the product of fertilization of an egg of a human female by a sperm of a human male for the purpose of initiating a pregnancy that could result in the creation of a human fetus, or the birth of a human being."]
Well, in order to clone a human being, you would in fact have to plant the cells in a human uterus, so it seems if that is prohibited there won't be any little clones running around Missouri.
* require expert medical and public oversight and annual reports on the nature and purpose of any stem cell research;
* impose criminal and civil penalties for any violations; and
* prohibit state or local governments from preventing or discouraging lawful research, therapies and cures. [actual text of the Amemdment, "no state or local governmental body or official shall eliminate, reduce, deny, or withhold any public funds provided or eligible to be provided to a person that (i) lawfully conducts stem cell research." The government is required to fund human cloning, and is never allowed to reduce funding!]
You selectively cut and pasted that provision in an attempt to alter the meaning. It reads "To ensure that no governmental body or official arbitrarily restricts funds designated for purposes other than stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures as a means of inhibiting lawful stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures, no state or local governmental body or official shall eliminate, reduce, deny, or withhold any public funds provided or eligible to be provided to a person that (i) lawfully conducts stem cell research or provides stem cell therapies and cures, allows for such research or therapies and cures to be conducted or provided on its premises, or is otherwise associated with such research or therapies and cures, but (ii) receives or is eligible to receive such public funds for purposes other than such stem cell-related activities, on account of, or otherwise for the purpose of creating disincentives for any person to engage in or otherwise associate with, or preventing, restricting, obstructing, or discouraging, such stem cell-related activities.
In other words, you can't take away funding for other programs based on the fact that the person who is administering those programs also conducts stem-cell research. The provision does not require funding for stem-cell research.
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
But are Missouri researchers explicitly permitted to conduct any research permitted under federal law?
Well, in order to clone a human being, you would in fact have to plant the cells in a human uterus, so it seems if that is prohibited there won't be any little clones running around Missouri.
You selectively cut and pasted that provision in an attempt to alter the meaning. It reads "To ensure that no governmental body or official arbitrarily restricts funds designated for purposes other than stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures as a means of inhibiting lawful stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures, no state or local governmental body or official shall eliminate, reduce, deny, or withhold any public funds provided or eligible to be provided to a person that (i) lawfully conducts stem cell research or provides stem cell therapies and cures, allows for such research or therapies and cures to be conducted or provided on its premises, or is otherwise associated with such research or therapies and cures, but (ii) receives or is eligible to receive such public funds for purposes other than such stem cell-related activities, on account of, or otherwise for the purpose of creating disincentives for any person to engage in or otherwise associate with, or preventing, restricting, obstructing, or discouraging, such stem cell-related activities.
In other words, you can't take away funding for other programs based on the fact that the person who is administering those programs also conducts stem-cell research. The provision does not require funding for stem-cell research.
lol ok I tell ya what. just go vote for it. then get back to me in 6 months. i'm just going to play democrat here and not worry about it since i'm not a missouri native.
you may have to read it 30 times... thats the point of the amendment. stem cell research is already on going in missouri. why name the amendment what it is? keep rereading...
"Sarcasm: intellect on the offensive"
"What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."
lol ok I tell ya what. just go vote for it. then get back to me in 6 months. i'm just going to play democrat here and not worry about it since i'm not a missouri native.
you may have to read it 30 times... thats the point of the amendment. stem cell research is already on going in missouri. why name the amendment what it is? keep rereading...
Haha ... I read shit like this all day long, I'm not going to read it all night too unless I'm getting overtime
I don't live in Missouri either, so it's no skin off my ass either way. And I sure as hell don't care what Missourians or anyone else do with their blatocysts. Just so we all know what we're talking about here, this is a blatocyst.
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
Haha ... I read shit like this all day long, I'm not going to read it all night too unless I'm getting overtime
I don't live in Missouri either, so it's no skin off my ass either way. And I sure as hell don't care what Missourians or anyone else do with their blatocysts. Just so we all know what we're talking about here, this is a blatocyst.
Yeah, one of those.
"Sarcasm: intellect on the offensive"
"What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."
Somebody look up the stats on what has yielded better advances: adult stem cells or embryonic stem cells? My gut tells me adult stem cells. My gut also tells me that the left won't tell us this.
There are advantages and disadvantages to each. It would make sense to explore both.
