God heals through modern medicine?

[Ziploc Surprise]

Well, before Undecieved got here it looked like this thread had run it's course. Now it looks like things will get interesting.

Undecieved, researchers like embryonic stem cells because quote: "embryonic stem cells still have the advantage in their ability to differentiate more readily than adult stem cells." >adult stem cells are not easily grown after isolation from mature adult tissues." "Adult stem cells are more likely to have abnormalities from DNA mutations, which can occur due to any number of factors. The 'youth' of embryonic stem cells means that they are less likely to carry mutations and they also regenerate much more quickly than adult stem" cells."http://www.explorestemcells.co.uk/adultvsembryonicstemcells.html

http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/ar..._cell.html

"It has been known for about 30 years that stem cells are present in the tissue of the adult, but it was assumed that they could only form cells of a particular tissue. That is, reprogramming them was considered impossible. In recent years, however, pluripotent stem cells were discovered in various human tissues–in the spinal cord, in the brain, in the mesenchyme (connective tissue) of various organs, and in the blood of the umbilical cord. These pluripotent stem cells are capable of forming several cell types–principally blood, muscle, and nerve cells. It has been possible to recognize, select, and develop them to the point that they form mature cell types with the help of growth factors and regulating proteins. This shows that in tissues of the body, adult stem cells possess a much greater potential for differentiation than previously assumed."

In other words, adult stem cells differentiate just fine for the purpose they are given. There is no advantage to doing so "more readily" in lab settings. That's lawyer lingo. Your article says that adult stem cells are more likely to have abnormalities, but what is the whole point of research? To cure the person. Meaning, embryonic stem cells have better turnouts in labs but, according to my article, not in the person who needs the cure: "There are no rejection reactions, because the cells are from the same body." So adult stem cells have been more successful in the real world where it matters.

I don't have much time to research this right now but from the research I've done so far, your doctor, Wolfgang Lillge, M.D., is suspect. BTW Lyndon LaRouche loves him though. I don't see any legitimate journals but I don't have time to check this completely. Usually with legitimate scientists it's much easier to check credentials and where they publish. Since you'rs didn't come up after some effort, I suspect him and his research but I don't have time to chase it down. There are other reasons I suspect this but I don't have time to go into it.

Remember last time we had a discussion I said you need to look beyond the information that the church feeds you? Do this, and while your at it be careful about internet research. When you research anything (I can't believe I have to instruct you on proper research techniques) on the internet you will find a few articles that will support what you want to believe. You need to look at the big picture. What art the majority of scientists saying? Has the research you favor been up for peer review? Are his or her experiments been reproduced? How long has it been since publication and have other scientist had the time to respond to it? What are the credentials of the scientist? Is this scientist publishing in legitimate journals? I could go on about this but the point is that peer review is an essential part of the scientific method. You need to look at these things before you believe. For anyone else reading this, I admit I am sounding rather condescending towards undeceived. Understand that there is some history here. Undeceived has a history of doing the things that can lead to self deception, one of them is pathetic research.

As for the "Lawyer lingo" comment: This was scientific language. It's purpose is to be as unambiguous as possible. Specifics are very important in scientific communication.

Your article says that "adult stem cells are more likely to have abnormalities, but what is the whole point of research? " This is too stupid to debate

---

[quote='Undeceived' pid='255215' dateline='1331867767']
Also, you are a disgustingly deluded human being.

Oh but he's a very cheery and polite disgustingly deluded human being. Like I always say If you're going to be an idiot, be a happy idiot.