Democrat Vs Republican - Health Care and Stem Cell Research

I would like to hear your opinion of the following statements, regarding Health Care and Stem Cell Reasearch.

Democrats call for "affordable and quality health care," and many advocate an expansion of government intervention in this area. Many Democrats favor a national health insurance system in a variety of forms to address the rising costs of modern health insurance. Some Democrats have called for a program of "Medicare for All."
Some Democratic governors have supported purchasing Canadian drugs, citing lower costs and budget restrictions as a primary incentive. Recognizing that unpaid insurance bills increase costs to the service provider, who passes the cost on to health-care consumers, many Democrats advocate expansion of health insurance coverage.

The Democratic Party has voiced overwhelming support for all stem cell research with federal funding. "under the strictest ethical guidelines."

Republican Party
The party opposes a single-payer universal health care system, such as that found in Canada or in most of Europe, sometimes referring to it as "socialized medicine " and is in favor of the current personal or employer based system of insurance, supplemented by Medicare for the elderly and Medicaid for the poor. The GOP has a mixed record of supporting the historically popular Social Security , Medicare and Medicaid programs, all of which Republicans initially opposed. On the one hand, congressional Republicans and the Bush administration supported a reduction in Medicaid's growth rate. On the other hand, congressional Republicans expanded Medicare, supporting a new drug plan for seniors starting 2006.

Although the GOP has voted for increases in government funding of scientific research, many members actively oppose the federal funding of embryonic stem cell research because it involves the harvesting and destruction of human embryos (which some consider ethically equivalent to abortion , while arguing for diverting research money into adult stem cell research

FYI: Embryonic stem cells are pluripotent meaning they are able to differentiate into all derivatives of the three primary germ layers : ectoderm , endoderm and mesoderm . In other words, they can develop into each of the more than 220 cell types of the adult body when given the sufficient and necessary stimulation for a specific cell type. Pluripotency distinguishes ES cells from multipotent progenitor cells found in the adult, which can only form a limited number of different cell types.

With a national healthcare system you limit quality. Why would someone become a doctor when they can sell cars and make more money? Thus, the physician pool gets diluted and sick people are forced to wait longer to see a physician and get treatment.

Don't get me wrong, something must be done to control healthcare costs, but putting the government in charge is not the right idea. The government cannot run a business now: The product is poor, expensive and if they didn't keep raising taxes they would have no incoming cash. Letting the government control healthcare is wrong.

As for stem cell research, there is plenty of private money being used to fund adult stem cell research, where there have been wonderful advancements and people successfully treated. Hence, private money funding the research....the chance for PROFIT.

Embryonic stem cell research has not produced one cure or made one person better. It has, however, made people sick, caused excruciating pain in the recievers of the cells, and doctors couldn't eliminate the pain or reverse the effects. Private money (ie: big business) does not conduct embryonic stem cell research because of this. If there is limited or no hope for success, they do not spend their money on it (this ought to be a sign that adult stem cell research is where the government should pin its hopes). However, embryonic stem cell research is a front for abortion. If you have a need for the stem cells, you can justify abortion on demand, as the Roe vs. Wade arguement will surely be reversed someday, but that is another arguement.

Although the arguement is made that embryonic stem cells are more useful, and can accomodate greater change, no study has proven it. In fact, when used on humans, they have failed and in many cases made people worse off than before.

This is a very personal issue, on many fronts. I encourage people to read the studies, not the news, before formulating an opinion on this. The media is biased. As in all cases, follow the money...if large companies are spending money on research for something, they see profit there, which means success. If the government is throwing money at something, it smells of failure.

Most importantly, do not read the party line for dems or republicans and assume it is the truth. It is their truth. The real truth is somewhere in between.

Whatever the party affiliation, I can tell you our healthcare system is not working for millions of people. As a nurse, I am in contact with people from all walks of life on a daily basis.
Some shameful examples:

An elderly retired couple on a limited income with the "new improved" prescription drug plan. For 3 months out of the year after their limit is exceeded, they either do without food or their drugs. She has cancer.

