Planned Parenthood sold whole, dead babies to StemExpress.
- Thread starter IMCC965
- Start date
You could harvest their organs. Isn't that a plot in a movie? They harvest the killer's organs and then he possesses the people who receive them.
The point of my comment is not about "is there enough tissue to use?" No one here has any issue with the tissue itself. What the point of contention is about, I think, is basically "Is this murder?"
I like throwing in the point that most pro-life people are almost always for the death penalty.
I was curious about this claim as Phantom has repeated it frequently. I wasnt sure why any researcher would continue to use if they werent the best option.
Phantom - can you source your claims?
Not sure if this is true or not but we know libs believe it's OK. As I recall BHO voted against the "born alive act" three times as a state senator in Illinois
"Some scientists are especially “interested in doing research with fetal liver because it’s a rich source of stem cells,” which can have important therapeutic applications, says Dr. David Prentice, research director for the Charlotte Lozier Institute, a pro-life group, and Indiana University stem-cell specialist. “At that point in your life while you’re in the womb, from about eight weeks after conception up to about 20 to 24 weeks, the fetal liver is very rich in stem cells. They’re the kinds of stem cells that you would find in bone marrow,” Prentice says. But, he says, the dubiously ethical practice isn’t nearly as important or useful as it used to be. “Frankly,” he says, “there is no advantage, nowadays, in fetal stem cells over adult cells. The science has matured.” Fetal stem cells can be used in fields ranging from Parkinson’s disease treatments to diabetes research, but Prentice says the focus on fetal stem cells is based on “an older idea that they will tend to grow more.”
“It’s a holdover from, frankly, the 1960s and 70s when people were just learning how to grow cells in the lab and it was easier at that stage to grow fetal tissue,” he says.
“In fact, the fetal cells, because they tend to grow more, tend to be more dangerous,” Prentice tells NR. “There’s the possibility of producing tumors, which have been seen in some patients. There’s the possibility of producing random tissues instead of a desired tissue. So it’s not as good as a stem-cell source as adult [stem cells].”
Brendan Foht, assistant editor at the New Atlantis, a conservative science and technology journal, who’s covered the stem-cell debate for years, suggests to NR that there doesn’t seem to be an ethical necessity here. “There are many alternative sources of stem cells that hold comparable promise to fetal and embryonic tissue without raising the same ethical problems,” he says. For instance, “umbilical-cord blood is a rich source of stem cells that can be stored and cultured for extended periods, and can be used for a wide variety of therapeutic purposes,” Foht says.
“The other part of it,” Prentice says, “is that I don’t think they have caught on with the more recent science. They are still working off this mindset of easier growing tissue, faster growing tissue and that’s why they’re looking for fetal rather than adult stem cells.”
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/artic...-organs-increasingly-outdated-researchers-say
Yet, I don't know a single pro-life person who wouldn't support a bill which would ban abortion AND the death penalty.
Clearly, that answer is 'no'; but he's a conservopedia link monkey not to be outdone by anyone!!!
He is an actual scientist and expert in the field.
https://www.lozierinstitute.org/team-member/david-prentice-ph-d/
Sorry, I read through that too quickly. He is a scientist, but certainly not unbiased. He works for the Lozier Institute. I am having a hard time finding other support for your opinion.
If anyone wants to find out what some of the donated tissues are used for/needed for, they can find the institutions that StemExpress provides tissues and cells to at their website.
These institutions include (but are not limited to):
Becton Dickinson
Dartmouth
Duke
FDA
Genentech
Harvard
Johns Hopkins
Novartis
Penn
Perkin Elmer
Pfizer
Quest Diagnostics
Roche
Stanford
UCLA
UConn
Yale
Dartmouth
Duke
FDA
Genentech
Harvard
Johns Hopkins
Novartis
Penn
Perkin Elmer
Pfizer
Quest Diagnostics
Roche
Stanford
UCLA
UConn
Yale
Many (or all) of those are probably using stem cells for various research activities. So, you can go and get the politicized claptrap from "the Lozier Institute", or you can visit several of those universities' sites and find out who is using them and what research they are working on.
Duke, Dartmouth, Harvard, Penn, Stanford, UCLA, UConn and Yale can hardly be considered 'backwater' research institutions using 'outdated' techniques regarding stem cells....
