I just thought I'd ask. Supposedly, in South Korea a woman's spine was repaired with stem cells, and she was able to walk again after many years of paralysis. I'll try to find the link to this if I can.... but yeah, please post your reasoning as to why you voted the way you did.

I voted for. Why? well, there isn't any real reason to be against it. Most of what I have heard ranges from 'but it might be dangerous, you shouldn't meddle with it' to 'its against gods will' or something similar. To the second, I have no non-violent response I deem worthy. To the first, I think it is like all research involving medicine: it has to be done carefully and with extreme control, especially in the beginning. If we can research weapons that can level cities, we can research this.

No.3..

I dun have enuf knowledge to tell if this technology would be good or bad to mankind...but i forsee US intentions will be really WORST n CRUEL here too...... So i guess they wil be used to make biological Weapons ...

Well, I suppose if they tried then maybe they could, but there wouldn't be much of a point. Stem cells are precursor cells that do not yet have a set function. In your body, as you develop, they split off and form into all the different parts of your body, from brain matter to bone. Thats why they are usefull, if something is damaged badly, we can theoretically use stem cells to repair it by having the stem cells turn into the cells that were lost due to damage, and replace them, good as new. While I suppose you could attempt to turn this into a weapon, it seems the long way around. Making a biological/chemical weapon is hard, but we know how to do it. We realistically have as nasty a set as we will ever need already. While I suppose, with some work, you could make a weapon out of stem cell research, it seem inefficient, and no worse than the things we already have running around. So, in that way, even if they did make weapons, it would just replace an existing weapons, for a small net negative effect. On the other hand, stem cell technology holds out the possibility of repairing damage and diseases completely outside our current abilities. So, I think the net effect is most likely to be very positive.

Indeed. Then again, if you're going to kill someone, some would argue that these could be turned into weapons that would slowly kill the victim. I mean, how would you like it if your heart slowly turned into your liver? XD But yeah, if stem cells are allowed to be researched openly, we could find ways to counteract these weapons using the same types of stem cells.

I voted for, because the benefits vastly outweigh the damage these could do. Plus, the opposition to this really doesn't have much of an argument- Stem cells now come mostly from embryos that would have been discarded and destroyed anyways (from infertility clinics) or from donated umbilical cords. With the proper regulation, we could prevent stem cell research from turning into a race to see who could clone a human first. (Though some people claim this already has happened, it hasn't occured in the open yet.)

I voted for. Cause, there isn't any real reason to be against it.

yeah, they could maybe be turned into slow horrible weapons. But we already HAVE slow horrible weapons. What we Dont have are cures for the degenerative diseases and such that stem cells might cure.

With the possiblilty of saving thousands of lives? Easy choice there.

And the chances for finding a cure for AIDS or HIV without the help of stem cells is looking slimmer all the time- we're always finding treatments that will delay or slow the development of AIDS or HIV, but nothing that can cure it with just one treatment.

The same goes for cancer- by studying stem cells and how they reproduce, we could eventually find the reason why cancer causes cells to divide uncontrollably and thus pave the way for an eventual cancer cure.

Exactly. I mean, we're going to have to lose a few lives before we can save a lot of them. Right? Stem cell isn't flawless yet though.