"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. Of course, adult and embryonic stem cells differ in the number and type of differentiated cells types they can become. Embryonic stem cells can become all cell types of the body because they are pluripotent. Adult stem cells are generally limited to differentiating into different cell types of their tissue of origin. However, some evidence suggests that adult stem cell plasticity may exist, increasing the number of cell types a given adult stem cell can become.
Large numbers of embryonic stem cells can be relatively easily grown in culture, while adult stem cells are rare in mature tissues and methods for expanding 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.
A potential advantage of using stem cells from an adult is that the patient's own cells could be expanded in culture and then reintroduced into the patient. The use of the patient's own adult stem cells would mean that the cells would not be rejected by the immune system. This represents a significant advantage as immune rejection is a difficult problem that can only be circumvented with immunosuppressive drugs.
Embryonic stem cells from a donor introduced into a patient could cause transplant rejection. However, whether the recipient would reject donor embryonic stem cells has not been determined in human experiments."
My dad has parkinsons. Michael J. Fox is not acting, that's actually how the later stages are. I am deeply offended but not surprised by such insensitive comments by rush limbaugh.
I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell.
-Christopher Walken
you're=you are
your=showing ownership
The truth has a well known liberal bias.
-Stephen Colbert
My dad has parkinsons. Michael J. Fox is not acting, that's actually how the later stages are. I am deeply offended but not surprised by such insensitive comments by rush limbaugh.
i haven't bothered to read any of the posts in this thread.
i just want to say that if m.j. fox was "acting" in the ads, good for him. he has the f-ing disease. if he feels the need to play it up to get the research needed to find a cure to fix him, so be it. but i don't think he was acting. i thought the reason he left his show (spin city) a few years back was b/c the disease had progressed to a point were he couldn't work all of the time.
i haven't bothered to read any of the posts in this thread.
i just want to say that if m.j. fox was "acting" in the ads, good for him. he has the f-ing disease. if he feels the need to play it up to get the research needed to find a cure to fix him, so be it. but i don't think he was acting. i thought the reason he left his show (spin city) a few years back was b/c the disease had progressed to a point were he couldn't work all of the time.
I still don't understand how it's acting if he's just not taking his meds. That's like saying someone dying from aids is acting cause they didn't take their meds.
I still don't understand how it's acting if he's just not taking his meds. That's like saying someone dying from aids is acting cause they didn't take their meds.
He IS taking his meds. His meds are what makes him shake. If he were off his meds, he would be completely immobile.
This whole thing about his being off his meds is something that Limbaugh made up, but it's framed the entire discussion. The power of the media . . .
"Things will just get better and better even though it
doesn't feel that way right now. That's the hopeful
idea . . . Hope didn't get much applause . . .
Hope! Hope is the underdog!"
I'm not totally up to date on this issue, but a while ago some republican addressed some folks (senate?) with some drawings on a board and one lame ass story about embryos and killing future babies, now that was stupid, dumb and lame.
I also think it looks like a campaign to make MJF look bad, which imho is very poor. Something I see more and more in the US media, not counter it with facts , just create a bad image of the messenger. The guy is sick and he makes in add in favour of this research, don't expect him to do his best to muffle away the physical disadvantages of it, or a miracle solution, but also don't dismiss the option it can help find cures.
I still don't understand how it's acting if he's just not taking his meds. That's like saying someone dying from aids is acting cause they didn't take their meds.
oh i don't think he is. but i've heard that some people think he's acting in this commercial.
Comments
A "yes" vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to allow and set limitations on stem cell research, therapies, and cures which will:
* ensure Missouri patients have access to any therapies and cures, and allow Missouri researchers to conduct any research, permitted under federal law; [Under federal law, Missouri patients already are secured all therapies and cures legal under federal law. No law in Missouri attempts to deny this.]
* ban human cloning or attempted cloning; [actual text from amendment: "(1) No person may clone or attempt to clone a human being... (2) 'Clone or attempt to clone a human being' means to implant in a uterus or attempt to implant in a uterus anything other than the product of fertilization of an egg of a human female by a sperm of a human male for the purpose of initiating a pregnancy that could result in the creation of a human fetus, or the birth of a human being."]
* require expert medical and public oversight and annual reports on the nature and purpose of any stem cell research;
* impose criminal and civil penalties for any violations; and
* prohibit state or local governments from preventing or discouraging lawful research, therapies and cures. [actual text of the Amemdment, "no state or local governmental body or official shall eliminate, reduce, deny, or withhold any public funds provided or eligible to be provided to a person that (i) lawfully conducts stem cell research." The government is required to fund human cloning, and is never allowed to reduce funding!]