Be aware that any 'witch hunt' set up to impact PP may ultimately impact research efforts at any or all of these labs. So, if you WANT to set this type of research back another decade (which was done with limiting stem cell lines in the Bush admin), that's what is likely to happen (again).
LOL. Like PP is the only one who does abortions. Oh, and I thought federal funding to PP wasn't going towards abortions. Well, at least you are being honest about it now. BTW, nothing is stopping you, or the above institutions, from making private donations to PP. I know, radical concept for libs, "must use federal dollars".
Oh, and yep, these companies have a great track record of success with embryonic stems cells.
We aren't talking all stem cells. They have found great success with adult stem cells, and other non-fetal stem cells.
Federal dollars aren't going towards abortion.LOL. Like PP is the only one who does abortions. Oh, and I thought federal funding to PP wasn't going towards abortions. Well, at least you are being honest about it now. BTW, nothing is stopping you, or the above institutions, from making private donations to PP. I know, radical concept for libs, "must use federal dollars".
Oh, and yep, these companies have a great track record of success with embryonic stems cells.
LOL. Like PP is the only one who does abortions. Oh, and I thought federal funding to PP wasn't going towards abortions. Well, at least you are being honest about it now. BTW, nothing is stopping you, or the above institutions, from making private donations to PP. I know, radical concept for libs, "must use federal dollars".
Oh, and yep, these companies have a great track record of success with embryonic stems cells.
Translation:
I do not understand ANYTHING about science or stem cell research, so I'll just ignore anything anyone says that doesn't support my position.
And I'm a Cafeteria Catholic who only adheres to things the Vatican says that I want to hear...
In other words, you can't contradict anything I said. You've provided nothing to contradict what Dr. Prentice said. PP should be defunded. I know, "oh no, scientific research will end if PP doesn't get federal funding". What a drama queen, and an ignorant fool.Translation:
I do not understand ANYTHING about science or stem cell research, so I'll just ignore anything anyone says that doesn't support my position.
And I'm a Cafeteria Catholic who only adheres to things the Vatican says that I want to hear...
Uh, you likely don't even know what a cafeteria Catholic means (I've seen your biblical "expertise" before - LOL). No, I'm not a cafeteria Catholic but you are probably as dumb on the teachings of the Catholic church as the media, or as you are on the law.
Phantom, do you know if the bill to defund PP would include medicaid reimbursements? Do you think PP shouldn't get medicaid money? From what I can tell, that is what most of their federal funding is from. The rest is from the Title X Family Planning Program.
If Title X funding is pulled from PP, it will be interesting to see if that causes an increase in abortions. I'm sure PP advocates will be making that case.
Doesn't the fact all these researchers/institutes use fetal stem cells contradict what you are saying? You have one scientist that works for a pro-life institute compared to scientists/researchers that work for all the places noted by Joe and likely many others. Why do you believe the one over the many?
Honestly, I'm not sure. According to the 1st article in the past the defunding measures have only applied to Title X. The 2nd link says the bill does include cutting funding for Medicaid but there could be legal hurdles to block doing this.
I doubt you last point. The bill also includes taking the money set aside for PP and giving it to community health clinics across the country.
http://www.vox.com/2015/7/22/9013565/planned-parenthood-government-funding
http://www.wsj.com/articles/senate-...ederal-funds-to-planned-parenthood-1438214775
Absolutely not. They could be doing it for the reasons Dr. Prentice stated, they could also be doing it because it's more cost effective.
If it was more 'cost effective', it would be the existing research standard.
Perhaps your 'expert' isn't as up to speed on the field as you think he is. (Shocking!!!)
Have you visited ANY of those Universities listed as clients of Stem Express? Read up on ANY of the stem cell or related work being done there?
Nope, just need to put you in your place when you act like a child (which is often). You couldn't provide me with a definition. You fire wildly then run away and hide. So typical of you.
Tell us again why the judge issued the injunction to stop the release of the video? LOL. You are such a tool.
Explain to us, AGAIN, how 'stealing' baby parts (whole) to collect stem cells (which don't require 'whole' body parts) is so critical for the stem cell research at those institutions, when they could just acquire them using the methods your 'expert' says are so commonplace? Why does StemExpress even exist??!!!