A 52 year old kidney failure patient admitted with sepsis. He's been in and out of the hospital all year. Dr.s say he can go home and receive his antibiotics through a home healthcare agency. No problem right? Wrong! The "new improved drug plan" will pay for the antibiotic alright....just not the fluids or tubing to deliver it to the patient as an outpatient. However the government plan will pay for him to receive his medication in hospital for 6 weeks paid in full! He chose to go home with no treatment rather than be hospitalized again.

A young working mother admitted with a pulmonary embolism. She received her few days of treatments of lovenox ( a blood thinner) and was to be discharged home with home health care to give her shots for another week. Same situation once again. Her private insurance will pay for in hospital treatments, but would charge an exorbitant $900 a week co-pay for home administration.

Just a few real examples of some actual patients I have seen. It makes no sense.

The way we care for our elderly in this country is shameful! They should not have to choose between food and medication, and I can tell you this going on right now in numbers you wouldn't believe!!

^Don't get me wrong, something must be done to control healthcare costs, but putting the government in charge is not the right idea. The government cannot run a business now: The product is poor, expensive and if they didn't keep raising taxes they would have no incoming cash. Letting the government control healthcare is wrong.

Bill I agree with you the government is failing and something needs to be done! But private insurance companies care about a profit and that is their bottom line. Maybe electing people with a little knowledge of the healthcare system could provide some solutions. All I know is our hospitals are full of sad cases and there are no quick fixes.

Putting the government in charge is not the right idea. Putting someone in charge of our healthcare decisions with little or no knowledge of healthcare is not the right idea either.
I have seen the same scenarios at the hospital I work at. We have "Frequent Flyers" but they don't get a discount. They come back at the end of every month when they haven't been able to afford their diuretics, beta blockers and all their other medications and now their blood pressure is out of control and their lungs are filled with fluid. It is ridiculous!

Back to the stem cell research. Here are some more facts:

Because of their plasticity and potentially unlimited capacity for self-renewal, embryonic stem cell therapies have been proposed for regenerative medicine and tissue replacement after injury or disease. To date, no approved medical treatments have been derived from embryonic stem cell research. This is not unusual for a new medical research field. Besides the ethical problems of stem cell therapy , there is a technical problem of graft-versus-host disease associated with allogeneic stem cell tranplantion . However, these problems associated with histocompatibility may be solved using autologous donor adult stem cells or via therapeutic cloning .

Adult stem cell research is more advanced, at least in part, because of its four decade head start over embryo stem cell studies. Researchers began using adult stem cells from bone marrow back in 1960. It was only in 1998 that other researchers were able to isolate and cultivate embryo stem cells. Adult stem cell research thus has an almost four decade head start compared to embryo-derived stem cells.

Adult stem cells express transporters of the ATP-binding cassette family that actively pump a diversity of organic molecules out of the cell. Many pharmaceuticals are exported by these transporters conferring multidrug resistance onto the cell. This complicates the design of drugs, for instance, neural stem cell targeted therapies for the treatment of clinical depression.
Adult stem cells are being developed for use in treatments for a variety of human conditions, ranging from blindness to spinal cord injury. Since adult stem cells can be harvested from the patient, potential ethical issues and immunogenic rejection are averted. Although many different kinds of multipotent stem cells have been identified, adult stem cells that could give rise to all cell and tissue types have not yet been found. Adult stem cells are often present in only minute quantities and can therefore be difficult to isolate and purify. Depending on the stem cell type, they can be multiplied in-vitro to therapeutic numbers.

