Quote:
Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Agreed. It was overly simplistic and it suggested that a cure for a variety of ailments was at best theoretical. That said, there is a lot of evidence that embryonic stem cells are different from existing line stem cells (usually taken from bone marrow).
|
What are you talking about? Are you trying to (ineptly) explain the difference between embryonic stem cells and adult stem cells? Adult stem cells come from a variety of progenator cells, some (but by no means all) of which may be bone marrow derived. Adult stem cells have been derived from
inter alia muscle, neurons, and connective tissue.
But there are quite a few embryonic stem cell lines already in existence in the US developed with US money (not federal government money). These cells were not taken from bone marrow - hence the term EMBRYONIC. They were taken from embryos - hence the term EMBRYONIC. One example are the lines developed by the University of Wisconsin. These lines were developed using research funds other than the federal government funds.
There is no ban on developing embryonic stem cell lines in the US and consequently, there are quite a few lines in existence. They just came to be because of private funds rather than federal funds. States are also free to use their money to fund embryonic stem cell lines. In fact, the state of California does fund embryonic stem cell research at some UC institutions.
Quote:
Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
It'd suck if everyone else owned the patents.
|
The broadest patents in this space are owned by the University of Wisconsin which has licensed them to US corporations. Any subsequent patents that are issued will be dominated by the UofWi's patents.
Threaded Mode