Man, you are so delusional, it's just fantastic to read your posts here. Maybe PP was selling dead baby parts so they could go buy a $50MM yacht, that they could name "Baby Chumming" and then they could use all their 'extra' dead babies as chum for their shark viewing scuba tours....I mean....they're raking in so much dough with all those baby parts, they gotta do SOMETHING with them....
I'm not sure how the Title X funding works, but I assume organizations apply for grants. Checking the HHS website, in Ames, the only place that receives Title X grants is Planned Parenthood. I guess the big question would be if any other places in Ames try to get Title X grants. If nobody else tries, I don't see how just keeping the same amount of funds available would matter. If other places in Ames have applied and been denied because funds went to PP instead, then I could see where that provision would matter.
What do you think is most likely? Everybody else is wrong and your one pro-life scientist is right or he is wrong and everybody else is right?
Or maybe you aren't. Tell you what. Let's compare your credentials with his. LOL. Oh, I forgot you're the guy with the (what was it?) the 160 IQ. You know all. Well, you think you do.
Not relevant. Not relevant, regarding work being done "there". Yes, I have read up on stem cell related work. You just listed a bunch of sites Stem Express does business with. So? You don't know what type of work they are doing there, what method they are using, what stem cells they are using, etc. You might be correct, Dr. Prentice may be wrong, however, you've provided no evidence to prove he's wrong. Sorry, I'm not doing your work and interviewing doctors or going through all those sites. Knock yourself out if you want.
The important thing to me is that it's barbaric, and it's unnecessary. These are late term abortions. By PP profiting from these selling of parts, it provides a financial incentive for them to encourage women to have an abortion (and/or get women to donate the parts voluntarily). Did PP tell these women that PP profited by the sale of their fetus body parts? Did PP use coercion to get women to consent to donating their fetus parts? If you can't see the ethical problems with what PP is doing and their cavalier attitude how they deal with this business, well it's because you are blind. Even pro-choice people have been unsettled by these videos and what was going on.
Oh, and if PP was providing such a wonderful service (I mean, you think mankind will cease to exist if we don't keep doing this research) it seems strange they didn't post this service ANYWHERE on their website. Why is that? They should have hired you to handle the PR work and do the writeup for their website. "Hello, McFly, anyone home?". PP and Stem Express should be boasting about this wonderful public service they are providing. Why hide it? Hmm, I know the answer but I'm pretty sure you aren't intelligent enough to figure it out.
If I phrased the question, the vast majority of all scientists in the field vs this one guy would you answer? I base this on the fact that I cannot find any research backing up what this guy says. You present your claim in these threads like it is just a settled debate and the stem cells aren't needed. Don't you think you are being a little dishonest?
Does this help you?
"If you want to make the case that stem cells are where future discoveries are at, there is a plentiful source of non-controversial stem cells widely available without requiring a single abortion: the placenta. This organ is routinely discarded after the delivery of a healthy baby.
While it’s true that it does not contain pluripotent stem cells (ones that can develop into multiple types of cells but not new organisms), there are existing lines available for research. Further, because pluripotent stem cells from unborn babies are unprogrammed cells, scientists have found that they are harder to control and have proven less valuable in clinical work. In fact, more Parkinson’s improvements have been achieved with adult stem cells while fetal tissue-derived treatments resulted in severe neurological side effects, including tumor growth and worsening of symptoms.
If you are convinced that pluripotent stem cells are the key for future discovery, thankfully science has also found a way to produce these cells without aborting babies.
Two major scientific papers published this week in Science and Cell unveil a proven way to generate patient-matched pluripotent stem cells without human cloning, and without using human embryos or human or animal eggs. Research groups in Wisconsin and Japan have generated ‘induced pluripotent stem’ (iPS) cells with the properties of human embryonic stem cells by direct reprogramming of adult cells."
"The market has responded in multiple ways to the challenge of what the Post says is exploding demand for human tissue. Several companies, like Organovo, have built 3D liver models to supplement in vitro investigations. This approach can be undertaken without the ethical and supply challenges of prioritizing access to human tissue in babies so much that Planned Parenthood is now on record twice describing how they can alter procedures to obtain better “product.
