Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Youth Defence

  • 18-02-2009 7:43pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,483 ✭✭✭


    Curious to hear from any attendees;

    Just walked out of their latest rally after five minutes. For those of you not regularly on campus, Youth Defence (militant, religious anti-gay/abortion/stem cell research) pitched a debate between James McInerney and representatives from what I gathered were an independent ethics group.

    First speaker announced James wouldnt be attending, claiming it was 'due to unforseen circumstances, and also out of fear of their previous success'


    He says it was because they were from youth defence, so I can only assume they mis-represented themselves until the last minute. Or just didnt bother telling us, and lured us to what essentially amounted to a two hour 'information' session.

    Anyone else attend? Or manage to last the full session?


«1

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,081 ✭✭✭LeixlipRed


    I stopped reading at Youth Defence tbh. These guys disgust me. Why do such close minded people come to 3rd level education? Isn't there some homgeneous culture in eastern europe they can **** off to instead?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,283 ✭✭✭PrivateEye


    little sh/ts of the highest order, nothing but trouble over the years. A few times int he past we've stood on the opposite side of the barricades (Miss D case for one..) and I've just thought 'these people are completely mental'

    Tried talking to them today, they don't want to talk. Go save babies somewhere else, its hard enough to convince yer mates Maynooth isn't some right-wing priest haven without this lot around :pac:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,483 ✭✭✭Ostrom


    PrivateEye wrote: »
    little sh/ts of the highest order, nothing but trouble over the years. A few times int he past we've stood on the opposite side of the barricades (Miss D case for one..) and I've just thought 'these people are completely mental'

    Tried talking to them today, they don't want to talk. Go save babies somewhere else, its hard enough to convince yer mates Maynooth isn't some right-wing priest haven without this lot around :pac:

    The level of support for them was unbelievable


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,878 ✭✭✭Rozabeez


    What is this thing?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,264 ✭✭✭JBoyle4eva


    If anyone was involved with LND tonight, you will understand the amount of unbelieveable actions taken by Youth Defence pre-deabte.

    I won't go into too much detail, but LND pulled out over issues such as the debate was being filmed. Many other things happened tonight, such as photos being taken without one's consent by YD...even out in the JH corridors (I'm in one of these photos, so I am royally pi**ed off right now). Photographer rufused to ask could they take our photo, and when we confronted him and asked him to delete it he wouldn't do so.

    I am very angry with the whole arrangement of the debate, totally biased because of lack of a "other" side to the debate, the whole arrogance showed by them for not having anything to argue with and the fact that there were very many non-students present. I will consider going to the SU people in the morning and making a formal complaint. The group harassed me in that photo, and I think if they have a photo of me I should at least have been consented for it.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,483 ✭✭✭Ostrom


    Rozabeez wrote: »
    What is this thing?

    Anti gay, abortion, embryonic stem cell research group in semi formal relationship with prolife society. Ran quite an extensive anti gay campaign from their Dublin office 4 years ago


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,264 ✭✭✭JBoyle4eva


    efla wrote: »
    The level of support for them was unbelievable

    This was all due to them not having anyone to argue against (read my earlier post). Anyone who was on the fence would surely have been persuaded by them.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,483 ✭✭✭Ostrom


    JBoyle4eva wrote: »
    This was all due to them not having anyone to argue against (read my earlier post). Anyone who was on the fence would surely have been persuaded by them.

    I refuse to believe a university audience could be that stupid. Did you stay?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,264 ✭✭✭JBoyle4eva


    efla wrote: »
    I refuse to believe a university audience could be that stupid. Did you stay?

    Yeah, but me and LND people I'm friends with were so busy contemplating what was happening (as SU had been informed) that we were barely listening at all. We weren't gonna listen to a one sided argument.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,483 ✭✭✭Ostrom


    I (selfishly) just wanted to see James hand them their ass. Given their record and reputation, I cant imagine anyone regarding them as anything more than entertainment. I was hoping to learn something from the supposedly inept scientists though.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,264 ✭✭✭JBoyle4eva


    Yeah, their "ethics" guy turned out to be mostly "science" and the ethics of it....but still, felt like it was mostly science I was hearing.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 842 ✭✭✭starflake


    I'm so glad myself and Efla left... I was so angry after the first minute I wanted to slap that woman. Im still angry thinking about it now... I'm very glad that I didnt stay as I could have said something I really regretted and yes... Some university students are that stupid.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,708 ✭✭✭ScissorPaperRock


    JBoyle4eva wrote: »
    If anyone was involved with LND tonight, you will understand the amount of unbelieveable actions taken by Youth Defence pre-deabte.

