Mice with human brains!

Post Reply New Topic

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_4if1x1pH8[/youtube]

Don't know about you, but she gets my vote.

I never really understood this attack on her. They have grown human brain cells in mice and their are certainly legitimate ethical questions about it. It's pretty clear she is referring to this article from 2005.

Article

But yea, I'd probably vote for her over Coons. She says she'll be guided by the constitution rather than personal beliefs.

"Cross-breeding mice and humans"
"Mice with full-functioning human brains"

If this isn't worthy of derision, I don't know what is.

See
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... _cell.html

Just a few human cells remain functioning in the mouse nervous system and that has no ethical concern whatsoever. The concern is totally silly.

A brain cell is not anywhere close to the same thing as "fully functioning human brains." And it certainly was not "cross-breeding." That article is more a proof-of-concept than anything else.

As to the supposed ethical concerns, I can only assume that you have never watched a family member die of Parkinson's. Stem cells have amazing medical potential, and the refusal of Luddites on the religious right to allow funding of that research is disgusting.


She says that, but the problem is that she's an idiot and doesn't know what's in the Constitution.

QFT. most of the people who cloak their petty hatreds in faux-constitutional cloth are just bullies who want the government to stop restraining their primitive impulses to robber-barron-hood. when fascism reaches these shores, it will be cloaked in the flag and bearing a cross.

It was a hyperbole, something quite common on Bill O'Reilly and amongst all political pundits which O'Donnell was before running. I'm pretty sure she doesn't believe scientists have created a race of mice people. Based on the short clip I assume it was on the larger point of the possibility of human cloning. Yes, there are ethical questions with that sort of research, maybe you have opposing opinions on those questions but they're still legitimate and worthy of discussion.

(note: I wasn't giving my opinion on it in the previous post just stating that there are ethical questions)

Her saying that is more than Coons and the rest of the democrats can say. Obama was a constitutional scholar University Of Chicago and where did that get us? The guy spits on it daily. All these politicians take an oath to protect and defend the constitution yet almost all of them don't seem to take this responsibility seriously and openly disregard the constitution. I remember when the question of constitutionality of the healthcare reform bill was asked to Nancy Pelosi and her response was something along the lines of "are you serious? don't be silly." She's not a great candidate with her personal issues but she's better compared to your run of the mill neocon or democrat unless she is blatantly lying which isn't out of the realm of possibility being a politician. I'll take the idiot over the criminal.

It clearly isn't hyperbole. There's exaggeration, then there's outright stupidity and making false claims on a subject you clearly know nothing about.

If you wish to discuss the ethics of experimenting with stem cells on mice for the benefit of human beings, please feel free to construct a reasonable argument on that matter rather than trying to defend the indefensible.

You're clearly not bias at all on the subject. At least have the whole discussion rather than the 30 second soundbite.

I'm not sure what you think I'm trying to defend in the second statement.

They showed that interview here, and she does appear to believe that somewhere scientists are actually growing mice with human brains, as opposed to "cultivating individual human cells in a non-human host".

Even if she doesn't, she clearly lacks the political acumen to realise that sound-bites are an important part of political posturing, and that anything you say might be taken and used to make you look like an idiot. The fact that she uses the sentence AT ALL shows her to be a pillock.

And yes, limiting this kind of research just condemns millions of people to a terrible slow collapse until death. Nobody is cloning people, nobody is actually making mutant brain-mice. This isn't a B movie.

A three pound brain will not fit in a mouse body.

ruveyn

Correct. My bias leans heavily towards intelligently formed statements, logical thinking and the abolition of stupidity in power. If anyone is interested in the entire discussion it can be found on youtube, though it doesn't make for particularly exciting viewing.



Her obvious gross stupidity, which you made excuses for.

But if it could, it would be faster and sharper than this woman, and a better candidate for a vote. I would vote for a mouse with a human brain over and above this daft a***hole.

I cannot speculate as to what she "might have" meant or believe if those speculations are contrary to her stated positions.

And evidently you did not understand the research much better than O'Donnell did if you think this had anything to do with human cloning. That was not the aim of the researchers. They were trying to cure Parkinson's and other neurological diseases.

The ethical questions involved here are no different than in any other biomedical research. Mice as a model animal has been considered ethically acceptable for years now, that is nothing new.

Yeah but he's gotta try and blindly support his party so that doesn't matter. It's about cloning Hitler and that's it. First it's mice with brains then it's Hitler. The connection is clear.

Well, I'd say O'Donnell there is a convincing argument for the idea that someone's growing humans with mouse brains...