The second way science is solving the supply challenge is through the use of immortalized cell lines.
In the field of hepatology, when orthotopic liver transplantation is not possible, human primary hepatocytes represent the ‘gold standard’, in particular for the establishment of bioartificial liver (BAL) support systems. They also serve as an important tool in research and are of particular interest for in vitro pharmaco-toxicology. Consequently, there is a considerable and increasing demand for human primary hepatocytes, yet their use is hampered by inadequate supply, high cost, high variability and low in vitroproliferation capacity. These constraints have prompted a large-scale search for alternative cell sources, such as hepatic cell lines and stem-cell derived hepatocytes. In contrast to primary cells, cell lines are readily available, and usually have an unlimited growth potential and high reproducibility. Hepatic cell lines are either derived directly from liver tumor tissue or artificially generated from primary hepatocytesin vitro.
http://thefederalist.com/2015/07/22...-to-whitewash-its-baby-body-parts-atrocities/
Why don't you ask them the first two questions?Explain to us, AGAIN, how 'stealing' baby parts (whole) to collect stem cells (which don't require 'whole' body parts) is so critical for the stem cell research at those institutions, when they could just acquire them using the methods your 'expert' says are so commonplace? Why does StemExpress even exist??!!!
Man, you are so delusional, it's just fantastic to read your posts here. Maybe PP was selling dead baby parts so they could go buy a $50MM yacht, that they could name "Baby Chumming" and then they could use all their 'extra' dead babies as chum for their shark viewing scuba tours....I mean....they're raking in so much dough with all those baby parts, they gotta do SOMETHING with them....
You crack me up. Half of your posts read like someone who's been hitting the wacky tobacky too hard. These threads have been a beauty for you. You have repeatedly gotten the law wrong, you've misstated why the courts stopped CMP from releasing more videos, you don't understand the ethical issues involved, you claim I'm wrong (and I"ve said I may be) yet haven't provided a single shred of evidence to support this point.
It's nice to know you read my posts, because based on what you write (even in this post) it's hard to believe. You are often off in left field about things I've never claimed or stated.
Why don't we just feed you to the sharks? At least, you'd be providing more of a contribution than you have in this thread.
Face it, Joe, this is a PR nightmare for PP. Their federal funding is in jeopardy, it's killing them with trying to acquire new donations from corporations who don't already give to PP. It's made it easier to go force with a bill banning abortions after 20 weeks. Your side has taken a beating on this issue the past few weeks. Be honest, isn't that what really has you upset? You know this was a dirty little secret of PP and StemExpress and now the cats out of the bag, and a majority of the people don't like what is going on.
Ok. Not sure your point.
Think of it like a MLB front office (FO). When sabermetrics came in it was a superior way to evaluate a player, however, basically only Oak, TB, Bos (maybe a couple others) adopted this way. Even after these teams were demonstrating clear success with this method, FO's were incredibly slow to adopt. The Cubs didn't start using advanced metrics in any meaningful way until Theo became the team President. Sabermetrics goes all the way back to the early 90's (actually the 80's). Even today, some FO's still use the old way of evaluating players and have little or no use of advanced metrics in their evaluating of players, even though it clearly superior way of evaluating a player's performance over old school methods. So, why does a FO, running a billion dollar business operate this way? Some people are slow to change, maybe they are set in their ways, maybe they aren't convinced advanced metrics are superior, maybe they don't understand them. I don't know, just like I don't know why research firms are using fetal stem cells. However, because a lot of them are still doing it isn't proof it's needed, or the best method, anymore than a majority of the teams in the early 90's using old school evaluation techniques was proof it was as good a method to evaluate players as sabermetrics was.
I took it to mean outlawing the use of fetal stem cells will limit research. So in your example, there wouldn't be enough sabermetrics for all teams, but baseball would outlaw the old evaluation methods. So some teams would not be able to evaluate any players.
You mean another clip/paste mishmash of pseudo-factual diarrhea from another Pro-Life source?