Generally though, adult stem cells do not self-renew as effectively as embryonic stem cells. This is especially true of hematopoietic stem cells. There is also limited evidence that adult stem cells may not have the same capacity to multiply as embryonic stem cells .
Finally, adult stem cells may contain more DNA abnormalities—caused by sunlight, toxins, and errors in DNA replication over the course of a lifetime. However, there are a number of clinically proven adult stem cell successes.
Over 100 million Americans and two billion other humans worldwide suffer from diseases that may eventually be treated more effectively with stem cells or even cured. These include heart disease, diabetes, and certain types of cancer.
Stem cells can be extracted from very young human embryos -- typically from surplus frozen embryos left over from in-vitro fertilization (IVF) procedures at fertility clinics. A couple undergoing IVF is faced with four alternatives for their 16 or so surplus embryos:

1.. Have them discarded
2. Donate them to another infertile couple "embryo adoption"
3. Donate the embryos for research
4. Have the embryos preserved at very low temperatures

There are very few parents willing to give their embryos to another couple for a variety of emotional reasons. There are very few couples willing to receive them for emotional reasons and because thawed embryos have such a low chance of starting a pregnancy. Preservation can be expensive. So most ask that they be discarded. Would you discard a live human being? The definition of when life begins differs among different people and groups. So is it okay to discard the embryos but not okay to use them for promising research?
There are currently hundreds of thousands of surplus embryos in storage. One source estimated that there were 400,000 stored embryos by mid-2003. However, a minority of pro-lifers and a majority of pro-life organizations object to the use of embryos in research. They feel that a few-days-old embryo is a human person. Extracting its stem cells kills the embryo -- an act that they consider to be murder. What do they consider discarding? If you can not sustain your own life through breathing and circulating blood with a beating heart are you alive?
Stem cells can now be grown in the laboratory, so (in a pinch) some research can be done using existing stem cells. No further harvesting needs to be made from embryos. However, existing stem cell lines are gradually degrading and will soon be useless for research.

Government research using embryo stem cells had been authorized in Britain, but was initially halted in the U.S. by President George W. Bush. He decided in 8/2001 to allow research to resume in government labs, but restricted researchers to use only 72 existing lines of stem cells. By 5/03, most of these lines had become useless. Only 22 remained in mid-2006, and many of them were of limited usefulness because of DNA damage.
Research continues in U.S. private labs and in both government and private labs in the UK, Japan, France, Australia, and other countries. In Sep 2002, Governor Davis of California signed bill SB 253 into law. It is the first law in the U.S. that permits stem cell research. Davis simultaneously signed a bill that permanently bans all human cloning in the state for reproduction purposes -- i.e. any effort to create a cloned individual.
Following former president Ronald Reagan's death due to Alzheimer's in June 2004 -- a slow, lingering disease that took a decade to kill him -- Nancy Reagan and all of her family, except for Michael Reagan, mounted a campaign to encourage President Bush to relax restrictions on embryo stem cell research. Fifty-eight senators, almost all Democrats, sent a letter to President Bush, urging the same action.
A federal bill passed the House on 5/2405 to allow government funded research on embryonic stem cells extracted from surplus embryos in fertility clinics. It was later passed by the Senate. President Bush vetoed it -- his first veto of his presidency!

I just want to know how a man with an IQ of less than 100 got elected. Maybe all the intelligent people were working on election day!

Rachel about the stem cell research debate....anyone who has a relative with Alzheimer's, Parkinson's or Diabetes, as well of those of us in the healthcare profession who care for them will no doubt agree it should be continued.

^Embryonic stem cells are pluripotent meaning they are able to differentiate into all derivatives of the three primary germ layers : ectoderm , endoderm and mesoderm . In other words, they can develop into each of the more than 220 cell types of the adult body when given the sufficient and necessary stimulation for a specific cell type. Pluripotency distinguishes ES cells from multipotent progenitor cells found in the adult, which can only form a limited number of different cell types.

These embryonic cells have potential for cures! It should continued to be explored....that's why it's called research. The Republicans are hung up on the abortion issue. The drug companies stand to lose big if cures are found. Something to think about in any case.

