• Greenpeace lawsuit could endanger stem cell research
    123 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Nikota;32850949]And thats the faults of the two party system.[/QUOTE] Amen to that.
i'm a liberal and i safely think that greenpeace is why i hate liberals
[QUOTE=Randdalf;32851006]I [I]think[/I] this article is misleading. The filing calls for a ban on [B]patents[/B] related to stem cells and genes. Which is fine by me, after having read Michael Crichton's Next. It basically stops people abusing stem cell research for money, rather than for the good of mankind. On the other hand, if it does actually affect stem cell research negatively then I don't know what to think.[/QUOTE] [quote]In agreement with the opposing scientific opinion, ACSH's Dr. Gilbert Ross believes that, “If this ruling is approved, the EU will enter a Dark Age of stem cell research, on par with its ongoing Luddite fear of genetically-engineered agriculture.”[/quote] He makes it sound really fucking bad. I think greenpeace is misunderstanding what the patent laws entail somehow. If there is universal opposition to this in the scientific community then it must be ridiculously bad - the scientific community is mostly very ethical and I trust they know what they're doing. If it was just corporations against this, I'd be more inclined to believe that greenpeace were in the right. Greenpeace can definitely fuck off anyway
[QUOTE=Lord of Ears;32851112]i'm a liberal and i safely think that greenpeace is why i hate liberals[/QUOTE] cool. these words mean things.
[QUOTE=Turnips5;32851208]He makes it sound really fucking bad. I think greenpeace is misunderstanding what the patent laws entail somehow. If there is universal opposition to this in the scientific community then it must be ridiculously bad - the scientific community is mostly very ethical and I trust they know what they're doing. If it was just corporations against this, I'd be more inclined to believe that greenpeace were in the right. Greenpeace can definitely fuck off anyway[/QUOTE] There is a universal opposition to this in the community of scientists getting paid lots of money by big corporations If you found some scientists who weren't on the payroll of large medical research companies I think they'd agree that patenting life is morally wrong
[QUOTE=Atlascore;32851136]You're a Libertarian right? I wish you guys would replace the GOP.[/QUOTE] I just don't like the idea of state rights having a big say. Since the chances for a corrupt governor is at least 80 percent with every election.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;32851247]There is a universal opposition to this in the community of scientists getting paid lots of money by big corporations If you found some scientists who weren't on the payroll of large medical research companies I think they'd agree that patenting life is morally wrong[/QUOTE] It's patenting microbes. They're not even slightly sentient. They just happen to be really handy to use in genetic engineering and can be used to make products. Please don't buy into the "big science" crap. Check out a typical value for the annual salary for a biology researcher : £27,500 per annum ([url=http://www.newscientistjobs.com/jobs/browse/developmental_biology-all.htm]source[/url])
A laughed at the bunch of people who just read the title and posted saying 'Fuck greenpeace'. The patents may be a bad thing in the short term for the researchers but there will be researchers who do it out of the good of their heart, not out of the good of their wallet. All this means if it passes is that the research will be available to all who would use it rather than having it sold out to the highest bidder once it's made.
People's lives are saved on a daily basis by insulin produced from genetically engineered bacteria.
[QUOTE=Atlascore;32851336]At least the Libertarians would try doing something for our country, unlike the GOP which has proven in the last decade that they're the most corrupt, immature, and backwards political party to ever exist.[/QUOTE] If they would willing to do something, that's not exactly a good idea to let a person do it. We have the police department for that reason. I don't want each state to be a different country basically, because it doesn't work. If different states had different laws and each state had the supreme say for their area, it would be a huge mess and there would be a lot of corruption without a balance.
Is there a sane conservation organization out there anymore?
[QUOTE=ThatHippyMan;32851416]Is there a sane conservation organization out there anymore?[/QUOTE] You can't really ask that question on a public forum. It's highly debatable and it's best forming up your own opinion on something like that through research.
Godammit, I had a bit of respect for Greenpeace when they were fighting whalers. That's gone :/
It's just so broad. There's so many of them.
In our radio said that this scientist tried to patent a method of getting stem cells. This is nearly as bad as what monsanto does...