    I won't go into too much detail, but LND pulled out over issues such as the debate was being filmed. Many other things happened tonight, such as photos being taken without one's consent by YD...even out in the JH corridors (I'm in one of these photos, so I am royally pi**ed off right now). Photographer rufused to ask could they take our photo, and when we confronted him and asked him to delete it he wouldn't do so.

    I am very angry with the whole arrangement of the debate, totally biased because of lack of a "other" side to the debate, the whole arrogance showed by them for not having anything to argue with and the fact that there were very many non-students present. I will consider going to the SU people in the morning and making a formal complaint. The group harassed me in that photo, and I think if they have a photo of me I should at least have been consented for it.

    What's the LND?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 842 ✭✭✭starflake


    Isn't that the literary and Debating Soc?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,135 ✭✭✭✭John


    Wackos. I couldn't believe these people existed when I started here. I thought this sort were only found in Alabama.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 44 kallstrom86


    You know, and even amongst my friends - we're all highly intelligent - they're totally divided on the issue of abortion. Totally divided. Some of my friends think these pro-life people are just annoying idiots. Other of my friends think these pro-life people are evil ****s. How are we gonna have a consensus? I'm torn. I try and take the broad view and think of them as evil, annoying ****s.

    - Bill Hicks


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1 lizzy300


    guys, i was there last night,it was great. Fair play to the two speakers, pity no one had the guts to actually show up and debate them. another thing, you are all much better at ranting behind your pc's rather than having the courage to do it face to face. The speakers were available to talk to ppl at the end which i did myself.
    For university students, you are all so unbelieveably closed minded.
    efla and starflake, you are obviously so pro woman, that you wanted to slap them to shut them up. Why didnt ya have the guts to do it last night, ya wimp? and you've the cheek to calll them violent.
    Grow up
    jboyle4eva you probably wouldnt have like even understood those guys, omg why did ya even bother to turn up.
    youre all so obsessed with appearing 'liberal' that you wont even research this issue. look up the facts.
    A boy today has a tumour on his brain because he was a guinea pig for embryonic stem cell research. talk to him.
    I would have loved to have seen 'james hand them their ass ' too, but he obviously wasnt confident enough in his debating abilities to come along. Chicken.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,081 ✭✭✭LeixlipRed


    What's your position on homosexuality so? I notice you don't mention that. Maybe if everyone knew you were a bunch of gay hating bigots they wouldn't listen to you on issues they don't understand so much. I'm free to debate this any time by the way. You'll find my office on middle floor of Logic :)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,081 ✭✭✭LeixlipRed


    lizzy300 wrote: »
    A boy today has a tumour on his brain because he was a guinea pig for embryonic stem cell research. talk to him.

    Have you his phone number there or would I get him through email?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,483 ✭✭✭Ostrom


    lizzy300 wrote: »
    guys, i was there last night,it was great. Fair play to the two speakers, pity no one had the guts to actually show up and debate them. another thing, you are all much better at ranting behind your pc's rather than having the courage to do it face to face. The speakers were available to talk to ppl at the end which i did myself.
    For university students, you are all so unbelieveably closed minded.
    efla and starflake, you are obviously so pro woman, that you wanted to slap them to shut them up. Why didnt ya have the guts to do it last night, ya wimp? and you've the cheek to calll them violent.
    Grow up
    jboyle4eva you probably wouldnt have like even understood those guys, omg why did ya even bother to turn up.
    youre all so obsessed with appearing 'liberal' that you wont even research this issue. look up the facts.
    A boy today has a tumour on his brain because he was a guinea pig for embryonic stem cell research. talk to him.
    I would have loved to have seen 'james hand them their ass ' too, but he obviously wasnt confident enough in his debating abilities to come along. Chicken.

    Interesting take on the issue, and despite what you may consider reasonable terms of engagement, the Pro-Life society did not set any reasonable precedent for debate. I came for a balanced debate from all perspectives, and after the unbalanced ramblings of the introductory speaker, I decided to leave. Much like Dr. McInerney I would imagine; I can only assume there was some colorful deception involved at some point.

    I didnt call them violent, I called them petty, bigoted and borderline militant - and this is a summary judgement - not just from last night. As for courage, I have nothing to hide. My username is my name, my post history shouldn't make me too difficult to find - I spend my days researching and lecturing, and you are most welcome to speak with me any time. I dont take any of the issues, technical or ethical lightly - I am not a scientist, but I grasp in concept most of what I read. Which is partly why debates of that nature interest me so much, it is often refreshing to see scientists confront alternative perspectives to their own, often quite limited technicism.

    I suppose you will have to take it on faith that I was very much looking forward to questioning your conception of the definition of life and its relationship to any subsequent need for technical knowledge, but again, those interested were deprived of any reasonable exchange of views.

