stem cell research

**perris** · May 25th, 2005

I know I'm gonna take allot of heat from this, but I agree with the president.

ya, I know the promise of this research is boundless.

if there were no existing lines of stem cells to research, I'd disagree with the presidents stand, but there are.

I grant there aren't enough...I think the solution would be to pick a random week, and harvest what could be harvested from already gone fetuses for research.

this would eliminate the concern that we are trading a promised life for one living.

I know he's going to veto the bill, and I don't think the veto will get an override

I wonder if he wants to allow the "nuclear option" and remove forever his power of veto

if he's consistent with his philosophy of romoving long standing checks and balances provided by the constitution, then his power of veto should be eliminated for ever I think

but that's another discussion isn't it

**muzikool** · May 25th, 2005

Originally Posted by perris

I wonder if he wants to allow the "nuclear option" and remove forever his power of veto

Hahaha

**Petros** · May 25th, 2005

There are two bills. He's going to veto the one that draws them from babies, and he's promised to sign the one that draws cells from placentas and umbilical cords. Harvesting them from already gone fetuses might not be a bad idea, though. Miscarriages are on the rise, and would provide plenty of cells for research.

Originally Posted by perris

I wonder if he wants to allow the "nuclear option" and remove forever his power of veto

if he's consistent with his philosophy of romoving long standing checks and balances provided by the constitution, then his power of veto should be eliminated for ever I think

He's never vetoed anything. Ever.

**muzikool** · May 25th, 2005

Originally Posted by Unwonted

He's never vetoed anything. Ever.

Interesting. I didn't know that.

**Mastershakes** · May 25th, 2005

The rest of the Western world has embraced it.

Get on the bandwagon, let's cure some shizz !!

I also did not know he's never vetoed.... thanks for the link unwonted !

**muzikool** · May 25th, 2005

Originally Posted by Mastershakes

The rest of the Western world has embraced it.

Hmm?

**Sazar** · May 25th, 2005

Does he have to veto anything with the senate and congress as his rubberstamp? Please read between the lines people

With regards to the research, what is the problem in doing research on embryo's in fertility clinics which are going to be discarded anyways? They are sitting in petri dishes and are going to be destroyed by being tossed in the garbage.

I find it odd that there is no outcry about THAT but when we talk about research using the same embryo's that are going to be thrown away ANYWAY there is an issue.

What gives people? Why the hypocrisy?

**LeeJend** · May 25th, 2005

Eventually, you can't please all of the people all of the time.

I may have miss-read it but I thought the bill he is vetoing only allowed taking cells from dead fetuses. Which to me is a perfect compromise.

The last time the religious right meddled in science Galileo spent years in prison and everyone continued to think the earth was flat. There are too damn many crippled, blind, senile and motor impaired people out there for an elected leader to be playing religious demagogue (and yes I voted for George junior because "non of the above" was not on the ballot).

I envy the Brits and their "vote of no confidence" option.

**Steevo** · May 25th, 2005

/leaves quietly

**Sazar** · May 25th, 2005

Cells from dead embryo's do nothing for research. The lines currently in use are mostly tainted.

New lines are needed for additional research.

**Mainframeguy** · May 25th, 2005

I know I've been quiet here lately - but this is one I feel strongly about. Seems to me (OK a layman, but we are all somewhat of that in this advanced field) that stem cells have the most incredible potential for medical advancement and pioneering treatments that enable damaged tissues to self repair and regenerate. To me this has the smell of a real potential and I know from a recent new story here that it has already restored sight to a blind child with a damaged cornea. I am not sure what the American vote or veto is, but I say anythung standing in the way of this research would need to be a really serious ethical no-no.... this is nothing like genetic engineering - I can only see good coming of this.

**Petros** · May 25th, 2005

Here is a short test on stem cell research.
1. Embryonic stem cells are used to cure/treat (or create cures/treatments for) __________________________ .

People say, "There is so much potential in this research, but so far, stem cell research has yielded nothing in a century outside of bone marrow transplants. Embryonic stem cell research is a relatively new field, but has yielded nothing in its 20-30 years.

Why don't they research animals first to determine what kinds of advancement, if any, can be made from embryonic stem cells? Isn't that the normal scientific way--to see if it works on animals before experimenting on human subjects? Why do they start with embryos before adult stem cells? There are too many safety steps they are skipping when scientists start with human embryos.

Galileo's situation was a matter of fact. Where human life begins is a matter of philosophy. If one accepts the premise that human life begins at conception, then embryonic stem cell research is equal to the human experiments of Japan and Germany on live soldiers in WWII.

If a person doesn't accept the premise of life at conception, that is a different view. It doesn't make their view right or wrong, and it doesn't make the other side's view right or wrong. It's a matter of philosophy, not a matter of fact.

**LeeJend** · May 25th, 2005

When the US House and Senate pass a law the President has to agree with it also. If he doesn't he can Veto it (stop it from going into law). If the House and Senate feel there is compelling need for the law they can override the veto with a 2/3 majority vote.