[QUOTE=ewitwins;32851441]Godammit, I had a bit of respect for Greenpeace when they were fighting whalers. That's gone :/[/QUOTE] fighting the whaling industry was the one thing they were good for
[QUOTE=Turnips5;32851356]It's patenting microbes. They're not even slightly sentient. They just happen to be really handy to use in genetic engineering and can be used to make products. Please don't buy into the "big science" crap. Check out a typical value for the annual salary for a biology researcher : £27,500 per annum ([url=http://www.newscientistjobs.com/jobs/browse/developmental_biology-all.htm]source[/url])[/QUOTE] That's actually a pretty good salary for a biology researcher, it's usually about £5000 lower. Discussing this with the research fellows in my lab, at least. (I'm a student doing my thesis on neurobiology. Specifically, adult neurogenesis which involves a little stem cell-age, so this is rather relevant to me)
[url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/europes-top-court-bans-scientists-from-stem-cell-patents-experts-say-research-will-suffer/2011/10/18/gIQAHFLxtL_story.html[/url] [quote]Some European religious groups welcomed the ruling. "We are in favor of research and development in biotechnology, but human beings must not be destroyed, not even in the early stages of their development," said Peter Liese of the EPP Christian Democrat group at the European Parliament. The German Bishops' Conference, part of the Catholic Church, called the decision a "victory for human dignity" and said it strengthened the view that life begins at conception.[/quote] [quote]"This casts real doubt on the possibility of new medicines from stem cell research," said Pete Coffey, a researcher at University College London running several projects on eye disease and stem cells. "Getting a stem cell technique to cure blindness is fantastic, but it may never get out as a medicine because no manufacturer will get any financial reward from it," he said.[/quote] fucking outstanding [editline]19th October 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Craigewan;32851547]That's actually a pretty good salary for a biology researcher, it's usually about £5000 lower. Discussing this with the research fellows in my lab, at least. (I'm a student doing my thesis on neurobiology. Specifically, adult neurogenesis which involves a little stem cell-age, so this is rather relevant to me)[/QUOTE] damn, that's kind of shit thanks for backing up my point though
[QUOTE=Turnips5;32851573][url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/europes-top-court-bans-scientists-from-stem-cell-patents-experts-say-research-will-suffer/2011/10/18/gIQAHFLxtL_story.html[/url] fucking outstanding [editline]19th October 2011[/editline] damn, that's kind of shit thanks for backing up my point though[/QUOTE] Yay Ludditism! Oh, and no problem. You do not go into science/research if you wish to be well paid. You only begin to see big money if you somehow get snapped up by a massive corporation, get off the research side of things and become a technical director or some kind of exec.
[QUOTE=Atlascore;32851603]"The European Union’s top court ruled Tuesday that scientists cannot patent stem cell techniques [U]that use human embryos for research[/U]" Human embryos weren't the only place we got stem cells from.[/QUOTE] christ that's like saying saudi arabia isn't the only place we get oil from so we should feel justified in nuking it human embyros are still pretty fucking important in this line of research
[QUOTE=Craigewan;32851601]Yay Ludditism![/QUOTE] Are you illiterate? They want this ban because they don't want companies to be able to patent life, not because they're against the actual research. The stuff about "people will die if this goes through!" is just fear mongering from companies who want to rile the public up in opposition to Greenpeace because Greenpeace is threatening their potential profits. [editline]18th October 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Craigewan;32851601]Yay Ludditism![/QUOTE] Are you illiterate? They want this ban because they don't want companies to be able to patent life, not because they're against the actual research. The stuff about "people will die if this goes through!" is just fear mongering from companies who want to rile the public up in opposition to Greenpeace because Greenpeace is threatening their potential profits.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;32851647]Are you illiterate? They want this ban because they don't want companies to be able to patent life, not because they're against the actual research. The stuff about "people will die if this goes through!" is just fear mongering from companies who want to rile the public up in opposition to Greenpeace because Greenpeace is threatening their potential profits. [editline]18th October 2011[/editline] Are you illiterate? They want this ban because they don't want companies to be able to patent life, not because they're against the actual research. The stuff about "people will die if this goes through!" is just fear mongering from companies who want to rile the public up in opposition to Greenpeace because Greenpeace is threatening their potential profits.[/QUOTE] No, I'm not illiterate, and they're not "patenting" life. They're patenting ways to use stem cells, which is no different to patenting a drug. Read yourself. It's not patenting stem cells, they're patenting "stem cell techniques." As in, the procedures and methods they have concieved (Pun not intended) that use stem cells. It is Greenpeace who is illiterate here. This, is a stupid and pointless waste of resources, and it will hamper research greatly.