    It has as little to do with liberalism as it does with religion for me, my problem goes beyond simple facts of the matter - for the record I am not too sympathetic to many pro-choice arguments, but then ideology should never be a condition of exclusion - again something I see repeated time and again - especially last night.

    I have heard it all before, and had nothing to gain from questioning - given my state of mind last night, it would have probably amounted to little more than provocation, which doesn't serve any good.


    If your concept of liberalism amounts to equality of sexual expression, and rational, evidence based debate, then you can call me whatever you want.

    Auxilia House, Room 1 / PG 1, 9-5


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 842 ✭✭✭starflake


    I call breach of terms of use of boards.... Name calling is against rules here Lizzie.... We have a troll on our hands. I didnt stay last night because I would have gotten so angry that I would have done something I regret. It's easy to hide behind pcs... you're right but Its also easy to slate a mans good name behind his back when he's not there. Theres no point in talking to YD and the likes its completely pointless


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,487 ✭✭✭banquo


    I talked to the guy with the beard afterwards and he confided in me his belief that the real motive behind stem cell research was that the CIA wanted to clone a huge army for the New World Order. Then his mate gave me an Alex Jones dvd, ''Freedom to Fascism''

    So now.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 842 ✭✭✭starflake


    im leaving this argument... there's just no point..


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,483 ✭✭✭Ostrom


    starflake wrote: »
    I call breach of terms of use of boards.... Name calling is against rules here Lizzie.... We have a troll on our hands. I didnt stay last night because I would have gotten so angry that I would have done something I regret. It's easy to hide behind pcs... you're right but Its also easy to slate a mans good name behind his back when he's not there. Theres no point in talking to YD and the likes its completely pointless

    I'm sick of this. Its difficult enough for some students without having a presence like that. And it is the antithesis of everything we try to promote and accomplish.

    I look forward to your visit


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,487 ✭✭✭banquo


    LeixlipRed wrote: »
    What's your position on homosexuality so? I notice you don't mention that. Maybe if everyone knew you were a bunch of gay hating bigots they wouldn't listen to you on issues they don't understand so much. I'm free to debate this any time by the way. You'll find my office on middle floor of Logic :)

    I didn't know they had a stance on homosexuality. Any more info in this? Link?

    LeixlipRed, what's you're office door number? :)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 842 ✭✭✭starflake




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,487 ✭✭✭banquo


    They go further and say that "Parents of Irish children would be horrified to think that their children could, in the event of their deaths, be adopted by homosexuals or lesbians."

    In the event of my girlfriend's and my deaths, if we had kids, my friend and his boyfriend are the agreed adoptive parents. So there goes that.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 842 ✭✭✭starflake


    If it's not in the bible they don't like it. that's what it boils to at the end of the day... And how can you argue against people like that


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 842 ✭✭✭starflake


    lizzy300 wrote: »
    efla and starflake, you are obviously so pro woman, that you wanted to slap them to shut them up. Why didnt ya have the guts to do it last night, ya wimp? and you've the cheek to calll them violent.
    Grow up

    At no point ever on these boards have I ever claimed to be ''pro woman''. I never called YD violent.. I am a woman and Efla is my long term partner. I would consider us both to be rather ''grown-up'' thank you. We are both in our mid twenties with full time jobs. Let me tell you also the reason I felt angry last night is I felt very mis-lead by the whole thing I geniunely felt a bit freaked out because the first thing that the first speaker said was that there was ''no-argument'' when we know the facts about the difference between embryonic and adult stem cells.. I think you'll find there is plenty of argument.. from both sides. Last night started with a slating of James, his reasons were dismissed as lies straight away and that was very unfair. Alot of the people in that room were people that were in my biological sciences class during the years and I left as I felt so annoyed at having been lured into what was clearly a Youth Defense rally I geniunely felt that I would have said something very angry and provoked. I would not like to have been filmed saying that. It would not be good for me, infront of my old class mates and it certainly would not look good for my partner who works in the University. I think i did ''show guts'' last night by walking out for my own sanity and for my partner. I wanted to go see a debate. I did not want to sit in on an 'information' rally by a group that I neither have time or respect for or want to be in anyway associated with. Thank you for your comments Lizzie300


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 51 ✭✭manna


    Just to set the record straight regarding James McInerney pulling out. Before the "debate" began, members of the Biosoc posted a printout from Jame's blog outside the door of JH3. Within minutes, the YD had taken this down, saying firstly it was because of "spelling errors", and after because they "didn't believe it was really him that wrote it" They had no contact details for him, and refused to look at the blog on a computer in the arts building when offered proof. (here's a link for anyone interested http://jamesmcinerney.ie/ )

    We were then told that they would announce the reasons given for his absence at the beginning of the debate, but instead said he "cowed out"

    When we asked for the printout back to show the speakers (who had never heard of youth defence or weren't told why the other speaker pulled out) we were told that they "lost it".