The house and senate fall well short of the 2/3 veto override right now but could be pressured into raising enough votes if there is a popular uproar. Say 10,000 people in wheel chairs blockading the house and senate buildings while they are in session. Wouldn't hurt to circle the wagosn around the White House either.

**perris** · May 25th, 2005

Originally Posted by Sazar

Cells from dead embryo's do nothing for research. The lines currently in use are mostly tainted.

New lines are needed for additional research.

ya, and there's the rub in my delema

I think a solution is to choose a random week and harvest what could be harvested

the problem with allowing the research and harvesting stem cells at will is that it will create a market for these cells, and it might encourage women to go forward with a decision to terminate their pregnancy which they might not otherwse have made

I agree with that line of thought

**Mastershakes** · May 25th, 2005

Originally Posted by muzikool

Hmm?

muzi - what I'm getting at.... several other countries already research stem cells. There is also massive $$$ in private research in the US....

From: http://www.newsbatch.com/stemcells.htm

The decision will certainly limit the number of government funded research projects but it has no effect on private stem cell research except that there will be a continuing ban on the cloning of embryos for the purpose of extracting stem cells. Because this technology is so promising, it is likely that there will be privately funded research.

so, who cares what he does....

**muzikool** · May 25th, 2005

Originally Posted by Mastershakes

muzi - what I'm getting at.... several other countries already research stem cells. There is also massive $$$ in private research in the US....

I know, but to say

The rest of the Western world has embraced it.

is kind of a blanketing statement, isn't it?

**Sazar** · May 25th, 2005

Originally Posted by Unwonted

Here is a short test on stem cell research.
1. Embryonic stem cells are used to cure/treat (or create cures/treatments for) __________________________ .

Insert anything, parkinsons, alzheimers, spinal injury research. Stem cell research has led to very promising results in animals thus far.

People say, "There is so much potential in this research, but so far, stem cell research has yielded nothing in a century outside of bone marrow transplants. Embryonic stem cell research is a relatively new field, but has yielded nothing in its 20-30 years.

I think you might want to look up some of the breakthroughs made over the past 2 years.

Why don't they research animals first to determine what kinds of advancement, if any, can be made from embryonic stem cells? Isn't that the normal scientific way--to see if it works on animals before experimenting on human subjects?

Again please look up the information about the breakthroughs made. They are not making stuff up, there are ACTUAL and TANGIBLE benefits. Google is your friend since you are more than adept at finding links.

Why do they start with embryos before adult stem cells? There are too many safety steps they are skipping when scientists start with human embryos.

This is simple. Embryonic cells are more easily manipulated and act faster.

Galileo's situation was a matter of fact. Where human life begins is a matter of philosophy. If one accepts the premise that human life begins at conception, then embryonic stem cell research is equal to the human experiments of Japan and Germany on live soldiers in WWII.

The embryo's in the petri dishes at fertility clinics are going to be thrown away anyways. Where is the philosophy in that? Further this is a fertility clinic setup we are talking about, what is the philosophy about playing god and creating life in a petri dish?

There was research done obviously to be able to get these cells to become live beings in a dish, is that also abhorent and since it was done with the destruction of life?

These are simple questions as well, almost as simple as yours except not as one-sided and biased.

If a person doesn't accept the premise of life at conception, that is a different view. It doesn't make their view right or wrong, and it doesn't make the other side's view right or wrong. It's a matter of philosophy, not a matter of fact.

It's a matter of ignorance and PR, not philosophy because the philosophy you speak of is hypocritical by its very essence.

Without ignorance and lack of education on the matter it is very easy to have judgements clouded.

**Mastershakes** · May 25th, 2005

Originally Posted by muzikool

I know, but to say
is kind of a blanketing statement, isn't it?

Yes, yerright... little too broad.

**muzikool** · May 25th, 2005

Originally Posted by Sazar

It's a matter of ignorance and PR, not philosophy because the philosophy you speak of is hypocritical by its very essence.

Without ignorance and lack of education on the matter it is very easy to have judgements clouded.

I'd like you to elaborate on this point a bit. I believe life begins at conception, how is that a matter of ignorance and PR? Can you prove that life does not begin when conception occurs? If you can prove that, undeniably, then anyone who argues could be considered ignorant. PR?

**Petros** · May 25th, 2005

Originally Posted by Sazar

It's a matter of ignorance and PR, not philosophy because the philosophy you speak of is hypocritical by its very essence.

To hold a belief that life begins at conception is not hypocritical. Philosophy is not an action.

Hypocrisy is "The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness".

