AdvanceUSAAmericans Defending Values and National Conservative Efforts
Home PageAbout UsLinksMediaActionSurveyDonateBlogContact Us









 Thursday, July 24, 2008
posted on Thursday, July 24, 2008 7:52:28 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
 Monday, July 21, 2008
Pharmaceutical giant Pfizer is putting millions of dollars into adult stem cell research in the hopes of finding effective treatments for eye diseases.  It’s interesting that people who actually want to make money off of cures and treatments are betting their investing their money in ethical adult stem cell sources rather than unethical embryonic sources.

Meanwhile, two doctors in Louisiana “have successfully used adult stem-cell therapy to help patients fight heart disease.”  Citizenlink reports.  Also, Harvard Medical School researchers have found that human adult and umbilical cord stem cells have been used to successfully create blood vessels in mice.  This raises hopes that adult stem cells will be useful in repairing damaged circulatory tissue.

Check out the adult stem cell page or the adult stem cell blog category for more news on ethical breakthroughs and treatments.

posted on Monday, July 21, 2008 6:51:21 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
 Saturday, July 19, 2008
The Pew Forum has released a helpful resource on the stem cell debate.  According to Pew, the percentage of Americans who support unethical embryonic stem cell research is shrinking.  If more people knew the facts about stem cells, this percentage would likely shrink even more.

posted on Saturday, July 19, 2008 8:47:19 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
 Thursday, July 17, 2008
Our friend Dr. David Prentice and a team of experts, have authored a report on the amazing adult stem cell success stories that have happened during 2008.  Unethical embryonic research has yet to produce one successful cure or treatment.  Take a look at these amazing results.

posted on Thursday, July 17, 2008 6:42:51 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
 Tuesday, July 15, 2008
posted on Tuesday, July 15, 2008 9:03:29 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
 Wednesday, July 09, 2008
LifeNews reports.  This study helps dispel the myth that “leftover” IVF embryos have no use but to be killed for unethical research and experimentation. 

Also, see AdvanceUSA’s interview with Ron Stoddart who runs a Christian adoption agency specializing in embryo adoption.

posted on Wednesday, July 09, 2008 8:21:05 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
posted on Wednesday, July 09, 2008 8:18:06 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
 Tuesday, July 08, 2008
posted on Tuesday, July 08, 2008 7:19:40 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
Daniel Herbster reporting

In the stem cell debate, you will often here proponents of unethical embryonic stem cell research say that we have hundreds of thousands of “leftover embryos” from IVF clinics and that the “only” thing to be done with them is to kill them for use in research.  Besides the fact that the numbers of available embryos is greatly exaggerated (when you consider that most parents of frozen embryos want to keep them), the fact that human embryos can be and have been adopted by couples unable to have children on their own shows that death in the lab is not the only option for IVF embryos.

One organization seeking to publicize this exciting adoption option is Nightlight Christian Adoptions.  I recently came across their website (http://www.embryoadoption.org/) and I am happy to share with you my interview with Ron Stoddart, the Executive Director of NCA.

Note: The above photo is President Bush, soon after vetoing an unethical embryonic stem cell research funding bill, holding a child who was adopted as an embryo.

DH:  Ron, why should we care about what happens to “leftover” IVF embryos? 

RS: It is a scientific fact that life begins at conception.  The argument is over when life is deserving of protection.  There are certainly those who would rather argue that embryos are not life – or are not persons – rather than admit that they just don’t want to afford them the same protection as life that is further developed.  They have a fear that if we accord too much respect to embryos then it will be an opening to have Roe v. Wade overturned.  I believe that all human life is sacred and deserving of protection.  The fact that the embryos have been frozen does not change their nature and they deserve a chance at continued life.

DH:  About how many unused embryos are there in this country, and how many of those are even available for research purposes?