    I was present for the entire proceedings, and was outside the door when security turned up, and I am ashamed of how these unnecessary outsiders behaved, from their rude manner at addressing people, to photographing and recording people without their permission.

    For the record I was sitting next to a person from the pro-life society who was equally appalled at what had happened, which I'm sure is true of the majority of people who saw what happened


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5 emer1010


    So aside from individuals preconcived notions about youth defence, did anyone learn anything from, or even listen to the talk last night?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1 jamesmcinerney


    I have been made aware of this thread and thought I would reply. I was not informed by the pro-life society that they were acting as a front for Youth Defence. If I was informed, I would never have accepted their invitation in the first place. I was told the details about the debate by a friend of mine that I play football with, not by the organisers of the debate.

    I have no qualms whatsoever debating this issue. I have debated this issue on RTÉs Prime Time and against Prof Reville in UCC and so on. More interestingly, from the point of view of this discussion, I debated the issue for the NUIM pro-life society two years ago (my opponent was barrister-at-law and associate professor, Prof Whyte from TCD). It was a very constructive debate and I stayed around afterwards to have a glass of wine with the attendees. Therefore, when I was asked again, I was happy to oblige.

    When a vote was taken at the end of that particular meeting two years ago, the arguments I made in favour of Embryonic Stem Cell research carried. I'll say that again - in an open vote by show of hands in a meeting that was organised by nuim pro-life society, the attendees voted in favour of Embryonic Stem Cell research. The same thing happened in UCC when I debated Prof Reville.

    I had no worries last night about the quality of the argument in favour of Embryonic Stem Cell research.

    I pulled out because of the involvement of Youth Defence, who are not a recognised society and whose past exploits leave a lot to be desired.

    I have since received an apology from NUIM pro-life society (I have retained the email) and the NUIM LnD. The LnD walked out apparently.

    The NUIM pro-life society are in discussions with the student's union to rectify the situation and are going to release a statement.

    This is not something I have ever experienced in my 10 years in Maynooth. Fear, misinformation and intimidation have no place on a university campus.

    Whatever your views.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,081 ✭✭✭LeixlipRed


    banquo wrote: »
    I didn't know they had a stance on homosexuality. Any more info in this? Link?

    LeixlipRed, what's you're office door number? :)

    See the link just above there. Handing out anti-gay leaflets, etc,. Not sure what the number is. Just moving office at the minute actually. I'm stuck somewhere on the bloody stairs at the moment :D


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 649 ✭✭✭Antbert


    Absolutely sickening. I heard all about this from my friend in LnD (apparently they knew nothing about YD's involvement, although I'm not sure how true that is). It's slightly worrying that a group such as this actually exists... As someone said before, in Alabama, not that surprising. But Ireland... Although I guess abortion's still illegal here, and people try to stone me to death when they find out I didn't make my confirmation so...

    I was reading something earlier (college computer, now can't find the link, annoying) that implied they were quite closely affiliated with NUI Maynooth... Please someone tell me that's a vicious rumour and completely unfounded. The fact that they're affiliated with the Pro Life society is bad enough (I now have EVEN LESS time for the Pro Life society since finding that out, if that were possible).

    I'll find the link tomorrow if I can.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,264 ✭✭✭JBoyle4eva


    Just want to say Mr. McInerney, that LnD actually refused to partake in the debate over all these issues. I'm friends with a few on the committee of LnD, and this defintely was one of the most memorable nights I've spent in my 1 and a half year in Maynooth....but all for the wrong reasons.

    YD and Pro-Life kept apologising the opposition "couldn't be here", with accusations that they were afraid of defeat.

    I was informed of your reasons for your absence, and I completely stand by your decision not to partake with this organisation. I am still apalled by all that happened last night, and I'm still annoyed they have a photo of me outside the debate venue.

    I do hope an apology is released, either from Pro-Life or Youth Defence (or both) and that Youth Defence no longer arrive on campus. They were certainly completely unethical in their handling of their "debate".


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1 royalgirl


    Are the people posting here students or small babies? Talking about slapping people? Throwing tantrums because people you don't agree with get to speak? Grow up.

    The talk was full tonight. Dr Prentice was incredibly well informed and interesting; I can see why the opposition backed out. What are they going to argue anyway - embryonic stem cell treatments are causing tumours but hey, lets go for it anyway.

