Stem cells nurture damaged spine: study

[palerider]

Thank you for cutting to the bone of this issue (so to speak)

I would like for you to explain your thinking to me.

Your life began when the fertilization of your mother's egg was complete. From the time of that event, your life, your growth and development has continued in an unbroken chain of events until this day. You didn't come from a zygote, you were a zygote. You didn't come from a blastocycst, you, personally, were a blastocyst. You didn't come from an embryo, you, coyote, were an embryo. You grew, you developed, and you matured, but the essential "you" with a capital "Y" came into being when the fertilization of your mother's egg was complete and you have simply aged and grown from that point. Nothing supernatural there, just a biological chain of events. You were young, you grew older and you matured.

Now tell me about the magic that changed you into a human being. You were alive, but you were not a human being and then something happened and one moment you were not a human being and the next you were. You crossed some barrier and became a human being. Biologically, you were noting after you crossed the barrier than you were before you crossed it except very slightly more mature. You have admitted that a completely mature adult is no more of a human being than a newborn infant so by your own words, we do not become more human by the processes of growth and maturing which are biological process that you have been going through since you began.

So tell me, what magical thing that wasn't growth or maturation happened to you that transformed you from whatever you believe you were, into what you are?

The bottom line here coyote is that you are not going to be able to offer up any sort of rational argument. Only a series of rationalizations.

 

[9sublime]

And when did I ever say that animals don't have emotions? My dogs certainly smile, and express other disticinct emotions. Grief is not an emotion, however. Grief is a coping process by which we deal with not only the loss of someone we care about, but a clear sign of our own mortality as well. Your suggestion that I desperately want to believe that only we have real emotions couldn't be further from the truth which characterizez most of the content of your argument. It is you who is desperate to get something to stick against the wall that might allow you to justify your position which requires you to successfully dehumanize a human being so that it can be killed, guilt free, in the name of a medical experiment. Even if that something that sticks is so far removed from the subject as why elephants might be interested in the tusks of dead elephants.

First of all, its not a human being killed, its something that could be a human, but currently isn't a human in my mind. So I don't need to dehumanize it, because I don't think it is one in the first place.

Secondly, if grief is not an emotion, then what the hell is? Scientifically, its a process for loss, but I think you and me know its more than just an instinct process.

 

[Coyote]

I would like for you to explain your thinking to me.

I can try.

Your life began when the fertilization of your mother's egg was complete. From the time of that event, your life, your growth and development has continued in an unbroken chain of events until this day. You didn't come from a zygote, you were a zygote. You didn't come from a blastocycst, you, personally, were a blastocyst. You didn't come from an embryo, you, coyote, were an embryo. You grew, you developed, and you matured, but the essential "you" with a capital "Y" came into being when the fertilization of your mother's egg was complete and you have simply aged and grown from that point. Nothing supernatural there, just a biological chain of events. You were young, you grew older and you matured.

Me...the biological entity Coyote, existed throughout that chain. But when did me - the person - come into being? How can a blastocyst be me - the complex thinking, feeling, human being? It's a handful of cells, genetic material and potential. When does it become me - the me that transcends biology? The me that is able to comprehend the entire living world around me and want to try to make sense of it? The me that cares about anything beyond survival?

Now tell me about the magic that changed you into a human being. You were alive, but you were not a human being and then something happened and one moment you were not a human being and the next you were. You crossed some barrier and became a human being. Biologically, you were noting after you crossed the barrier than you were before you crossed it except very slightly more mature.

Some people think digitally - off/on, black/white, yes know. Other people think analogue - a continuum. That is how I view it, and it is fundamentally different then the way you view it. At some point in the process we are no longer a collection of cells - we have a nervous system, a brain, self awareness. When that happens I can't personally pinpoint.

You have admitted that a completely mature adult is no more of a human being than a newborn infant so by your own words, we do not become more human by the processes of growth and maturing which are biological process that you have been going through since you began.