^I just want to know how a man with an IQ of less than 100 got elected. Maybe all the intelligent people were working on election day!

lol Rachel.... I think a lot of people are regreting their votes right about now!

debbylyn,

You are correct that the republicans are "hung up" on the abortion issue. If you can be charged for two counts of murder, for killing a pregnant woman, then you should be charged with murder for having an abortion. How can it be choice when one person kills someone and a crime when someone else does it?

But, the real issue here is helping people. Adult stem cells have helped people. Embryonic ones have not. The drug companies and medical suppliers will be the ones to benefit should stem cell research pay off with cures....they will be the ones to deliver the stem cells and grow them via cloning, in labs, that is why they have spent fortunes on research for adult stem cells, it has the greatest potential to be a profit center for them. Those cures will require cells and they will be poised to provide them.

In regards to your statement above regarding healthcare, yes it is sad that the elderly and infirm cannot get adequate care because of insurance costs, but that in and of itself does not merit government healthcare that tax payers have to pay for. As it stands now, 90% of all taxes are paid by the top 2% of earners in America. That is not an even distribution of taxation. Why should they pay more? No, I'm not in that 2% group, but I pay way more taxes than I should. Every time the government does something that citizens should do (like manage thier own health care), it just gets worse. Their are countries with government paid, managed health care. People die before they get treated because of the time and red tape. When I have worked jobs where my employer didn't provide health insurance, I paid for it myself....so long starbucks, so long cable tv, so long internet access, hello medical coverage....why? Because it was important to me and my family. We made changes in our expenditures so that we could pay the premiums and I found a job with a firm that had coverage. Freedom and responsibility go hand in hand. Yes, it is sad when people cannot get help, but when they choose to not prepare for the future (and are thus dependent upon social security for an income), choose not to pay for healthcare, and do this at a time in their life when they know they are more likely to get sick (youth is, after all, wasted on the young), whose fault is that? When my dad was a sixty five year old door greeter at Walmart, it was not my fault he had not put away money for old age and social security was not enough, but he wouldn't take help from the family either....because he believes in being independant and not taking from others what he should have put away for himself. Life is about choices and every time in my life I was in a bad way, it was because of my choices...we should all be accountable. There is not a steady stream of money any longer....the baby boomers are retiring and those of us employed are paying a higher tax burden because of it. We cannot work to support others forever. The governments money comes from us.

As for companies profiting from advances in healthcare, they already do that with all the drugs on the market. Did you think they would research the embryonic stem cells and when they work out the kinks it would be offered for free? Let's not research a potentially life saving / life changing treatment for fear the drug companies may make more of a profit uuuuuuuuhhhhhh NO.

As for this statement:

but when they choose to not prepare for the future (and are thus dependent upon social security for an income), choose not to pay for healthcare, and do this at a time in their life when they know they are more likely to get sick (youth is, after all, wasted on the young), whose fault is that?

In some cases fate. Young people do not ask to be born with diabilities or be diagnosed with Lupus, Cancer, Kidney Failure or MS. Just because someone is on SSI/SSD does not mean it was their choice or lack of preparation. When able bodied yes be accountable and for the others there has to be exceptions. UUUUMMMMM maybe ESR could help to make these disease stricken people able bodied. Not without research!

Adult stem cell research is more advanced, at least in part, because of its four decade head start over embryo stem cell studies. Researchers began using adult stem cells from bone marrow back in 1960!! It was only in 1998 that other researchers were able to isolate and cultivate embryo stem cells. Adult stem cell research thus has an almost four decade head start compared to embryo-derived stem cells.

^Adult stem cell research is more advanced, at least in part, because of its four decade head start over embryo stem cell studies. Researchers began using adult stem cells from bone marrow back in 1960!! It was only in 1998 that other researchers were able to isolate and cultivate embryo stem cells. Adult stem cell research thus has an almost four decade head start compared to embryo-derived stem cells.

That's so true Rachel. All treatments and procedures we have today were developed by brilliant minds doing research. The first blood transfusions caused harm to some because we weren't aware of the need to type and crossmatch.

I don't believe that anyone condones abortion specifically to target stem cell harvest, but as long as it is a legal procedure under the constitution, those embryos should be available instead of being cast out in the trash. But that issue aside....