    Here's something from BBC (or maybe they are just part of Youth Defence's enormous propaganda campaign :))






    Stem cell 'cure' boy gets tumour


    Wednesday, 18 February 2009
    BBC

    A boy treated with foetal stem cells for a rare genetic disease has developed benign tumours, raising questions about the therapy's safety.

    The boy, now 17, received the stem cells in 2001 at a Moscow hospital and four years later scans showed brain and spinal tumours, PLoS Medicine reports.

    Israeli doctors removed the abnormal growth from his spine and tests suggest it sprouted from the stem cells.

    Critics say the finding is evidence against the controversial therapy.

    Apart from the ethics of using cells taken from embryos, opponents say there are big safety concerns.

    As well as the possibility that stem cells may turn cancerous, some researchers fear that it is possible that stem cell therapy could unwittingly pass viruses and other disease causing agents to people who receive cell transplants.

    Experimental therapy

    Experts are hopeful that stem cells, which have the ability to develop into other kinds of human cells, will eventually lead to treatments for some of the most intractable conditions.


    Although this is just one case it does show that we need to be careful

    Stem cell scientist Dr Stephen Minger

    The boy in question was treated for a condition called Ataxia Telangiectasia - a genetic disease that attacks the brain region controlling movement and speech.

    He received three courses of foetal stem cell injections to the brain and the fluid surrounding the spine.

    Four years after his first injection he was investigated for recurrent headaches and his doctors at the Sheba Medical Centre in Tel Aviv found two tumours - one in the spine and one in the brain at the same sites the injections had been given.

    A year later, when the boy was 14, the doctors removed the non-cancerous tumour from his spine and it was found to contain cells that could not have arisen from the patient's own tissue and had in all probability grown from the donated stem cells.

    Although they were unable to sample the growth in the boy's brain, the scientists believe this probably arose from the injected stem cells too.

    Donor-derived cells might have been able to spark tumours in this patient because people with Ataxia Telangiectasia often have a weakened immune system, say the researchers. It is not clear whether the stem cell therapy helped his genetic condition.

    Safety fears

    They say the findings "do not imply that the research in stem cell therapeutics should be abandoned."

    Nonetheless, they say more work should be done to assess the safety of this therapy.

    Josephine Quintavalle of the public interest group Comment on Reproductive Ethics said: "The risks of tumour formation in association with embryonic stem cells are widely acknowledged and one reason why there are very serious concerns about the proposed use of such cells in treating spinal cord injury in the US.

    "It would appear from this report that foetal stem cells are similarly unstable. These are not areas of therapy we should be rushing into, whatever the ethical debates surrounding the use of embryo or foetal tissue per se."

    Stem cell scientist Dr Stephen Minger, of King's College London, said it was clear that the tumours had arisen from the transplanted cells.

    "This is worrying and we have to be cautious. We need to have long term monitoring and follow up of the patients given stem cells and rigorous regulation of centres providing cell therapy.

    "Although this is just one case it does show that we need to be careful about the cell populations we are using." He said not all clinics used good quality cells.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,135 ✭✭✭✭John


    Chemotherapy causes cancer too, should we abandon that?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 842 ✭✭✭starflake


    royalgirl wrote: »
    Are the people posting here students or small babies? Talking about slapping people? Throwing tantrums because people you don't agree with get to speak? Grow up.

    The talk was full tonight. Dr Prentice was incredibly well informed and interesting; I can see why the opposition backed out. What are they going to argue anyway - embryonic stem cell treatments are causing tumours but hey, lets go for it anyway.

    Here's something from BBC (or maybe they are just part of Youth Defence's enormous propaganda campaign :))






    Stem cell 'cure' boy gets tumour


    Wednesday, 18 February 2009
    BBC

    A boy treated with foetal stem cells for a rare genetic disease has developed benign tumours, raising questions about the therapy's safety.

    The boy, now 17, received the stem cells in 2001 at a Moscow hospital and four years later scans showed brain and spinal tumours, PLoS Medicine reports.

    Israeli doctors removed the abnormal growth from his spine and tests suggest it sprouted from the stem cells.

    Critics say the finding is evidence against the controversial therapy.

    Apart from the ethics of using cells taken from embryos, opponents say there are big safety concerns.

    As well as the possibility that stem cells may turn cancerous, some researchers fear that it is possible that stem cell therapy could unwittingly pass viruses and other disease causing agents to people who receive cell transplants.

    Experimental therapy

    Experts are hopeful that stem cells, which have the ability to develop into other kinds of human cells, will eventually lead to treatments for some of the most intractable conditions.


