tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12625691.post113477168211491617..comments2024-02-29T01:43:23.900-05:00Comments on Women's Bioethics Blog: More controversy on embryonic stem cell researchLinda MacDonald Glennhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02378544626277000243noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12625691.post-1135017028135080212005-12-19T13:30:00.000-05:002005-12-19T13:30:00.000-05:00Kevin, a question--since it seems like you know so...Kevin, a question--since it seems like you know something about the science end of this. I understand that SCNT is about where to *get* stem cells, etc. <BR/><BR/>But I also thought that the reason SCNT was seen as attractive was that it would enable the creation of stem cells that would be compatible (because genetically identical) to the cell donor--which would theoretically reduce the risk of rejection. Am I off base here?Sue Trinidadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04607124236112450990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12625691.post-1134933108841396612005-12-18T14:11:00.000-05:002005-12-18T14:11:00.000-05:00Given the past week's revelations about the the So...Given the past week's revelations about the the South Koreans' research in this area, however, we should all be quite a bit more skeptical of promises of cures for human disease any time soon. If somatic stem cell nuclear transfer has in fact *not* worked in humans, this field is nowhere near as far along as had been reported/believed. . . doesn't mean it can't, or won't, happen--but from a policy standpoint, a realistic understanding of what might be possible, and when, is important information.Sue Trinidadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04607124236112450990noreply@blogger.com