RS:   The best estimates are that there are about 500,000 embryos currently frozen in fertility clinics around the United States.  The decision about the fate of the embryos rests with the family who created them (except in Louisiana where they are protected from destruction).   Different surveys have attempted to estimate how many families would donate their embryos for research, so the estimate varies from 15,000 embryos and up.  The reality is that the vast majority of families with stored embryos do not know what to do and are struggling with their decision.  We are trying to encourage them to have the embryos implanted, if not in the family who created them then in an adoptive family. 

DH:  Should we respect the rights of human embryos the same way we do for adult human beings?  What is the state of the law regarding the treatment of embryos?

RS: A person’s a person regardless how small.  There is a lot of wisdom in these words from the WHO.  My answer to the question is “yes.”  The state of the law, except for Louisiana, is that embryos are treated with slightly more respect than property.  Most of the conflicts have arisen when a couple is divorcing.  In those cases, the courts have consistently sided with the spouse who wants to destroy the embryos rather then allowing the other spouse to implant them or donating them to another couple.  Not much respect there.

DH:  What is the mission of Nightlight Christian Adoptions?  How long have you been in operation, and how did it get started?

posted on Tuesday, July 08, 2008 7:15:52 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
 Monday, July 07, 2008
posted on Tuesday, July 08, 2008 1:25:58 AM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
posted on Tuesday, July 08, 2008 1:22:41 AM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
 Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Daniel Herbster reporting

Have you ever been frustrated by the way the news media often fails to make the distinction between adult and embryonic stem cells when talking about research funding or medical results?  The Repair Stem Cell Institute is trying to do something about it, and I had the opportunity to interview the Chairman and Founder of this organization, Don Margolis.

DH: Don, what are the differences between adult and embryonic stem cells? 

DM: The difference is easily described when you don't use the common names but instead use their reason for existing, which is easier to understand.  Adult stem cells are more aptly REPAIR stem cells (RSC); they know how to do just one function: REPAIR a sick part of the body.  Embryonic stems cells are PROLIFERATING stem cells (PSC).  They know how to proliferate through some stages and become a zygote, then proliferate through more stages and become a fetus, then proliferate again until it is a baby. REPAIR stem cells repair. They repair so much and so well that 100-plus diseases are being effectively treated with RSC around the world.  Meantime, PSC constantly frustrate embryonic researchers by refusing to behave as repair cells because, well, they are NOT. Even when well-trained to repair a disease, PSC may do it but then off they go, wherever they wish, fighting the attempt to stop them from proliferating and sometimes they can completely rebel and become tumors. Now you can see why the treated disease score, after 10 years, is RSC, over 100; PSC, zero.

DH: Why is it so hard for the media to mention the fact that there is more than one type of stem cell (not all of which have ethical concerns)?  Do you think there is often an intentional effort to blur the distinction?

DM: The American news media is more inclined to cover embryonic stem cell news and trends. I'm hoping that the reason for this slanted news coverage is because most writers, reporters and editors are uninformed about repair stem cell science and how relevant this science is right now in treating those 100-plus diseases, about half of them considered incurable by modern medicine. This is, of course, is one of the main reasons why The Repair Stem Cell Institute LLC (RSCI) was created a few months ago. My goal and the goal of my world-class Science Advisory Board is to educate and inform the American public and news media community about repair stem cell science and its treatment centers located around the world.  No company or institution in the world can match the RSCI Science Advisory Board in stem cell skills and knowledge – no one comes close! Then again, not many in the world (outside of bloggers) are fighting the science battle for RSC.