    Although this is just one case it does show that we need to be careful

    Stem cell scientist Dr Stephen Minger

    The boy in question was treated for a condition called Ataxia Telangiectasia - a genetic disease that attacks the brain region controlling movement and speech.

    He received three courses of foetal stem cell injections to the brain and the fluid surrounding the spine.

    Four years after his first injection he was investigated for recurrent headaches and his doctors at the Sheba Medical Centre in Tel Aviv found two tumours - one in the spine and one in the brain at the same sites the injections had been given.

    A year later, when the boy was 14, the doctors removed the non-cancerous tumour from his spine and it was found to contain cells that could not have arisen from the patient's own tissue and had in all probability grown from the donated stem cells.

    Although they were unable to sample the growth in the boy's brain, the scientists believe this probably arose from the injected stem cells too.

    Donor-derived cells might have been able to spark tumours in this patient because people with Ataxia Telangiectasia often have a weakened immune system, say the researchers. It is not clear whether the stem cell therapy helped his genetic condition.

    Safety fears

    They say the findings "do not imply that the research in stem cell therapeutics should be abandoned."

    Nonetheless, they say more work should be done to assess the safety of this therapy.

    Josephine Quintavalle of the public interest group Comment on Reproductive Ethics said: "The risks of tumour formation in association with embryonic stem cells are widely acknowledged and one reason why there are very serious concerns about the proposed use of such cells in treating spinal cord injury in the US.

    "It would appear from this report that foetal stem cells are similarly unstable. These are not areas of therapy we should be rushing into, whatever the ethical debates surrounding the use of embryo or foetal tissue per se."

    Stem cell scientist Dr Stephen Minger, of King's College London, said it was clear that the tumours had arisen from the transplanted cells.

    "This is worrying and we have to be cautious. We need to have long term monitoring and follow up of the patients given stem cells and rigorous regulation of centres providing cell therapy.

    "Although this is just one case it does show that we need to be careful about the cell populations we are using." He said not all clinics used good quality cells.


    You posted the exact same thing yesterday under a different name.. (lizzie300)... please give it up will you? To be quite honest reading the same, unproven 'argument' from you is boring!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,483 ✭✭✭Ostrom


    royalgirl wrote: »
    Are the people posting here students or small babies? Talking about slapping people? Throwing tantrums because people you don't agree with get to speak? Grow up.

    The talk was full tonight. Dr Prentice was incredibly well informed and interesting; I can see why the opposition backed out. What are they going to argue anyway - embryonic stem cell treatments are causing tumours but hey, lets go for it anyway.

    Here's something from BBC (or maybe they are just part of Youth Defence's enormous propaganda campaign :))






    Stem cell 'cure' boy gets tumour


    Wednesday, 18 February 2009
    BBC

    A boy treated with foetal stem cells for a rare genetic disease has developed benign tumours, raising questions about the therapy's safety.

    The boy, now 17, received the stem cells in 2001 at a Moscow hospital and four years later scans showed brain and spinal tumours, PLoS Medicine reports.

    Israeli doctors removed the abnormal growth from his spine and tests suggest it sprouted from the stem cells.

    Critics say the finding is evidence against the controversial therapy.

    Apart from the ethics of using cells taken from embryos, opponents say there are big safety concerns.

    As well as the possibility that stem cells may turn cancerous, some researchers fear that it is possible that stem cell therapy could unwittingly pass viruses and other disease causing agents to people who receive cell transplants.

    Experimental therapy

    Experts are hopeful that stem cells, which have the ability to develop into other kinds of human cells, will eventually lead to treatments for some of the most intractable conditions.


    Although this is just one case it does show that we need to be careful

    Stem cell scientist Dr Stephen Minger

    The boy in question was treated for a condition called Ataxia Telangiectasia - a genetic disease that attacks the brain region controlling movement and speech.

    He received three courses of foetal stem cell injections to the brain and the fluid surrounding the spine.

    Four years after his first injection he was investigated for recurrent headaches and his doctors at the Sheba Medical Centre in Tel Aviv found two tumours - one in the spine and one in the brain at the same sites the injections had been given.

    A year later, when the boy was 14, the doctors removed the non-cancerous tumour from his spine and it was found to contain cells that could not have arisen from the patient's own tissue and had in all probability grown from the donated stem cells.

    Although they were unable to sample the growth in the boy's brain, the scientists believe this probably arose from the injected stem cells too.

    Donor-derived cells might have been able to spark tumours in this patient because people with Ataxia Telangiectasia often have a weakened immune system, say the researchers. It is not clear whether the stem cell therapy helped his genetic condition.

    Safety fears

    They say the findings "do not imply that the research in stem cell therapeutics should be abandoned."

    Nonetheless, they say more work should be done to assess the safety of this therapy.