Many people are not born with the intellect or resources to work a job that provides insurance or for that matter a living wage. It's hard to save for a future need when present needs can't be met. I'm sorry but in my eyes...I am my brother's keeper and this country of immense wealth should be ashamed of what our parents and grandparents have been given.

"I am my brother's keeper and this country of immense wealth should be ashamed of what our parents and grandparents have been given."

Our parents and grandparents who have little now, are that way because they chose not to save and invest. Many boomers are wealthy and that wealth will transfer to their kids and grandkids when they die...the rest should have saved and invested. I know it is hard. I work 60+ hours a week for a reason. I choose to. I was raised by a man who is now 79 and has little to show for it. Despite raising me that, "if it is to be, it is up to me" he didn't save well. He doesn't blame anyone else for his current condition. He is a good, decent, independent person.

Why should the haves, who pay 90% of the taxes give to the have nots? Redistribution of wealth is a communist principle and it never works. All economic models show that within one year, the wealth is redistributed back to the wealthy, as they continue to be workers and savers. I wouldn't work long, hard hours to give it to someone else...why should I when I can work a menial job and have it given to me? If you take wealth from those who earn it and give it to their brothers and sisters, pretty soon they stop earning it...because, after all, why should one person work harder than another??? Because their hard work pays off.....for them....not someone else.

I was born in a gang infested neighborhood. I've seen my friends, beaten, stabbed and shot. I didn't go the route they did. I paid my way through college unloading trucks in a warehouse. I went to school full time, worked full time and work hard now. Life is about choices. I am proof that you can have what you want (I'm not the best or the brightest) if you are willing to work for it.

When I hear people complain about not having much, I am reminded of a line from the Untouchables: What are you willing to do about it?

If all you are willing to do is whine and complain, then it won't get any better. When you truly want something bad enough, you find a way to get it. I did. My dad did. In America, you can be whatever you want to be, if you want to be it bad enough you will work for it and that includes having healthcare.

I know someone intelligent who graduated from college. She is 34 years old and was recently dignosed with breast cancer. She had to have a double mastectomy and is undergoing chemotherapy which leaves your body very weak. She is now unable to work and on SSD. Not by choice, because she worked hard to earn her American dream. So should we tell her sorry that you got cancer and can no longer support yourself, it's not our problem.

You can not save and invest when you are struggling to survive now can you?

Earning - this is a joke when people can put on fancy underwear and beat people's brains in for millions a match and when you have men running around in tights chasing a misshapen ball for millions a year.

I am not whining and I am a college graduate who works hard for her money. I am also a taxpayer who has every right to complain if I feel a process is not working. After all if everyone believed what you say we'll be unfortunate enough to have another Republican President who wants to make the rich get richer and the poor stay poor. We need to help people who want to help themselves and leave our noses out of other countries business when our own country has so many problems!

It is not about democrats and republicans....it is about the haves and have nots. The republicans are rich elitists....so are the democrats. Nancy Pelosi and her husband have 17 million in stock that due her leaving Samoa off of the list of places to see an increase in minimum wage, is doing nicely. Yes, they are huge share holders in Del Monte, the parent company of Star Kist, the largest employer in Samoa.

Lets not throw stones.

The rich in both parties run this country and keep you and I at arms length. We will never see change in this country because the truly wealthy, those that make millions each year, won't give up the power.

Raising minimum wage, BS. It hurt more than it helps. I live in a state where the minimum wage is $5.15 an hour. My son makes $8.50 an hour and was told when the minimum wage hits, they will reallocate staff and he will see a pay cut as he takes over someone elses job. Free enterprise demands that some in his company make minimum wage, because that is all they are worth. Others, like him, make more, because of what they do and how hard they work. But, businesses will not lose money, so the weak workers, who are tolerable at five bucks an hour will be let go, while those that make more, will take less, to keep their jobs.