DH:  What is the The Repair Stem Cell Institute and what is its mission?

posted on Tuesday, June 24, 2008 3:13:00 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
 Monday, June 23, 2008
posted on Tuesday, June 24, 2008 12:33:41 AM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
 Friday, June 20, 2008
Some experts looking to get a return on their money are betting on ethically obtained induced pluripotent stem cells rather than unethical embryonic stem cell research, according to this piece at LifeNews.

posted on Saturday, June 21, 2008 2:22:39 AM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
 Tuesday, June 17, 2008
posted on Tuesday, June 17, 2008 2:10:43 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
 Thursday, June 12, 2008
Fox News reports on this exciting story of a boy regaining his sight thanks to ethically obtained adult stem cells.  Unfortunately, Fox neglected to mention that these stem cells were not embryonic.

posted on Thursday, June 12, 2008 6:14:31 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
 Tuesday, June 10, 2008
posted on Tuesday, June 10, 2008 9:00:38 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
According to new scientific research it appears that Parkinson’s disease, one of the maladies often cited by proponents of unethical embryonic stem cell research as sure to be cured if only we spend tax dollars to destroy innocent human embryos, might soon be treated with adult nasal stem cells instead.  Physorg.com reports.  Excerpt:

Research released today provides evidence that a cure for Parkinson's disease could lie just inside the nose of patients themselves.

 

The Griffith University study published today in the journal Stem Cells found that adult stem cells harvested from the noses of Parkinson's patients gave rise to dopamine-producing brain cells when transplanted into the brain of a rat.

News-Medical.net also reports.

And according to CitizenLink, a man’s back pain was successfully treated in the nation’s first spinal disc surgery using adult stem cells.  Excerpt:

"Stem cells have shown great promise over the past three years for treating back pain," Dr. Jeffrey Kleiner said. "In combination with the dis[c]ectomy, we hope to offer patients long-term relief from their back pain and to decrease their risk of needing additional surgeries."

 

Adult stem cells have been injected into patients' backs and joints to promote tissue growth, but this is the first time stem cells have been injected during a spinal surgery, doctors said.

 

The bone-marrow cells used in the procedure were harvested from the middle-aged man then brought to the laboratory, where millions more were grown over three weeks using the patient's blood. Tens of millions of the cells were then injected into the man's back during a discectomy, a surgery to remove a herniated or bulging disk.

For more exciting news on real results from ethical adult stem cell research check out the AdvanceUSA adult stem cell page.

posted on Tuesday, June 10, 2008 7:47:02 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
 Thursday, June 05, 2008
posted on Thursday, June 05, 2008 5:36:52 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
CitizenLink reports.  Excerpt:

 
Researchers and doctors have used adult stem cells to successfully treat 2-year-old Nate Liao, who had a rare, fatal skin disease called recessive dystrophic epidermolysis.

 

In October, Nate received a cord-blood and bone-marrow stem-cell transplant from his brother, Julian. Their mom said Nate's skin is already stronger. Nate, who was never able to eat normal food, is now eating pork chops and chips.

posted on Thursday, June 05, 2008 5:30:25 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
 Tuesday, June 03, 2008
 Thursday, May 29, 2008
posted on Thursday, May 29, 2008 8:41:46 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
 Wednesday, May 28, 2008
This post by newsUSA is a helpful reminder of the difference between ethical adult stem cell research (which are already producing amazing results) and unethical embryonic stem cell research.

posted on Wednesday, May 28, 2008 6:06:38 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
 Wednesday, May 21, 2008
posted on Wednesday, May 21, 2008 6:22:56 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
 Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Daniel Herbster reporting

Dr. David Prentice is one of the foremost experts on bioethics in the country.  He has valuable science experience from his days as researcher and teacher, and he now works for groups like the Family Research Council and Do No Harm speaking out on some of the most important (though sometimes confusing) ethical issues facing our society today.  I’ve had the opportunity to meet Dr. Prentice a number of times and have heard him speak often so it is a distinct pleasure to interview him today and share with you his scientific expertise.

DH: First off, tell our readers a little about yourself.  What did you do before you came to FRC?  What are your responsibilities at FRC and Do No Harm?

DP: Before FRC, I spent almost 20 years as Professor of Life Sciences at Indiana State University, at the same time as Adjunct Professor of Medical & Molecular Genetics for Indiana University School of Medicine.

