Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ish who wrote (76936)	10/12/2004 4:55:20 PM
From: R2O	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793866

The 'ban' is only against Fed funding of embryonic stem cell work. If embryonic stem cell research is so important, then why not lobby companies to fund it? Or have all those wealthy promoters fund it? My answer: gov't money has few strings attached. You get the gov't to pay for the work and the patent and you (almost) own it. If your company funds it, they own it, 100%. If really interested in curing sick people, embryonic stem cells would not be the first choice because of tissue rejection problems (even if it was easy to otherwise effect a cure). For the short term (to help those of us already born) bone marrow is the obvious choice. Going forward, cord stem cells would be first choice since they would be one's own: no rejection problems. Unfortunately for me, 'born again' doesn't carry a cord --- does it?