The tuition bill: Voted for by both dems and republicans is a farce. It does not lower college costs as touted. It does nothing to lower the cost of books and tuition. It lowers the interest on loans and doesn't do much of that until 2011. Why? Because the elite do not want the rest of us to be educated and know that we are getting screwed.

Don't think in terms of liberals and conservatives. Think in terms of rich elite and working class. The wealthy want us in our place. Forcing us out of college by raising the cost and doing nothing to help (lower interest on student loans, while costs continue to rise only leaves you with more debt when you graduate) limits who can go to school. Fewer educated people gives more power to the powerful.

Complaining about democrats and republicans is like complaining about muggers and pickpockets....both are stealing you blind.

And, Rachel, that is why SSD is there. Upon completion of her therapy, she will be able to return to work and use her education. The world is a sad place and bad things happen to good people. I know. I've lived it. I've been well off (rich by some standards) and lost it all twice in my life, due to health issues. SSD does not pay the bills when your life is built on making 10k or better a month. But, I got right back in the game, rather than accept what was given me. I've been on both ends of the spectrum. I've been homeless and sold plasma so my son could have Christmas and I could pay the house payment. I've also done well and donated more in a year than some people make, because I wanted to give back after having been down.

When you talk about these issues, I've lived them, they aren't some idealistic principle for me.

I grew up in a working class town, but industry here has been shipped overseas or put out of business by foreign competition....thanks to the Republicans in power. What concerns me is not the so called "welfare" system....we can all agree that some people will take the free ride, my concern is for those who worked hard all their lives and did save, only to have it consumed in a few years by over inflated health care costs and copayments. Is it fair if you get cancer that you can choose to eat or buy pills? How about the $3000 a month nursing home bill? How long will the savings last? People are living into their 90's today and no one could have predicted this decades ago.

I commend you and others like you who have the fortitude to rise above your conditions and make a successful living. I also consider myself a success....teenmom, poor working class...I also worked hard full time while attending college to get my degree. It does pay off. And I'm definitely not a communist. I'm not proposing that we give our money away to those who don't or won't help themselves. But....this country in all her glory is somehow ignoring the elderly. Our culture does not care for and value our elders like most other nations and cultures worldwide. I think our mothers and fathers deserve to be cared for and respected in their old age regardless of their saving habits.

^Earning - this is a joke when people can put on fancy underwear and beat people's brains in for millions a match and when you have men running around in tights chasing a misshapen ball for millions a year.

lol Rachel we sure do value our over payed athletes more than we do our elders!!!

^Don't think in terms of liberals and conservatives. Think in terms of rich elite and working class. The wealthy want us in our place. Forcing us out of college by raising the cost and doing nothing to help (lower interest on student loans, while costs continue to rise only leaves you with more debt when you graduate) limits who can go to school. Fewer educated people gives more power to the powerful.

Complaining about democrats and republicans is like complaining about muggers and pickpockets....both are stealing you blind.

Very well put Bill....I totally agree with this point!

Debbylyn, you and everyone like you, who didn't sit back and let life happen deserves to be commended.

But, the elderly had their shot and some of them have done very well (ask investment bankers managing their portfolios) while others have not. That is life. Just as you have done well for yourself as a young mother who worked hard, others did not. These are life skills and life habits that don't change when you get older. You either make it or you don't. Look around you at your friends and associates....some will survive and live well in old age, some will barely make it, as they do now, because of the choices they make.

You could probably survive anything because of who you are. I know I could. But, I know people who couldn't survive if trouble struck. You are either wired to be a survivor or you are not and sadly it stays with you into old age.

Here is a little something on stem cell research: http://www.humanevents.com/rightangle/index.php?p=19766

I know a little about stem cell research as I did my research paper for Ethics on the subject a couple years back. I think it deserves to be explored. As I read in a recent article...If you or your loved one had a disease such as Alzheimer's or Diabetes and you knew a cure lay behind one of four doors, would you choose to open only one door?

I will check out the above mentioned link Bill, thanks.