    Josephine Quintavalle of the public interest group Comment on Reproductive Ethics said: "The risks of tumour formation in association with embryonic stem cells are widely acknowledged and one reason why there are very serious concerns about the proposed use of such cells in treating spinal cord injury in the US.

    "It would appear from this report that foetal stem cells are similarly unstable. These are not areas of therapy we should be rushing into, whatever the ethical debates surrounding the use of embryo or foetal tissue per se."

    Stem cell scientist Dr Stephen Minger, of King's College London, said it was clear that the tumours had arisen from the transplanted cells.

    "This is worrying and we have to be cautious. We need to have long term monitoring and follow up of the patients given stem cells and rigorous regulation of centres providing cell therapy.

    "Although this is just one case it does show that we need to be careful about the cell populations we are using." He said not all clinics used good quality cells.

    Small babies it would appear. Honestly, the urge to slap is now more a consequence of your username tactics, but I suppose it is fortunate you wont speak with us in person.

    In person or not at all, you have my details....


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5 emer1010


    i'm quite worried by the narrow-mindedness of the people posting here.
    It seems to me that the people who lost out on wednesday were the students. There were lots of interested folk there who wanted to hear a debate, instead they just got one side of the argument. Why? Because certain people couldnt manage to get over their petty preconceived notions about youth defence instead of gettin up there and proving the strengths of their convictions. Everyone benefits from an open and healthy debate. Who cares who provided the speakers? Mc inerney should have jumped at the chance at debating these guys, i was really disappointed.
    I spoke to some of the girls from Youth Defence who were quite upset at being called all kinds of names from some attendees. You know I think if you guys could come along and actually meet these people and form your own opinion based on that rather than the crap thats posted on indymedia(!) then perhaps they could call themselves educated members of the university. lads, ditch the stupid anti-YD brain-washed heads and wake up!
    these people arent criminals or evil! so stop demonising them and get over yourselves.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5 emer1010


    efla wrote: »
    Small babies it would appear. Honestly, the urge to slap is now more a consequence of your username tactics, but I suppose it is fortunate you wont speak with us in person.

    In person or not at all, you have my details....

    perhaps more than one person looks at news items on BBC. you obviously don't. You shouldn't be afraid of information, you might learn something!
    why arent people actually talking about what the speakers said? I don't even think people here care about the issue of emryonic stem cell research vs adult stem cell cells?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,483 ✭✭✭Ostrom


    emer1010 wrote: »
    i'm quite worried by the narrow-mindedness of the people posting here.
    It seems to me that the people who lost out on wednesday were the students. There were lots of interested folk there who wanted to hear a debate, instead they just got one side of the argument. Why? Because certain people couldnt manage to get over their petty preconceived notions about youth defence instead of gettin up there and proving the strengths of their convictions. Everyone benefits from an open and healthy debate. Who cares who provided the speakers? Mc inerney should have jumped at the chance at debating these guys, i was really disappointed.
    I spoke to some of the girls from Youth Defence who were quite upset at being called all kinds of names from some attendees. You know I think if you guys could come along and actually meet these people and form your own opinion based on that rather than the crap thats posted on indymedia(!) then perhaps they could call themselves educated members of the university. lads, ditch the stupid anti-YD brain-washed heads and wake up!
    these people arent criminals or evil! so stop demonising them and get over yourselves.

    Pre-conceived?

    Anti-YD?

    You cant see a sustained anti-homosexuality campaign as grounds for disapproval? I want a direct response from you on this, I dont know how old you are, I dont have that many years on you I would imagine, but many of us remember the YD snapshots throughout the years, I certainly remember the founding case of your organization.

    Everyone benefits from open and healthy debate*; YD have shown nothing but contempt for competing prespectives throughout the years, and less in the way of alternative lifestyle tolerance.

    If you want to characterize the actions of a group such as YD as 'open and healthy' then I cant relate to you on any level.

    The posts above and blog links should give you enough just cause for the oppositions' decline - read it and respond, there is no excuse for wilful ignorance.


    *As a tutor I do not accept news items, wikipedia entries, or any non-peer reviewed publications as evidence in a reasonable and balanced argument, and certainly - authentic as it may be - television items for the conventionally-recognized limitations of representation and bias. This is not to be interpreted as a dismissal of your cited news item, just to highlight the fact that you cant base an argument on so limited a range of sources. Which is why I went on wednesday hoping to hear some.

    I am happy to debate in person, once more, you have my details.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,483 ✭✭✭Ostrom


    emer1010 wrote: »
    why arent people actually talking about what the speakers said?

    I'm sorry, you must be looking for the Youth Defense forum.

