![]() |
Re: OK, now that's just mean Rush!
Quote:
Exactly. Michael J Fox has credibility. He actually has Parkinsons. He has been suffering from it for years. Some days are better and some are worse, but it will never go away until a cure is developed. When Rush calls MJF's credibility into question, he only discredits himself, and that's what is harming the GOP. Thank you for helping me make my point. |
Re: OK, now that's just mean Rush!
Quote:
You don't have credibility when you are obviously pandering to the TV spot for political reasons. It's pretty simple. He was obviously faking it, no questions. If he didn't take meds "just for show", it's the same as faking. It all lacks credibility. At no other times is he shown to be so uncontrollable, so the Fox argument is moot. Rush Limbaugh simple spoke what everyone else was thinking. Anything past the fact that Michael J Fox allowed himself to be puppeted for political purposes is nothing more than fodder. |
Re: OK, now that's just mean Rush!
Quote:
He has no credibility. He lost credibility for anyone with the disease because he flopped all over the place in a manner inconsistent with anything else he has been shown to do anytime prior to or since that one political ad. Ever think that it might have taken more than one take to get it right? It's ludicrous to assume that it's legit. |
Re: OK, now that's just mean Rush!
![]() |
Re: OK, now that's just mean Rush!
So what if i do have a small johnson, what's that got to do with things
|
Re: OK, now that's just mean Rush!
Quote:
why is it called a "johnson" did "johnson & johnson" invent it does it have something to do with pedophelia? re: john's son was some guy named johnson being a dick |
Re: OK, now that's just mean Rush!
Quote:
|
Re: OK, now that's just mean Rush!
Quote:
Not sure this is exactly a good article as evidence towards the case of tumors. The authors obviously are biased. I'd like to see an article from an actual peer-reviewed medical journal before drawing conclusions. |
Re: OK, now that's just mean Rush!
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/...n2128188.shtml
Quote:
Tardive Dyskinesia Quote:
|
Re: OK, now that's just mean Rush!
As for the "Tumors" article:
http://www.nature.com/news/2006/0610...061016-16.html Quote:
|
Re: OK, now that's just mean Rush!
Quote:
Good point, blue. As with any other research, medical research is a process of trial and error. Just because Harvard researchers found indications of tumors or pre-cancerous growth doesn?t mean that embryonic stem cell research is a total failure. It only means that our current mechanism to control embryonic cell development (and prevent malignant or parasitic growth) needs work. Setbacks are inherent in research, and failure down one avenue will lead to success in another. But even treatments proven to be effective can be risky. Many drugs and treatment protocols are controversial at first because of risks and side effects, like radiation and chemotherapy. People suffered and died while doctors learned how to dose and properly target the cancers. Imagine if we had halted research on these treatments because of the health risks ... or because of moral concerns over using "human guinea pigs"? or because a religious group had undue influence in Congress. |
Re: OK, now that's just mean Rush!
imo, the moratorium on embryonic stem cell research should be lifted. Researchers merely want access to all legally available embryonic material. If they can get it from cord blood, they’ll take it. If someone miscarries in a hospital, that’ll do. If someone has a legal abortion, they want access.
These scientists aren’t advocating abortion. They’re not saying we need to kill more babies so they can get more stem cells. People are already getting legal abortions and the embryos are getting thrown away. This research ban prevents researchers from making something good out of something terrible. Think of stem cell collection as a form of organ donation. Would you outlaw organ donation because some people don't like the idea or believe it desecrates the human body? No. Organ transplants save, lengthen and improve lives. Stem cell treatments could do the same and more in the future. |
Re: OK, now that's just mean Rush!
Quote:
Organ donors normally indicate that with a "Y" on their drivers license. People need to get sick and die sometimes- it's nature and no one can live forever. Lets work on passing assisted suicide for those really suffering. But yeah, next time a big hurricane is coming- lets hurl a bunch of old people at it and see if it slows it down. We aren't sure if it will stop the hurricane or prevent damage but lets try it anyway. :D:D:D Can everyone stfu?-really. No one is going to change anyone's mind on the subject and it has been agreed that MJF was bobbing more than usual. kthanxbye |
Re: OK, now that's just mean Rush!
I think we were just going for "No More Bullsh1t". Or in O'Reily lingo, "No Spin Zone."
|
Re: OK, now that's just mean Rush!
Quote:
I agree with that. People should be able to die with dignity. And until then, they should be able to live well. |
Re: OK, now that's just mean Rush!
Quote:
|
Re: OK, now that's just mean Rush!
And Rush might have mixed his meds that day (the RX and street drugs) with a drinkie....
|
Re: OK, now that's just mean Rush!
What a bunch of weak fluff-filled arguments for what is being talked about as the biggest Democratic goof of the year so far.
They screwed up. Whomever told MJF to act out the effects of his illness to pander to the voters in MO is getting reamed out right now. MJF lost all credibility as a spokesperson because he was not genuine about something that is so heart-wrenching and effects so many others. Regardless of the fact that, as others pointed out, ebryionic stem cells are not the end all that the media makes it out to be. Stem cells harvested in other ways have proven to be, if nothing else, very similar. For all of you crying about letting the scientists do what they want, where is all of the research on embryonic stem cell success on animals? |
Re: OK, now that's just mean Rush!
Quote:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/...n2128188.shtml Quote:
Tardive Dyskinesia Quote:
|
Re: OK, now that's just mean Rush!
Quote:
As for why you haven't seen any public applications, they are to date either too expensive, or results are still being kept confidential until enough data is gathered to present a scientifically sound conclusion that will stand up to extensive peer review. I imagine applications in animals is significantly different from that of human systems, hence the lack of results. Additionally, lacking government funding, this research has to be done entirely in the private sector. And here's the research articles that do exist: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gquery/g...nic+stem+cells |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:12 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.0.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.