The statement "so by your own words, we do not become more human by the processes of growth and maturing" is not what I said. You are taking something I said and distorting it.

At some point in the process of growth and maturing we cross the line from a mere handful of cells to a person. My opinion is that it is at some point during the development of the nervous system and brain, we become an actual "person".

Ironically - the very people who consider a blastocyst a full fledged human, have no issue with killing adult people when whom they've decided are longer human.

So tell me, what magical thing that wasn't growth or maturation happened to you that transformed you from whatever you believe you were, into what you are?

It was something in growth: at some point, in the development of the nervous system and brain occurs something that seperates us from the rest of animal life. I don't know what it is - but it is no more magical then your insistance that there is something magical about human life at any stage if development - that makes it worth preserving over that of any other species.

The bottom line here coyote is that you are not going to be able to offer up any sort of rational argument. Only a series of rationalizations.

We'll see.

 

[Coyote]

And when did I ever say that animals don't have emotions? My dogs certainly smile, and express other disticinct emotions. Grief is not an emotion, however. Grief is a coping process by which we deal with not only the loss of someone we care about, but a clear sign of our own mortality as well.

Why do you say grief has to do with an awareness of our own mortality?

 

[palerider]

Me...the biological entity Coyote, existed throughout that chain. But when did me - the person - come into being? How can a blastocyst be me - the complex thinking, feeling, human being? It's a handful of cells, genetic material and potential. When does it become me - the me that transcends biology? The me that is able to comprehend the entire living world around me and want to try to make sense of it? The me that cares about anything beyond survival?

I get the feeling that you shoud have attatched some spooky music to accompany the thoughts of the necromancers and the gypsys.

Were you not a human being when you were an infant? What were you in the 18 or so months of your life post birth before you gained any sort of self awareness?

See what I mean. No rational argument. Just rationalizations.

Some people think digitally - off/on, black/white, yes know. Other people think analogue - a continuum. That is how I view it, and it is fundamentally different then the way you view it. At some point in the process we are no longer a collection of cells - we have a nervous system, a brain, self awareness. When that happens I can't personally pinpoint.

You did not become self aware until you were at least 1 year post partum. Your argument is not rational. Just a series of rationalizations.

The statement "so by your own words, we do not become more human by the processes of growth and maturing" is not what I said. You are taking something I said and distorting it.[/quote}

So a 30 year old that is fully mature is more of a human being than an infant?

At some point in the process of growth and maturing we cross the line from a mere handful of cells to a person. My opinion is that it is at some point during the development of the nervous system and brain, we become an actual "person".

What point? Exactly when. Describe a precise bright line that one must cross in order to be a human being. It is, after all, a matter of life and death.

Ironically - the very people who consider a blastocyst a full fledged human, have no issue with killing adult people when whom they've decided are longer human.

As I said, give each unborn his or her day in court, and describe exactly what they are guilty of that their life must be forfiet in accordance with the law and you won't hear a peep from me.

It was something in growth: at some point, in the development of the nervous system and brain occurs something that seperates us from the rest of animal life. I don't know what it is - but it is no more magical then your insistance that there is something magical about human life at any stage if development - that makes it worth preserving over that of any other species.

"something" in growth? "some" point in the development? "something" that separates us? You don't know? This is a matter of life and death. Something, sometime, somewherere are hardly terms that seem appropriate when you are talking about killing human beings. Where is the bright line so that you can be quite sure that you aren't indeed killing human beings for the purpose of medical experiment?

We'll see.

We have already seen coyote, and you know it.

 

[palerider]

Why do you say grief has to do with an awareness of our own mortality?

It is only the awareness of our own mortality that allows us to feel grief and to mourn. Mourning and grief have no meaning absent the concept of ones own mortality.

 

[Coyote]

I get the feeling that you shoud have attatched some spooky music to accompany the thoughts of the necromancers and the gypsys.