A "no" vote would not ensure that stem cell research permitted under federal law is allowed to be conducted in Missouri and that Missouri patients have access to stem cell therapies and cures permitted under federal law.
This measure will have no impact on taxes.
"What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."
Camden 5-28-06
Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
Well, in order to clone a human being, you would in fact have to plant the cells in a human uterus, so it seems if that is prohibited there won't be any little clones running around Missouri.
You selectively cut and pasted that provision in an attempt to alter the meaning. It reads "To ensure that no governmental body or official arbitrarily restricts funds designated for purposes other than stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures as a means of inhibiting lawful stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures, no state or local governmental body or official shall eliminate, reduce, deny, or withhold any public funds provided or eligible to be provided to a person that (i) lawfully conducts stem cell research or provides stem cell therapies and cures, allows for such research or therapies and cures to be conducted or provided on its premises, or is otherwise associated with such research or therapies and cures, but (ii) receives or is eligible to receive such public funds for purposes other than such stem cell-related activities, on account of, or otherwise for the purpose of creating disincentives for any person to engage in or otherwise associate with, or preventing, restricting, obstructing, or discouraging, such stem cell-related activities.
In other words, you can't take away funding for other programs based on the fact that the person who is administering those programs also conducts stem-cell research. The provision does not require funding for stem-cell research.
lol ok I tell ya what. just go vote for it. then get back to me in 6 months. i'm just going to play democrat here and not worry about it since i'm not a missouri native.
you may have to read it 30 times... thats the point of the amendment. stem cell research is already on going in missouri. why name the amendment what it is? keep rereading...
"What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."
Camden 5-28-06
Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
I don't live in Missouri either, so it's no skin off my ass either way. And I sure as hell don't care what Missourians or anyone else do with their blatocysts. Just so we all know what we're talking about here, this is a blatocyst.
Yeah, one of those.
"What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."
Camden 5-28-06
Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
"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. Of course, adult and embryonic stem cells differ in the number and type of differentiated cells types they can become. Embryonic stem cells can become all cell types of the body because they are pluripotent. Adult stem cells are generally limited to differentiating into different cell types of their tissue of origin. However, some evidence suggests that adult stem cell plasticity may exist, increasing the number of cell types a given adult stem cell can become.
Large numbers of embryonic stem cells can be relatively easily grown in culture, while adult stem cells are rare in mature tissues and methods for expanding 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.
A potential advantage of using stem cells from an adult is that the patient's own cells could be expanded in culture and then reintroduced into the patient. The use of the patient's own adult stem cells would mean that the cells would not be rejected by the immune system. This represents a significant advantage as immune rejection is a difficult problem that can only be circumvented with immunosuppressive drugs.
Embryonic stem cells from a donor introduced into a patient could cause transplant rejection. However, whether the recipient would reject donor embryonic stem cells has not been determined in human experiments."
http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/basics5.asp
-Christopher Walken
you're=you are
your=showing ownership
The truth has a well known liberal bias.
-Stephen Colbert
i haven't bothered to read any of the posts in this thread.
i just want to say that if m.j. fox was "acting" in the ads, good for him. he has the f-ing disease. if he feels the need to play it up to get the research needed to find a cure to fix him, so be it. but i don't think he was acting. i thought the reason he left his show (spin city) a few years back was b/c the disease had progressed to a point were he couldn't work all of the time.
I still don't understand how it's acting if he's just not taking his meds. That's like saying someone dying from aids is acting cause they didn't take their meds.
This whole thing about his being off his meds is something that Limbaugh made up, but it's framed the entire discussion. The power of the media . . .
doesn't feel that way right now. That's the hopeful
idea . . . Hope didn't get much applause . . .
Hope! Hope is the underdog!"
-- EV, Live at the Showbox
Oh okay. My bad. Either way my point still stands. I read that earlier but it completey fell outta my head.
I also think it looks like a campaign to make MJF look bad, which imho is very poor. Something I see more and more in the US media, not counter it with facts , just create a bad image of the messenger. The guy is sick and he makes in add in favour of this research, don't expect him to do his best to muffle away the physical disadvantages of it, or a miracle solution, but also don't dismiss the option it can help find cures.
oh i don't think he is. but i've heard that some people think he's acting in this commercial.