Att:David Meigs Re: Honest objection to stem cell research

[Sid Levin <Sidlevin2@xxxxxxx>]

Your point is well taken that objectors to stem cell research are not idiots
or cruel, but sympathetic, rational people. There is one minor point you
overlooked.

The primary source for stem cells in research are fertilized eggs leftover
after a woman has conceived her desired number of children. With no further
use for these eggs, they are normally incinerated. If she donates them to
research, there are many regulations and safeguards that make sure (among
other things) she cannot specify to whom the product goes, and she cannot
charge for her excess eggs.

Keep in mind that the stem cells they don't use are the Totipotent cells.
This means "toti" or total potential. If these are implanted into a womb the
cells might be capable of creating life. Instead the scientists use
pluripotent cells -- which means cells that have "pluri" (plural) or many
potentials. But are not capable of ever growing into a life form.

Question: Which is better: To incinerate her surplus eggs or to extract the
stem cells for the betterment of mankind?

Please think about these two tough alternatives. I'd appreciate your response.
PS Note that "saving the eggs is not a viable alternative. Women want there
own child. If incapable of bearing a child, she wants to know about the
donor, who in turn is entitled to privacy not publicity.