Hate to disappoint you...but I'm not a new-ager anything.

Were you not a human being when you were an infant? What were you in the 18 or so months of your life post birth before you gained any sort of self awareness?

See what I mean. No rational argument. Just rationalizations.

Some sort of self-awareness occurs with the development of a nervous system and brain. That's not a rationalization. That's a rational fact. A blastocyst has no nervous system or brain.

You did not become self aware until you were at least 1 year post partum. Your argument is not rational. Just a series of rationalizations.

How do you know?

The statement "so by your own words, we do not become more human by the processes of growth and maturing" is not what I said. You are taking something I said and distorting it.

So a 30 year old that is fully mature is more of a human being than an infant?

I did not say that.

Is a 12 yr old child more mature then a 6 yr old? Yes.

Is an 18yr old more mature then a 12 yr old? Yes.

Is a 45 yr old more mature then a 30 yr old? No.

Both are at that point mature human beings.

You have a gradual process of growth with a cutoff when maturity is achieved.
Why is it so difficult to comprehend a gradual process of development with a cutoff when personhood is achieved (ie - development of a cns and brain).

What point? Exactly when. Describe a precise bright line that one must cross in order to be a human being. It is, after all, a matter of life and death.

When the fetus develops a CNS/brain.

As I said, give each unborn his or her day in court, and describe exactly what they are guilty of that their life must be forfiet in accordance with the law and you won't hear a peep from me.

If human life - by the fact that it is human - is sacred, then all human life should be. What makes a blastocyst - a handful of chromosomes - with no awareness - more valuable than any other species?

"something" in growth? "some" point in the development? "something" that separates us? You don't know? This is a matter of life and death. Something, sometime, somewherere are hardly terms that seem appropriate when you are talking about killing human beings. Where is the bright line so that you can be quite sure that you aren't indeed killing human beings for the purpose of medical experiment?

We have already seen coyote, and you know it.[/QUOTE]

 

[Coyote]

I get the feeling that you shoud have attatched some

"something" in growth? "some" point in the development? "something" that separates us? You don't know? This is a matter of life and death. Something, sometime, somewherere are hardly terms that seem appropriate when you are talking about killing human beings. Where is the bright line so that you can be quite sure that you aren't indeed killing human beings for the purpose of medical experiment?



We have already seen coyote, and you know it.

According to what I found:

As early as the 9th week of gestation the fetus is able to spontaneously move the extremities, head, and trunk (de Vries, Visser, & Prechtl, 1985).

It has also been suggested that the near term fetus may be endowed with some degree of cognitive capability (e.g., Hepper & Shahidullah, 1994; Kisilevsky, Fearson & Muir, 1998). Cognition has been inferred based on alterations in fetal heart rate (FHR) and habituation to airborne sound (Kisilevsky & Muir, 1991), response-declines to vibroacoustic stimuli (Kisilevsky et al., 1998; Kuhlman, Burns, Depp, & Sabagha, 1988), and what appears to be neonatal preferences for the maternal voice as well as melodies and stories presented up to six weeks prior to birth (DeCasper & Fifer, 1980; DeCasper & Spence, 1986; DeCasper, Lecanuet, Busnel, Granier-Deferre & Maugeais, 1994; Lecanuet, Granier-Deferre, & Busnel, 1989).

That suggests that the fetus isn't a "person" until at least 9 weeks, possibly later. There may not be a clear line here.

 

[Coyote]

It is only the awareness of our own mortality that allows us to feel grief and to mourn. Mourning and grief have no meaning absent the concept of ones own mortality.

We can feel grief and mourn loss without considering our own mortality. I don't understand what you are saying.

