Blood is the main resource & people who are suffering from injuries are in a greate  need of blood so plz donate blood & visit  cordblood for further information.

I know the facts, they're important, but, I'm for leaving this one out of the "Mommy and Family" category.

Busy Mom Blog

...why would you rather leave this out of the Mommy and Family category? Would love to hear more about your thoughts here.

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder
Surfette

This just being reported by the Associated Press...

TRENTON, N.J. -- New Jersey has approved the first funding to build a state stem cell research facility touted by Gov. Jon S. Corzine as key to combating federal restrictions on embryonic stem cell work.

The New Jersey Economic Development Authority on Tuesday approved $9.2 million in preconstruction costs for the Stem Cell Institute of New Jersey in New Brunswick, which the governor said would attract the world's best researchers and boost the state's economy. -- read full article

Contributing Editor Catherine Morgan
also at Women 4 Hope and CatherineBlogs.com

Bravo, Catherine.

As someone who watched someone she loved pass away from the side effects of an unsuccessful stem cell transplant, it is very difficult for me to discuss this subject in a civilized manner--it is too emotional of an issue for me.

But you have just done such a fabulous job of providing the FACTS that I think anyone would be hard-pressed to disagree with you.

The facts are:
1. that no babies are killed for stem-cell transplants, regardless of what the govt. tries to insinuate,

2. there are already many treatments for various cancers and immunological disorders that are dependent on stem cells;

3. and finally, many people die each year from these diseases, and from unsuccessful treatments. Meaning, of course, that more research needs to be done to create more effective treatments for more diseases.

Opposing stem-cell research, to me, is turning a blind eye to the thousands of leukemia, sarcoma, and lymphoma patients that are diagnosed every year.

We owe those people better than that.

Amanda Shaffer, Blogher Health and Wellness Contributing Editor

The Adventures of Cat Lady.

Well, to say that "no babies are destroyed by ESCR" implies a certain POV. Someone who believes that life begins at conception would consider an embryo to be a pre-born child. That person would also not see any moral distinction between destroying a human life in the name of science (ESCR) and destroying a human life in the name of convenience (abortion).

If an individual kills an adult for the purposes of harvesting the victim's organs, would you say that murder is less evil than a person who commits murder for some other reason?

I agree with you about the IVF. I would personally like to see restrictions on high-tech reproductive techniques such that only the number of embryos that will be implanted in one round can be created. If couples wish to freeze their eggs and sperm separately for a later IVF attempt, that's fine.

There are ways of getting stem cells that do not require the destruction of a human embryo such as umbilical cord blood donation. Right now most cord blood is discarded as medical waste. Instead of spending taxpayer money to destroy embryos for stem cell research, why not fund cord blood collection?

I donated my cord blood with both pregnancies. A couple years ago the cord blood bank contacted me and told me that my firstborn's cord blood was a match for a very sick little boy and they were going to use it to treat him.

Interestingly, during the big stem cell debate in my state a year or so ago, the fact that science had discovered a way to "regress" (for the lack of a better term) adult/etc. stem cells to that full-potential embryonic stage went unnoticed. Now there's success, which could ultimately defuse the entire argument.

Dana
Mamalogues.com
In the St. Louis Post-Dispatch
Pop Mama
Since Eve

Re: cord blood, it's interesting to see what has happened with cord blood banking advertising. I think the ads -- urging parents to bank their baby's blood as "insurance" against possible future illness -- are really preying on new parents' insecurities, and they really subvert the facts, which is that it's unlikely your baby's cord blood could be used to treat THEM.

That said, I think cord blood donation is a wonderful alternative that really DOES have the potential to help others, just as Dana's story shows. One thing to note, though, is that you have to Link Textplan in advance for this, usually by 34 weeks or so, and you'll have to get a blood test for infectious disease.

I feel really strongly about the need to push forward with stem cell research in general -- it was really hammered home for me a few years ago when I wrote about an amazing woman who was diagnosed with ALS while she was pregnant with her first baby, shortly after she was married. She became a really fiesty advocate for this research during the short time before she died (in early 2005). It was as if she was being held captive to a slow-moving science -- maybe it wouldn't have been able to help regenerate her dying motor neurons, but it was incredibly frustrating to know how much politics was holding up the process that might have helped her find out.

Link TextThe Daily Meds

You're welcome Catherine. I feel like my son has already helped someone at his young age. I hope the boy's treatment was successful. I cannot imagine ...

I concur re: the advertising methods of private blood banks; it angers me. The minuscule chance that you would need it does not justify the exorbitant amount of money private banks charge in annual fees. I wish here was more of an effort to get the word out about cord blood donation as opposed to private banking.

Dana
Mamalogues.com
In the St. Louis Post-Dispatch
Pop Mama
Since Eve

I too find the arguements against stem cell research often to be strange and all that I've heard have been based on mis-information.

Developments in medical research and treatments have always needed ethical considerations and discussion and I think that is healthy and crucial.

Having heard a recent discussion on the radio about stem cell research I got wondering what is the cost each year alone for Alzheimer's for all of society - carers, work productivity (for carers, patients, family etc etc etc), health services, health funds, medicine, research, changes to homes, transport, equipment, all of the costs involved in living with, managing, caring for, researching and finding out about Alzheimer's?

What differences would there be in the world if Alzheimer's could be healed? Stem cell research could be the way to heal Alzheimer's. Imagine the impact this would have on all the people in the world who are carers? They could get their life back, they could return to work and participate in productive work society. Caring for loved ones is valuable but it is about putting yourself second to another and it is a huge change with lots of deep impacts.

Stem cell research has the ability to change not just Alzheimer's but at least another dozen (or 100) other illnesses that have such huge impacts in our societies. We all know carers, even if they aren't within our families, and the sacrifices they make. We could all end up needing care or being carers at the current rate of society.

Yes, we need careful and sensitive ethical considerations to be respected, I for one don't want clones but that isn't what stem cell research is about. I don't want stem cells being thrown out when they can be used to heal.

I want to see illnesses that break hearts and rip up lives to be healed just like we've got rid of the issue of polio in Western societies (and need to do so in developing soceities) we can do the same for Alzheimer's and other illnesses.

Personally I just think knee jerk reactions with mis-information is a failing of humans while I'd rather celebrate the good grace of humanity.

I hope all who are hurting from illness and loss find comfort in their hearts and start their own healing towards happy and full lives, just as the loved ones would want for us.

Belinda

www.CreativelyBelle.com/Sale
www.CreativelyBelle.blog.com

I'm pregnant with our first child, almost 17 weeks. I'm going to talk to my husband about it, but I'm really really hoping we can do this. Once we agree, I'll be bringing it up at my next ob appt (20 weeks). For me, it's a no brainer. There is no reason for me to NOT donate it.

Cass

Do all hospitals and birthing centers now have core blood donation? I hope so.

You know when collecting blood for population use was first started there were lots of arguements for and against it. This happened between the wars, between 1918 and 1939.

The difference between survival rates for war casualties between the WW1 1914 - 1918 war to the WW2 1939 - 1945 war was huge because of the use of blood products and improvements in treatment. 100,000's of lives were saved in the 2nd World War and after that it was taken as normal.

So Yes, make the core blood donation happen and be part of the change to normality.

Smiles
Belinda

www.CreativelyBelle.Blog.com
www.CreativelyBelle.com

You certainly educated me with this post.

"Love is liquid. Brew and be drunkards!" ~~Nordette. And here's a link to the blog.