[QUOTE=Atlascore;32851646]What the fuck kind of analogy is that, this can't be compared to nuking an entire region and killing hundreds of millions of people.[/QUOTE] I knew someone would attack my analogy hey, guess what, without genetics, [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Borlaug#Wheat_research_in_Mexico]at least a billion people would be dead from starvation[/url], so it's perfectly fucking valid maybe next time you'll actually have an argument?? ok [editline]19th October 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Zeke129;32851647]The stuff about "people will die if this goes through!" is just fear mongering from companies who want to rile the public up in opposition to Greenpeace because Greenpeace is threatening their potential profits.[/QUOTE] People who could have been saved WILL die if this goes through
[QUOTE=Atlascore;32851765]You're an idiot. They were saved because of FOOD, not stem cells.[/QUOTE] where'd you think they got the fucking food dumbass we're talking about genetics, not stem cells
[QUOTE=Turnips5;32851753] People who could have been saved WILL die if this goes through[/QUOTE] Because of greedy corporations, not because of Greenpeace. [editline]18th October 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Craigewan;32851690]No, I'm not illiterate, and they're not "patenting" life. They're patenting ways to use stem cells, which is no different to patenting a drug. Read yourself. It's not patenting stem cells, they're patenting "stem cell techniques." As in, the procedures and methods they have concieved (Pun not intended) that use stem cells. It is Greenpeace who is illiterate here. This, is a stupid and pointless waste of resources, and it will hamper research greatly.[/QUOTE] I don't see the difference, but either way it's going to allow companies to get monopolies on life saving treatments and charge out the ass for them.
[QUOTE=Atlascore;32851814]What. Do you know what thread you're posting in?[/QUOTE] all I can hear is someone screaming at a computer far, far away any semblance of reasoned debate was lost a long time ago
[QUOTE=Zeke129;32851839]Because of greedy corporations, not because of Greenpeace. [editline]18th October 2011[/editline] I don't see the difference, but either way it's going to allow companies to get monopolies on life saving treatments and charge out the ass for them.[/QUOTE] I hate companies/corporations as much as the next man, but you do realise they are the biggest source of funding for research, right? Government grants are a pitiful amount of research money compared to what Evil Greedy Corps will throw out. And the only thing that drives corporations to fund research is looking for the next "edge" in terms of patents. If they can deliver and patent a working solution because of their grant money, they see it as a good return on investment. It's why fields like ecology and conservation are so pitifully underfunded compared to things with medical benefits or technological applications. I'm an ecologist by trade, but have branched out a bit with my thesis, and the differences between the summer jobs I did in conservation and the lab I'm working in for my thesis, where we have corporate funding? It's like two entirely different worlds. Without them, Zeke, it's entirely likely that those life saving developments wouldn't be made in the first place. Not without changing society from the ground up. Call me a realist or a cynic, but I can believe in the term "necessary evil". This is shades of grey, not black and white like you make out.
if you want to drag this back into some kind of rational light, you can explain why stem cell research was crippled in the US after federal funding for embryonic stem cells was banned in 2001, despite the fact that researchers can supposedly work just fine with marrow stem cells [editline]19th October 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Atlascore;32851902]This thread was about stem cells, they banned patenting stem cells taken from human embryos, you're the one dragging ALL OF GENETICS into this, wheat research has nothing to do with human embyros, neither does most genetic research, comparing this to massive nuclear genocide just makes your ignorant argument even worse. Just stop.[/QUOTE] you were so busy targeting my analogy that you forgot your argument what I was TRYING to get across was how you were underplaying the importance of embryonic stem cells
"Innovative companies must have patent protection as an incentive to become active in Europe.” I think I should lay this out here so that it becomes more clear on what's happening.
[QUOTE=Atlascore;32851947]They banned embryonic stem cells from being used. In the EU they're banning [U]patenting[/U] things done with embryonic stem cells. Learn how to read, this isn't an outright ban like the one done in the US.[/QUOTE] that wasn't even your point you fucking tool, stop moving the goalposts [QUOTE=Atlascore;32851603]"The European Union’s top court ruled Tuesday that scientists cannot patent stem cell techniques [U]that use human embryos for research[/U] [b]Human embryos weren't the only place we got stem cells from.[/b][/quote] look this explain [editline]19th October 2011[/editline] this is all I care about you're trying to say somehow that researchers will be just fine with marrow stem cells
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.