Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] Korean stem cell rout...

["Christian M. Cepel" <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

What does this mean for the subject of stem cells on a broader basis? 
There are so many different 'types' of uses of stem cell that are 
currently being discussed out there that I (and I think the average 
public) cannot keep them straight... therapudic cloning, etc...

There's the research Bush banned, there's the issue on the 2006 Missouri 
ballot, there's all these other debates and conflicts and hopes.

Hopes.

Even for those opposed to a lot of the procedures, the biggest thing 
regarding stem cell research in general has been Hope.  You've got all 
these celebrities and folks with reputable names out there pushing for 
cures for all sorts of ailments and disease... Michael J. Fox is the 
first that comes to mind with his own battle with Parkinsons, and, if I 
recall, Superman was hoping for some therapudic solutions/treatments for 
those with spinal chord injuries before he expired.

What I'm asking is... I don't understand the significance of the Korean 
research... was all the other research validated based on their work and 
now rendered invalid, or is there still some exciting (if controversial) 
stuff still out there?  I.e., is it all a Red Herring, or do you just 
want to avoid Herring caught in the Asiatic waters off the Korean peninsula?

Mike Miller wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Dec 2005, Jonathan King wrote:
>
> > So last week, we thought that maybe 2 of the 11 stem cell lines were 
> > real.  Now it looks like the other 2 were faked, causing Science to 
> > postpone the paper's retraction so that they can print the *right* 
> > retraction:
> >
> > http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/31/science/31clone.html?pagewanted=print
> >
> > And now, the more important 2004 stem cell cloning paper is suspect, 
> > since a key figure was found to be copied from a 2003 paper, 
> > and...maybe even Snuppy (sniff).
>
>
>
> I've been keeping many of the news articles (e.g., from NY Times) here 
> for anyone who would like to see them:
>
> http://taxa.epi.umn.edu/cgi-bin/webglimpse/rmnews?query=woo+suk%2Cwoo-suk
>
> Of course, we have to expect that *all* of Hwang's attention-grabbing 
> research was fraudulent.  He was first to create human embryos from 
> adult human cells, first to clone a dog from a cell of an adult dog, and 
> first to make human stem cells from adult human cells, or so he claimed.
>
> With that kind of high-profile fakery, it was always a matter of time 
> until he was apprehended.  He had to know this day would come.
>
> We don't know yet that he faked all of it, but that's what I think.
>
> Mike
>
> _______________________________________________
> discussion mailing list
> EMAIL:PROTECTED
> http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion


_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion