Medical Forum / General / Alternative / August 2005
OPTION TO STEM CELLS FOUND
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Dr. Jai Maharaj - 05 Aug 2005 05:47 GMT Option to stem cells found
Pitt experts say placental cells offer palatable alternative
By Byron Spice Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Friday, August 5, 2005
University of Pittsburgh http://www.pitt.edu/ researchers have discovered that one type of cell in the human placenta has characteristics that are strikingly similar to embryonic stem cells in their ability to regenerate a wide variety of tissues.
The cells, called amniotic epithelial cells, potentially could be used to produce new liver cells to treat liver failure, or new pancreatic islet cells to cure diabetes or new neurons to treat Parkinson's disease.
Unlike embryonic stem cells, which are obtained only by destroying human embryos, these cells can be extracted from the same placentas that now are routinely discarded after birth. They thus could be a non-controversial alternative to embryonic stem cells. http://stemcells.alphamedpress.org/
"We think it would be easier to get these to the clinic than [embryonic stem] cells," said Stephen Strom, an associate professor of pathology at the Pitt medical school.
Not only do amniotic epithelial cells lack the controversy of embryonic stem cells, but they also do not generate the tumors associated with embryonic stem cells, he said. So it may be possible in some cases to simply transplant the amniotic cells to a patient, rather than to first grow the desired specialized cells in the laboratory.
Strom and Dr. Yoshio Miki, an instructor in the pathology department, described their discovery in a paper published online last night in Stem Cells Express; the paper also will appear in an upcoming issue of the journal Stem Cells.
Publication of the paper had been delayed while the university sought patent protection for the discovery, Strom noted. A local biotechnology company, Stemnion Inc., has licensed the patent rights from Pitt with plans to use the cells for treating cirrhosis and diabetes and to spur wound healing.
In the meantime, a couple of Japanese research groups have already confirmed several aspects of the Pitt findings.
"This is an exciting report," said David Prentice, senior fellow for life sciences at the conservative Family Research Council. More and more reports are emerging regarding stem cells derived from such sources as amniotic fluid, bone marrow and nasal mucosa that have much of the same flexibility as embryonic stem cells, but that don't carry the danger of generating tumors, he noted.
The announcement comes with embryonic stem cells once again in the headlines. Last week, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., broke with the Bush administration and said he would support federal funding to create additional embryonic stem cell lines. President Bush this week reiterated his intent to veto any such an expansion of federal stem cell research.
Alan Russell, director of Pitt's McGowan Institute for Regenerative Medicine, said finding new sources of stem cells will be vital to accelerating the pace of stem cell research.
"The placenta and umbilical cord appear to be rich sources for stem cells that have real potential to treat disease," said Russell, who also is an adviser to Stemnion. "Strom's discovery adds another piece to the puzzle that will help patients in the future."
Amniotic epithelial cells make up the thin membrane known as the amnion, or birth sac, which contains the fetus and amniotic fluid. Among other functions, the amnion keeps the developing baby from becoming permanently affixed through wound healing to the mother's organs.
Doctors have recognized that the membrane was rich in stem cells and have long used it as a sort of human bandage to aid in healing, notably in eye surgery.
That's why Miki and Strom first studied amniotic epithelial cells four years ago. Strom is interested in developing sources of liver cells, called hepatocytes, that could be used as an alternative to liver organ transplantation for treating cirrhosis and liver failure.
Once Miki found that the amniotic cells indeed could be used to produce hepatocyte-like cells, he began exploring their other capabilities. That's when he found that they were similar in almost every way to embryonic stem cells.
Just why the cells in this membrane should retain the potential for generating almost any type of tissue in the body is not clear, Strom said, and it may simply be a consequence of when these cells are created during early development.
Embryonic stem cells are found when the developing embryo is still a free-floating ball of 40 to 150 cells. The cells in the middle of this ball, which have yet to take on any specialized functions, are the stem cells.
The amniotic epithelial cells are the first of the inner cell mass to "differentiate," or acquire a specialized function; they develop when the blastocyst prepares for implantation in the uterus.
Only after implantation does the inner mass of stem cells begin to differentiate, undergoing a major transformation called gastrulation in which the cells divide into three major classes of cells from which all other tissues are derived. Because amniotic epithelial cells pre-date gastrulation, Strom said, they retain the ability to form any type of tissue.
Amniotic epithelial cells, unlike embryonic stem cells, cannot live forever, Strom said, so therapies based on them will depend on regularly harvesting cells from discarded placentas.
Also, questions remain as to whether the replacement tissues generated from amniotic epithelial cells will be rejected by a recipient. The amniotic epithelial cells don't have many of the cell antigens that can trigger rejection, Strom said, but that seems to change as the cells differentiate.
That would not pose any problem for liver cell transplants, he noted, because the liver can tolerate transplanted cells as long as they have a compatible blood type. But it could be a problem for therapies such as islet cell transplants to cure diabetes.
With about 4 million births a year, however, it should be possible to find donor placentas with tissue types compatible to any recipient, Strom said.
Or, some people may choose to follow Miki's example. His wife, Hisae, is due to give birth any day now and he plans to save the placenta, banking it for possible future use by their child.
http://www.postgazette.com/pg/05217/549236.stm
- - - - - - - Don't wait for the MSM to report this - they don't seem to be interested unless babies (embryos) can be sacrificed.
Posted on 08/04/2005 9:27:46 PM PDT by pittsburgh gop guy
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - End of forwarded messages
Jai Maharaj http://www.mantra.com/jai Om Shanti
Hindu Holocaust Museum http://www.mantra.com/holocaust
Hindu life, principles, spirituality and philosophy http://www.hindu.org http://www.hindunet.org
The truth about Islam and Muslims http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate
The terrorist mission of Jesus stated in the Christian bible:
"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not so send peace, but a sword. "For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. "And a man's foes shall be they of his own household. - Matthew 10:34-36.
o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the educational purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post may not have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works. o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read, considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name, current e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number. o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others are not necessarily those of the poster who may or may not have read the article.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use of which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance the understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Since newsgroup posts are being removed by forgery by one or more net terrorists, this post may be reposted several times.
Craig Chilton - 05 Aug 2005 08:11 GMT On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 04:47:41 GMT, Jai Maharaj <usenet@mantra.com> reported:
> Pitt experts say placental cells offer palatable alternative. <flush remainder>
We don't NEED an "alternative," you pathetically-moronic loon.
However, there is nothing wrong with pursuing ADDITIONAL avenues of medical advances.
Go get yourself a life. DAMN, but you Anti-Choice control-freaks are all dumber than dead rocks! How you jerks can survive walking in a rainstorm without drowning is amazing.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
Reasoned Insanity - 06 Aug 2005 15:53 GMT > On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 04:47:41 GMT, > Jai Maharaj <usenet@mantra.com> reported: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > -- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>. Aren't you the one who is always spouting about the hate of the right? What you wrote is an example of hate if I ever saw it. I mean you attack the guy for posting something that, if anything, actually supports your cause by advocating research into such things. Why did you "flush" over half his post? Are you not the one that I see complaining about people deleting parts of your many idotic posts? Hypocrite. Maybe you should consider an anger management class.
osprey - 06 Aug 2005 16:13 GMT > > On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 04:47:41 GMT, > > Jai Maharaj <usenet@mantra.com> reported: [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > of your many idotic posts? Hypocrite. Maybe you should consider an anger > management class. I agree with you. Finding an alternative is a good idea. I for one am all for stem cell research. And if we can find away to get the cells needed to help cure disease without the having to take a human life, then I support that all the way. In this area Craig and I will strongly disagree, which is why I don't normally respond to his post..it saves any hard feelings. We agree to disagree. But I strongly will disagree with Graig on this and say we do need an alternative, if an alternative is available.
Craig Chilton - 07 Aug 2005 03:14 GMT >>> Jai Maharaj <usenet@mantra.com> reported:
>>>> Pitt experts say placental cells offer palatable alternative.
>>> <flush remainder> >>> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >>> are all dumber than dead rocks! How you jerks can survive walking >>> in a rainstorm without drowning is amazing.
>> ... you attack the guy for posting something that, if anything, actually >> supports your cause by advocating research into such things.
> I agree with you. Finding an alternative is a good idea. I for one am > all for stem cell research. And if we can find away to get the cells [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > disagree. But I strongly will disagree with Graig on this and say we > do need an alternative, if an alternative is available. In the interests of retaining our truce, I simply will comment that there is nothing wrong with ADDITIONAL approaches to fighting disease being brought to bear. But ADDING those methods does *not* preclude ALSO pursuing embryonic stem-cell research toward that end.
Any more than painting with oils precludes painting with acrylics.
Having MANY ways to approach a problem is a GOOD thing. The more, the better. Jai implied that medical science should pursue other methods **in lieu** of stem cell research, and THAT is why I criticized him. For taking 'WAY too narrow a view.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
Craig Chilton - 07 Aug 2005 03:05 GMT >> Jai Maharaj <usenet@mantra.com> reported:
>>> Pitt experts say placental cells offer palatable alternative.
>> <flush remainder> >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >> are all dumber than dead rocks! How you jerks can survive walking >> in a rainstorm without drowning is amazing.
> Aren't you the one who is always spouting about the hate of the right? I shine a very bright spotlight on it, yes. And in the process, show how the relevant facts reveal the utter vacuousness of their agendas, and those agendas as being sociopathic and utterly devoid of one scintilla of redeeming social significance.
> What you wrote is an example of hate if I ever saw it. LOL!!! That's how bigots ALWAYS respond, when their bigotry is spotlighted. Works for me! I wouldn't have it any other way!
> I mean you attack the guy for posting something that, if anything, > actually supports your cause by advocating research into such things. Surely you jest!!! Jai is one of Usenet's more notorious Anti-Choicers, and if you didn't see that he was making an attempt to promote folks' viewing an **additional** means as an ALTERNATIVE to wield, in LIEU of stem-cell research, then you're not particularly astute.
There's nothing wrong with medical science taking a MULTI-pronged approach to solving problems. But to even HINT that such a viable and promising method as embryonic stem-cell research should be *dropped,* while other methods are pursued -- is abject STUPIDITY.
So I called him on that.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
Reasoned Insanity - 07 Aug 2005 21:51 GMT >>> Jai Maharaj <usenet@mantra.com> reported: > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > I shine a very bright spotlight on it, yes. Then you will be sure to shine a very bright spotlight on yourself then.
>> What you wrote is an example of hate if I ever saw it. > > LOL!!! That's how bigots ALWAYS respond, when their bigotry is > spotlighted. Works for me! I wouldn't have it any other way! Way to refute, way to refute!
>> I mean you attack the guy for posting something that, if anything, >> actually supports your cause by advocating research into such things. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > So I called him on that. You didn't call him on anything, you just get off on murdering babies. From the the article said, the alternative method proposed actually is easier and better than killing unborn children. You just can't seem to get over that your excuses for women and scientists to be able to murder are slowly being checked off.
Craig Chilton - 08 Aug 2005 08:53 GMT >>>> Jai Maharaj <usenet@mantra.com> reported:
>>>>> Pitt experts say placental cells offer palatable alternative.
>>>> <flush remainder> >>>> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >>>> are all dumber than dead rocks! How you jerks can survive walking >>>> in a rainstorm without drowning is amazing.
>>> Aren't you the one who is always spouting about the hate of the >>> right?
>> I shine a very bright spotlight on it, yes.
> Then you will be sure to shine a very bright spotlight on yourself then. I present FACTS. And that always indicts the bigots. Especially since they have NO relevant facts available to draw upon in their defense.
>>> What you wrote is an example of hate if I ever saw it.
>> LOL!!! That's how bigots ALWAYS respond, when their bigotry is >> spotlighted. Works for me! I wouldn't have it any other way!
> Way to refute, way to refute! Stating a FACT is the only refutation necessary.
>>> I mean you attack the guy for posting something that, if anything, >>> actually supports your cause by advocating research into such things.
>> Surely you jest!!! Jai is one of Usenet's more notorious Anti-Choicers, >> and if you didn't see that he was making an attempt to promote folks' [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >> >> So I called him on that.
> You didn't call him on anything, you just ... ...are FAIR and SENSIBLE enough to value **real people** more than mere, UNwanted reproductive-process entities (which not even the Bible defends) -- to the infinite power factorial.
So as I said -- I CALLED him on his abject stupidity.
> From the the article said, the alternative method proposed actually > is easier and better than... ...pursuing embryonic stem cell research. No problem!! Some methods of approaching problems typically are easier than other, but often are EQUALLY valid, multi-pronged approaches. As is the case here. NO harm, no foul. Go for both/all, and thereby make medical advancements even faster and more effectively.
<stupidity-flush>
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
Reasoned Insanity - 08 Aug 2005 11:58 GMT >>>>> Jai Maharaj <usenet@mantra.com> reported: > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > I present FACTS. And that always indicts the bigots. Especially > since they have NO relevant facts available to draw upon in their defense. Please Craig, lets not go there. You never have been able to defend yourself in this area. You NEVER have been able to present proof of any "facts" that you've had. Come back when you can prove your little "facts".
Here's a little stupidity flush for you.
Craig Chilton - 08 Aug 2005 15:09 GMT >>>>>> Jai Maharaj <usenet@mantra.com> reported:
>>>>>>> Pitt experts say placental cells offer palatable alternative.
>>>>>> <flush remainder> >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >>>>>> are all dumber than dead rocks! How you jerks can survive walking >>>>>> in a rainstorm without drowning is amazing.
>>>>> Aren't you the one who is always spouting about the hate of the >>>>> right?
>>>> I shine a very bright spotlight on it, yes.
>>> Then you will be sure to shine a very bright spotlight on yourself >>> then.
>> I present FACTS. And that always indicts the bigots. Especially >> since they have NO relevant facts available to draw upon in their >> defense.
> Please Craig, lets not go there. ROTFL!!!!! You're probably HOPING that I won't. Since that's about to prove **devastating** to you and your loathsome agenda against millions of women.
> You never have been able to defend yourself in this area. Ah. Per that comment, one or both of these is/are true:
(1) You're as deluded and brainwashed as any cult lemming who has ever lived.
and/or...
(2) LYING is your long suit.
> You NEVER have been able to present proof of any "facts" that > you've had. Come back when you can prove your little "facts". Facts are truths, and generally are self-evident. And just about EVERY fact in the outline below is clearly self-evident -- and none of them are "little." Unless you regard facts that utterly destroy the underpinnings of your hateful and bigoted agenda to be "little."
A person would have to be one of the most abjectly-ignorant people on earth in order to say that ANY proof is needed that sunrises occur on the eastern horizon. The facts in the outline below totally destroy the sociopathic agenda of the Anti-Choicers. And *your* thinking that any- thing as OBVIOUS as those need to be proved, is CONCRETE PROOF of **this**: You, and any other Anti-Choicer dumb enough to say that, are among the most IGNORANT people on the face of the earth.
(No surprise, though. Ignorance and adherence to control-freakish and sociopathic agendas of the RRR cult GO together.)
ANALYZING ABORTION-ON-REQUEST* in the USA *(Abortion Rights as they have existed since 1-22-73)
Abortion terminates entities (oz/e/offs: zygotes, embryoes & fetuses, up until the 7th month of gestation) which have ALL of these characteristics in common with sperm and ova:
-- Human -- Unique -- As a stage of development, indispensable to future birth -- Have NEVER experienced conscious awareness -- Alive
...which makes it hypocritical when abortion opponents try to defend z/e/fs but NOT sperm and ova.
And the Bible, which is the primary moral authority for the majority of Americans:
-- In NO way condemns abortion -- Doesn't even MENTION abortion -- By Jesus' day, abortion had been around for 1,000 yrs. -- Contains NO defenses of s/o/z/e/fs -- Reserves ALL of its protection for already-BORN people -- That the Bible regards personhood to begin at BIRTH is made clear by it's immense emphasis on the importance of BIRTH order, and BIRTHrights. -- In certain cases, condemned BABIES to horrible deaths -- Never indicates that there is anything "special" about fertilization -- Thus making z/e/f and sperm & ova of EQUAL worth
Abortion-on-request enables women to:
-- Put their lives back on track immediately -- Restore their well-being to pre-unplanned pregnancy levels -- Vast majority of women are happy with this decision -- Most women have no regrets -- Restore their full range of future opportunities -- Avoid physical difficulties of a 9-month pregnancy -- Especially important for young girls, ~12-16 -- Statistically 6-10 times safer than carrying-to-term -- Avoid the trauma of adopting-out, and wondering later -- Avoid possibility of changing mind about adopting-out -- Reduce likelihood of long-term economic deprivation -- Avoid bringing child into less-loving home -- Avoid bringing child into unstable environment -- Wait until timing is better before having children -- Who then are MORE likely to be loved -- Who then are MORE likely to be in stable home -- And thus are LESS like to have troubled childhoods -- And therefore more likely NOT to become criminals -- And thus are MORE likely to become successful
Legal abortion-on-request:
-- Is exponentially safer than illegal abortions -- Thus saving the lives of hundreds or thousands of women/yr. -- Has been available throughout the USA since early 1973 -- Between 1973 and 2000, 30 million women have had them -- Between 1973 and 2000, 40 million abortions have been done
Other related facts include:
-- MOST women who have abortions go on to HAVE kids later, when the timing is better -- Those children would NOT have been born if the abortions had not taken place earlier, because the same sperm and ova would not have matched up. -- Those "2nd-round" kids STARTED reaching age 13 in significant numbers by 1988. By the early 1990s, millions of those "2nd-round" kids were in their mid-teens by the early 1990s. -- Mid-teens is the highest risk age for crime, and this continues into the early 20s. -- As pointed out above, wanted and loved children are LESS prone to criminal behavior. -- By 1995, millions of "2nd-round kids" were entering the workforce. Perhaps a million-plus MORE have entered it every year SINCE. By 2000, the oldest ones had reached the age where they could be getting quite successful. -- Since the early 1990s, the rate of violent crime in the USA has declined dramatically, and by 2000 was at 40-year lows in many categories. -- The decade of the 1990s, and the 21st century to date, in the USA, has been the most economically-dynamic period of time for any nation in the entire history of the world.
Although the exact figures may be impossible to derive, the probability that abortion-on-request has SIGNIFICANTLY benefitted all of America's society in terms of the crime rate and the economy is QUITE strong, despite the temporary anomaly caused by the attack on Sept. 11, 2001. And a strong U.S. economy benefits the entire world.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
Reasoned Insanity - 08 Aug 2005 21:37 GMT >>>>>>> Jai Maharaj <usenet@mantra.com> reported: > [quoted text clipped - 157 lines] > -- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> >+ I see you are back to your old tricks of claiming many things without backing any of them up. This conversation is over unless I see you proving everything that you have said with documentation from credible resources. I'm not going to bother to get into another game of ask Craig to claim what he says when he never has bothered to before.
Craig Chilton - 08 Aug 2005 22:11 GMT >>>>>>>> Jai Maharaj <usenet@mantra.com> reported:
>>>>>>>>> Pitt experts say placental cells offer palatable alternative.
>>>>>>>> We don't NEED an "alternative," you pathetically-moronic loon. >>>>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >>>>>>>> are all dumber than dead rocks! How you jerks can survive walking >>>>>>>> in a rainstorm without drowning is amazing.
>>>>>>> Aren't you the one who is always spouting about the hate of the >>>>>>> right?
>>>>>> I shine a very bright spotlight on it, yes.
>>>>> Then you will be sure to shine a very bright spotlight on yourself >>>>> then.
>>>> I present FACTS. And that always indicts the bigots. Especially >>>> since they have NO relevant facts available to draw upon in their >>>> defense.
>>> Please Craig, lets not go there.
>> ROTFL!!!!! You're probably HOPING that I won't. Since that's >> about to prove **devastating** to you and your loathsome agenda >> against millions of women.
>>> You never have been able to defend yourself in this area.
>> Ah. Per that comment, one or both of these is/are true: >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> >> (2) LYING is your long suit.
>>> You NEVER have been able to present proof of any "facts" that >>> you've had. Come back when you can prove your little "facts".
>> Facts are truths, and generally are self-evident. And just about EVERY >> fact in the outline below is clearly self-evident -- and none of them are [quoted text clipped - 107 lines] >> on Sept. 11, 2001. And a strong U.S. economy benefits the entire >> world.
> I see you are back to your old tricks of claiming many things without > backing any of them up. Yeah. As though a person would need to back up the statement, "sunrises occur daily." And the facts stated in my outline above -- NONE of which have **ever** been disproven by ANY person dumb enough to be an Anti-Choicer -- are THAT obvious.
Thanks for this further evidence that you are FAR fro being the brightest wick in the lamp shop.
> This conversation is over... Why would THAT bother me one whit? You have provided NO facts to support your Anti-Choice stance. All you have managed to do in here is prove that you are stupid, hateful, and bigoted enough the support a *loathsome* agenda that seeks sociopathically to impose IMMENSE hardship upon no fewer than tens of MILLIONS of women by FORCING childbirth upon them. AGAINST their will. Resulting in the DENIAL of their rights... their RELEGATION to second-class-citizen status... their INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE to mere, NON-sentient, Stage 2, 3, and 4 reproductive-process entities which are, in all important ways, equivalent to the Stage 1 entities that you so *hypocritically* do NOT "defend"-- which *also* are human, unique, alive, and comprise a stage of development without which NO births would occur. UNwanted entities which the WOMEN very sensibly, under their circumstances, often regard to be parasitic. Further manifestations of that hardship would be the DISRUPTION of their well-being, both short-term and long-term (as in, for decades or a lifetime)... and the DESTRUCTION of countless of their oppor- tunities.
All of which makes you nothing more than a figurative rat turd floating in humanity's punchbowl.
So it's supposed to bother me that you may choose to end this so-called "conversation?"
LOL!!!!!! Not in the least. It's always fun to watch bigoted losers making such total fools of themselves in public as you have, and then RUN when it becomes obvious that they have NO debating weaponry (i.e., FACTS that would support their stance) in their arsenal.
Just about the only "good old days" aspect of being Civil Rights workers, back in the early '60s in the South -- other than the great camaraderie we all shared in fighting a ruthless and very ignorant foe) was watching them lose it when we baited and taunted them, and thus caused them to make even BIGGER fools of themselves.
Debating mindless bigots -- such as the segregationists then -- and the Anti-Choicers/RRR-Cult-lemmings, and homophobes today, is a blast. It's as easy as shooting a brontosaurus in a barrel with a howitzer. You losers are a monumental joke. And when your loathsome agendas ultimately swirl down the Drain of Extinction to join segregation in permanent oblivion, we egali- tarians will be laughing VERY long and VERY loudly at you.
> ...unless I see you proving everything that you have said > with documentation from credible resources. ROTFLMAO!!!! What a tool. I haven't had this much fun since Jackson, Mississippi in 1964!
But make no mistake... when ALL such mindless bigotry has become history, forevermore, neither I, nor any other sensible person, will ever miss it one iota. It'll be "Good Riddance to VERY putrid garbage." And society will be infinitely better for no longer being tainted by it.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
someone - 09 Aug 2005 23:08 GMT > > I see you are back to your old tricks of claiming many things without > > backing any of them up. > > Yeah. As though a person would need to back up the statement, > "sunrises occur daily." Go ahead, back it up. Prove that the sun rises daily.
Dr. Homilete - 08 Aug 2005 17:14 GMT >> Surely you jest!!! Jai is one of Usenet's more notorious Anti-Choicers, >>and if you didn't see that he was making an attempt to promote folks' [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > your excuses for women and scientists to be able to murder are slowly being > checked off. I wonder if denial of medical care on the basis of income, and consequent deaths, qualifies as attempt to murder/murder? How about fatally delayed medical care on the same basis?
Don't abort, we prefer to kill them slowly later, after we've squeezed some low-wage, don't-provide-an-aspirin-unless-OSHA-mandates-it working years out of the brutes.
|
|
|