← Return to New Promising Treatment? AOH1996 in early (in vivo) discovery

Discussion
Comment receiving replies
@jrobitai

Great summary IMHO

re:STEM - IDKY this is such a divisive topic on such a promising tech.
Like so many things the narrative has been hijacked by nefarious entities posing as do-gooders when non-differential stem cells are in the umbilical cord & discarded daily. No babies need dies in the name of progress.

Of course, I could be wrong...

Jump to this post


Replies to "Great summary IMHO re:STEM - IDKY this is such a divisive topic on such a promising..."

@jrobitai stem cells definitely have their own narrative about which I am largely uninformed and agnostic, although I just watched my evangelical son and daughter in law wrestle with that as they are pregnant with in-vitro fertilization. (I'm spelling things out here because I actually meant Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (ha!)) That kind of STEM my kids have in spades, as the daughter is a PhD research physicist and the son is a Google engineering manager....
While the article doesn't dwell on it, I suspect you're right--a lot of the selection, clipping, and editing of cellular biology such as involved in this treatment involves stem cells either directly or indirectly, and the thought that humans can edit cells without unintended consequences seems rather ambitious to someone like me who can't even see the cells 😉