    You see, fronting an external orgaization under the remit of a university-sponsored society is generally not allowed.

    But, this is an open forum, so why not start another thread? I started this one to complain about people like you


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5 emer1010


    The posts above and blog links should give you enough just cause for the oppositions' decline - read it and respond, there is no excuse for wilful ignorance.


    *As a tutor I do not accept news items, wikipedia entries, or any non-peer reviewed publications as evidence in a reasonable and balanced argument, and certainly - authentic as it may be - television items for the conventionally-recognized limitations of representation and bias.

    Yeah people should have grounds and evidence for their opinions and beliefs. the above posts do not give me a valisd explanation as to why people have these opinions. As far as I know the 'anti-gay' campaign you refer to was by a pro family group but not by youth defence who are solely a pro-life group, concerned with the protection of life from conception to natural death.
    People are entitled to thier own personal opinions and beliefs, but I draw the line at blatant demonisation of a group of people, and sadly some attendees at the debate did lower themselves to catty name calling such as homophobic bigots, fascists etc. Not nice and not the behaviour of educated individuals.
    YD were not the ones debating. However I am glad that one of the YD girls was given the opportunity to refute the nasty note that I and many saw outside the lecture theatre. If the debate had gone ahead as planned it would not have been necessary for any one from YD to speak.
    The issue should be with the LND and prolife socs who should have found replacement speakers.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5 emer1010


    efla wrote: »
    I'm sorry, you must be looking for the Youth Defense forum.

    You see, fronting an external orgaization under the remit of a university-sponsored society is generally not allowed.

    But, this is an open forum, so why not start another thread? I started this one to complain about people like you


    Listen until you get over your bigoted bias against people like Yd there is no room for debate with some like you. you obviously couldnt give a toss about the issues and are quite enjoying attacking people you've never met and haven't the guts to approach.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,483 ✭✭✭Ostrom


    emer1010 wrote: »
    The posts above and blog links should give you enough just cause for the oppositions' decline - read it and respond, there is no excuse for wilful ignorance.


    *As a tutor I do not accept news items, wikipedia entries, or any non-peer reviewed publications as evidence in a reasonable and balanced argument, and certainly - authentic as it may be - television items for the conventionally-recognized limitations of representation and bias.

    Yeah people should have grounds and evidence for their opinions and beliefs. the above posts do not give me a valisd explanation as to why people have these opinions. As far as I know the 'anti-gay' campaign you refer to was by a pro family group but not by youth defence who are solely a pro-life group, concerned with the protection of life from conception to natural death.
    People are entitled to thier own personal opinions and beliefs, but I draw the line at blatant demonisation of a group of people, and sadly some attendees at the debate did lower themselves to catty name calling such as homophobic bigots, fascists etc. Not nice and not the behaviour of educated individuals.
    YD were not the ones debating. However I am glad that one of the YD girls was given the opportunity to refute the nasty note that I and many saw outside the lecture theatre. If the debate had gone ahead as planned it would not have been necessary for any one from YD to speak.
    The issue should be with the LND and prolife socs who should have found replacement speakers.

    I agree also, name calling should not be tolerated - I do not, however, believe that any form of YD presence should have been tolerated on campus.

    The stage was flanked by YD banners, the photographer identified himself as a member of YD, I dont think I was misinterpreting the terms of debate.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,483 ✭✭✭Ostrom


    emer1010 wrote: »
    Listen until you get over your bigoted bias against people like Yd there is no room for debate with some like you. you obviously couldnt give a toss about the issues and are quite enjoying attacking people you've never met and haven't the guts to approach.

    My working day revolves around examing competing opinions on a range of topics; of which abortion, adoption and reserach ethics make up a few.

    My 'bigotry' extends as far as youth defense, for the reasons above, I have nothing more to say - people like that are best ignored. Had the debate proceeded as planned, I imagine I would have had many questions; as I said before, competing arguments often lead to interesting syntheses.

    I'm sure if I could approach you I could lay my 'guts' on the line, but the move is yours.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 842 ✭✭✭starflake


    emer1010 wrote: »
    Listen until you get over your bigoted bias against people like Yd there is no room for debate with some like you. you obviously couldnt give a toss about the issues and are quite enjoying attacking people you've never met and haven't the guts to approach.


    We're not the ones doing the attacking.... that was YD I'm afraid.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 649 ✭✭✭Antbert


    Emer, what's this about? http://www.indymedia.ie/article/68442 Does the Mother and Child campaign have nothing to do with YD?

    Also, could you kindly explain to me your stance on abortion.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 842 ✭✭✭starflake


    And whether you are anti-gay or not Emer?


  • Advertisement
Advertisement