 

[Coyote]

Palerider,

Here is something else to consider per science:

From: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract

PIP: Participants at the Human Life Symposium: An Interdisciplinary Approach to the Concept of Person, held in Houston in March, 1982, considered the question of when life and personhood begin. Previously all such discussions have been held in the political arena and in right to life publications. In 1973 the Supreme Court had refused to resolve the question. In 1981 Senator Helms Human Life Amendment (2038) to debt ceiling legislation stated that life begins at conception and the fetus was entitled to protection under the law. This would have created severe abortion funding restrictions and has not yet been passed. From the scientific point of view it was concluded that biology alone is not able to determine the point at which personhood is established. Several scientists expressed their view on personhood covering such areas as subjective awareness including personality, a sense of self and consciousness, social status rights and obligations. Reasons for not defining the fetus as a person included the negative impact on providing medical services to the mother and the fetus, and ethical issues in fetal surgery. The legal impact of bestowing personhood on the fetus would not resolve the abortion issue, and historically the law has treated the fetus differently for different purposes. If a fetus were legally defined as a person, additional areas of conflict in consitutional law, tax law and others would arise. A final area discussed was whether any of the criteria which define death could help define life; results were inconclusive. The participants agreed that while further explorations of the question are necessary, legislative action seems inappropriate at this time.

When you come down to it - and the way I see it - this question is not answerable in purely biological terms but must also be looked from an ethical and philosophical perspective. You're striving to force an answer based in biology alone.

 

[9sublime]

When you come down to it - and the way I see it - this question is not answerable in purely biological terms but must also be looked from an ethical and philosophical perspective. You're striving to force an answer based in biology alone.

Exactly. Its not just science that defines wether life beings at conception.

 

[palerider]

Hate to disappoint you...but I'm not a new-ager anything.

But you believe that you were alive but not a human being and magically became a human being by some force outside of biology. By something not measurable by science.

Some sort of self-awareness occurs with the development of a nervous system and brain. That's not a rationalization. That's a rational fact. A blastocyst has no nervous system or brain.

Sorry. No awareness of self for at least 12 months and most research suggests 18.

How do you know?

It is a very thoroughly studied field. What? You haven't bothered to even look up the subject? You just assume that the magic is real and there is no need to verify the science?

Is a 12 yr old child more mature then a 6 yr old? Yes.

A 12 year old is more of a human being than a 6 year old?

Is an 18yr old more mature then a 12 yr old? Yes.

Aren't you embarassed that you must equivocate so? Are you saying that an 18 year old is more of a human being than a 12 year old is? Anyone knows that one is more mature, but are you saying that the 12 year old isn't as much a human being as the 18 year old?

You have a gradual process of growth with a cutoff when maturity is achieved.

Are you then not really a human being until you are mature?

If human life - by the fact that it is human - is sacred, then all human life should be. What makes a blastocyst - a handful of chromosomes - with no awareness - more valuable than any other species?

The law.

 

[palerider]

According to what I found:

Cognitive ability does not equal self awareness. Have you now changed the benchmark from self awareness to mere cognitive ability? And precicely when does this happen. It is a matter of life and death and a general time simply is not good enough.

 

[palerider]

We can feel grief and mourn loss without considering our own mortality. I don't understand what you are saying.

No you can't. With out the sense of your own mortality, the absence of your loved ones is no different than the sense of separation you might feel when they go to the grocery store or to visit relatives.

 

[palerider]

Palerider,

Here is something else to consider per science:

Hardly science.

From: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract

So sayeth the necromancers and gypsys.

When you come down to it - and the way I see it - this question is not answerable in purely biological terms but must also be looked from an ethical and philosophical perspective. You're striving to force an answer based in biology alone.

Of course it can. And has. Repeatedly. Your unwillingness to accept hard science while at the same time promote pseudoscience says all that need be said about your postion.

"Every time a sperm cell and ovum unite a new being is created which is alive and will continue to live unless its death is brought about by some specific condition."

Pathology of the Fetus and the Infant, 3d ed.
E.L. Potter and J.M. Craig, (Chicago: Year Book Medical Publishers, 1975), vii.