No. It's really not helpful. I've simply pointed you to the multiple universities (e.g. Duke, Dartmouth, UCLA, Harvard, Stanford, etc) who are using stem cells for research activities, and perhaps you could obtain information directly from those sources (Try Google: "Duke fetal stem cell research", or "Dartmouth fetal stem cell research" etc) and identify WHY they need the cells they are purchasing. Because if this were simply a matter of taking a bunch of existing cells already in culture and just maintaining a culture line for ALL of their stem cell research needs, I'm absolutely positive they would do that. Why? Because these researchers are not ignorant of the ethical issues surrounding fetal tissues; culturing cells is dirt cheap, compared with harvesting them from fetal or afterbirth sources.
You seem to think that just because ONE PP idiot make callous and inflammatory comments on a videotape that the whole industry and research environment is like that. Newsflash: they are not. And there are countless presentations on the ethics of the types of research being done and what those cells are used for. I can guarantee that most of those researchers who rely on various sources of fresh stem cells/tissues are shocked and disgusted by the comments on the tapes.
Your aversion here is that you abhor 'abortions'. Fine. But we can either throw those tissues into the trash like used banana peels, or we can use components from them for work that may (and in some cases already has) provided cures for people with incurable conditions.
The members of the research community who 'promote' abortions just so they can get their stem cells are a vast minority (if there really are any who would promote actively aborting fetuses just so they can harvest certain cells).
Perhaps your problem here is that the fact that these cells CAN be used for valuable research provides a pregnant women considering an abortion an 'ethical out', that allows her to rationalize something 'good' coming from ending her pregnancy. While that may be true, and certainly should be factual information provided to someone seeking a 1st/2nd trimester abortion, I also agree it should not be used as an excuse or financial incentive for anyone ending their pregnancy.
I find it troubling that among all of this political gibberish surrounding abortion that the 'right to life' crew doesn't simply start a fund to PAY women to carry their pregnancy to term and then offer the baby for adoption. That would be the 'free market' alternative for the party of 'less government intrusion' in our lives. Why has that not happened?
Got it. You couldn't dispute a single fact from the article (maybe the science was a bit above your knowledge level), so you pull the Sgt Schultz, "I see nothing", and then ignore it. LOL. Thanks Joe, you couldn't have provided me a better compliment that the article was an excellent one.
So, provide for me the quotes from experts in the field that says fetal stem cell research must be used in lieu of other means.
It wasn't ONE PP idiot, it's been several. Then we have clowns like you who apologize for it. How the frack would you know this attitude comments doesn't represent the industry. I've read countless articled from former PP doctors and nurses, that it absolutely represents their attitude. I'm not commenting on the researchers attitudes because I don't know. However, there are ways to do research without fetal stem cells, and this is a gruesome process. You are killing a baby, a human life, in the name of saving human life. That's warped reasoning.
You say, "why not get some good use out of these dead fetuses". Nice logic Joe. So, should we use the science from Nazi experiments because we might be able to save future lives? There are some ethical lines that need to be drawn. Not to mention PP PROFITS for the sale of these body parts. They have a financial incentive to encourage MORE abortions.. They also have an incentive to coercer women into volunteering to donate their fetus parts. Planned Parenthood has been caught in the act of selling baby parts for human research. In other words, they are killing babies and selling them under the guise of preserving life. That is twisted logic.
Can PP do anything that would stop your support for them? If they sold the parts to fast food joints, to put in burgers for human consumption, would you finally say, "enough". What if they sold the parts to companies that make energy drinks, vitamins, and had science show these were beneficial to your health? Would you still support them?
Your last point has happened. There are pro-life pregnancy centers that do exactly what you say. The one in my city provides women free health care services, helps throughout her pregnancy. provides diapers, baby formula, clothes, all for free. They help the women with adoption if she chooses that route. The problem is all the money comes from donations, which means the funds aren't unlimited.
Tell you what. Instead of spending a half a billion dollars on the butchers of PP, how about we use that federal money on women who go to these pro-life centers, to encourage women to have the children.
I mean, if you think it's fair for the pro-life pregnancy centers to get no money, then lets strip PP of every federal dollar they receive. Then we can have a true free market, not a stacked one in favor of the abortion butchers using fed dollars. Then you can put up or shut up. If you think PP and fetal research is doomed, and of the most importance, then you can pony up a sizeable sum to PP, as can your other PP supporters. Don't tell me you are advocating a hypocritical position, that would disappoint me because we know you've 'never' done that before.
Similar threads