During those years I taught and did lab research, and also spent a few years in administration.

My job description now is somewhat similar: I lecture, give briefings, and testify about science, especially the scientific facts regarding stem cells, cloning, and other biotechnologies.

DH: You often hear people say that we should “leave science to the scientists,” that we who have ethical concerns with particular research techniques have no right to an opinion if we are not scientists ourselves.  Is this true?  Do we as a society have a stake in deciding what research should or should not be allowed?  Why is this notion so dangerous?

DP: Some scientists might like that, but the fact is that society sets the agenda, both in terms of what's allowed as well as what resources are provided to science.  Everyone has a stake in this discussion, because everyone is affected.  Leaving these decisions just to one group means we abdicate our responsibility to help form a strong society.

DH: Dr. Prentice, what are stem cells?

DP: A stem cell has 2 main characteristics: (1) It continues to grow and divide, making copies of itself, and (2) given the correct signal, a stem cell can form many different specialized cells of the body.

DH: What are the two general types of stem cells, and are there any ethical differences between them?

posted on Tuesday, May 20, 2008 8:12:35 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
Unfortunately our pro-life compatriots in Great Britain were unsuccessful in passing a ban on the creation of human-animal hybrid embryos for unethical stem cell research in Parliament (for more details check this BBC report).  However, it looks as though a move to lower the abortion limit from 24 weeks to 22 or 20 weeks might prove successful.  It in encouraging to know that pro-lifers are fighting the good fight elsewhere in the world, but the fact that Britain will likely allow the creation of hybrid cloning is a sobering warning that such research could be coming to American shores in the near future (unless legislation like H.R. 5910 and S. 2358 is passed).

The fact that Great Britain even has a gestation limit on abortion illustrates the surprising fact that the United States is among the nations with the most unrestrictive abortion laws in the world.  Many Americans are unaware that the Supreme Court decisions of Roe vs. Wade and Doe vs. Bolton basically mandate that abortion for whatever reason is permissible at almost any stage of prenatal development.

See also: pro-life page, stem cell page

Photo source: roots-travel.co.uk

posted on Tuesday, May 20, 2008 3:28:11 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
 Monday, May 19, 2008
posted on Monday, May 19, 2008 8:22:34 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
LifeNews reports.  Excerpts:

 
Wesley Smith, an attorney and bioethics watchdog, responded to the news.

 

"Geron Corporation has released a series of press releases over several years stating that 'next year' it would start the first human trials using ES cells. Apparently, that won't be happening yet," he said.

 

"Tumors are an important worry, as is efficacy. Meanwhile, those adult stem cell advances keep rolling in," he added.

 
[Senator] Brownback said human trials involving embryonic stem cell research are unnecessary given the enormous success scientists have had with adult stem cells.

 

“What makes this even more troubling is that there is a viable ethical alternative with adult stem cells," he said.

 

"They are currently being used in the treatment of well over 70 different diseases and conditions, including spinal cord injury, type-I diabetes, heart failure, and Parkinson’s disease as validated by peer-reviewed, published results."

posted on Monday, May 19, 2008 8:21:20 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
posted on Monday, May 19, 2008 8:18:21 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
 Thursday, May 15, 2008
posted on Thursday, May 15, 2008 8:29:28 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
posted on Thursday, May 15, 2008 8:28:26 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
 Monday, May 12, 2008
Proponents of unethical embryonic stem cell research often argue that unused embryos that were created through in vitro fertilization should be destroyed for research purposes because they will only be discarded anyway.  The fact that embryos are being adopted (many known as “snowflake” children) by parents unable to have children of their own shows that this argument is incorrect.

CitizenLink recently interviewed the first snowflake family.  Click here to read this informative and heart-warming interview.

posted on Monday, May 12, 2008 7:08:05 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
posted on Monday, May 12, 2008 7:03:21 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)  #   
 Friday, May 09, 2008