So I googled like you said. Check this out:

MILAN - A five-year-old boy has been cured of thalassaemia with stem cells taken from the umbilical cord blood of his two brothers, who are twins. Stem cells from one of the twins were multiplied successfully at the laboratories of the Franco Calori Cell Factory of the Milan Polyclinic, opening the possibility of obtaining blood stem cells in sufficient quantity to treat adults, as well as smaller patients. The operation, the first of its kind in the world, was performed on August 12 in the paediatric oncology and haematology unit, directed by Professor Franco Locatelli, at the San Matteo Polyclinic in Pavia. Yesterday morning, Health Minister Girolamo Sirchia was in attendance when the Italian achievement was presented in Milan at the Marangoni pavilion. It was here ten years ago that Sirchia, as head of the transfusion and transplant immunology centre, set up a bank of placenta and umbilical cord blood. Currently, the bank holds 5,000 units, each containing 100 centilitres of cord blood.

And nobody had to terminate an embryo.

May 25th, 2005	Top \| #1
perris OSNN Godlike Veteran Joined: January 2002 Location: new york Posts: 12,258 Reputation: 4333 Power: 291	stem cell research I know I'm gonna take allot of heat from this, but I agree with the president. ya, I know the promise of this research is boundless. if there were no existing lines of stem cells to research, I'd disagree with the presidents stand, but there are. I grant there aren't enough...I think the solution would be to pick a random week, and harvest what could be harvested from already gone fetuses for research. this would eliminate the concern that we are trading a promised life for one living. I know he's going to veto the bill, and I don't think the veto will get an override I wonder if he wants to allow the "nuclear option" and remove forever his power of veto if he's consistent with his philosophy of romoving long standing checks and balances provided by the constitution, then his power of veto should be eliminated for ever I think but that's another discussion isn't it IT'S NOT WHAT YOU'VE DONE IT'S WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO DO

May 25th, 2005	Top \| #2
muzikool Act your wage. Joined: December 2001 Location: Texas, USA Reputation: Yes, please. Posts: 7,626 Reputation: 2900 Power: 232	Re: stem cell research Originally Posted by perris I wonder if he wants to allow the "nuclear option" and remove forever his power of veto Hahaha

May 25th, 2005	Top \| #3
Petros Thief IV Joined: May 2003 Location: Pacific Northwest Posts: 3,038 Reputation: 1647 Power: 156	Re: stem cell research There are two bills. He's going to veto the one that draws them from babies, and he's promised to sign the one that draws cells from placentas and umbilical cords. Harvesting them from already gone fetuses might not be a bad idea, though. Miscarriages are on the rise, and would provide plenty of cells for research. Originally Posted by perris I wonder if he wants to allow the "nuclear option" and remove forever his power of veto if he's consistent with his philosophy of romoving long standing checks and balances provided by the constitution, then his power of veto should be eliminated for ever I think He's never vetoed anything. Ever.

May 25th, 2005	Top \| #4
muzikool Act your wage. Joined: December 2001 Location: Texas, USA Reputation: Yes, please. Posts: 7,626 Reputation: 2900 Power: 232	Re: stem cell research Originally Posted by Unwonted He's never vetoed anything. Ever. Interesting. I didn't know that.

May 25th, 2005	Top \| #5
Mastershakes OSNN Veteran Addict Joined: July 2004 Location: Montreal Posts: 1,721 Reputation: 1040 Power: 124	Re: stem cell research The rest of the Western world has embraced it. Get on the bandwagon, let's cure some shizz !! I also did not know he's never vetoed.... thanks for the link unwonted !

Latest News Posts

Latest Forum Posts

Latest Member Blogs

May 25th, 2005	Top \| #6
muzikool Act your wage. Joined: December 2001 Location: Texas, USA Reputation: Yes, please. Posts: 7,626 Reputation: 2900 Power: 232	Re: stem cell research Originally Posted by Mastershakes The rest of the Western world has embraced it. Hmm?

May 25th, 2005	Top \| #7
Sazar F@H - Is it in you? Joined: April 2002 Location: Between Austin and Tampa Posts: 14,888 Reputation: 4110 Power: 313	Re: stem cell research Does he have to veto anything with the senate and congress as his rubberstamp? Please read between the lines people With regards to the research, what is the problem in doing research on embryo's in fertility clinics which are going to be discarded anyways? They are sitting in petri dishes and are going to be destroyed by being tossed in the garbage. I find it odd that there is no outcry about THAT but when we talk about research using the same embryo's that are going to be thrown away ANYWAY there is an issue. What gives people? Why the hypocrisy? Help to find cures for Alzheimer's, Mad Cow (BSE), CJD, ALS, Huntington's, Parkinson's disease, and many Cancers. Folding@Home, is it in you?

May 25th, 2005	Top \| #8
LeeJend OSNN Veteran Addict Joined: January 2003 Location: Fort Worth, TX Posts: 5,261 Reputation: 3386 Power: 199	Re: stem cell research Eventually, you can't please all of the people all of the time. I may have miss-read it but I thought the bill he is vetoing only allowed taking cells from dead fetuses. Which to me is a perfect compromise. The last time the religious right meddled in science Galileo spent years in prison and everyone continued to think the earth was flat. There are too damn many crippled, blind, senile and motor impaired people out there for an elected leader to be playing religious demagogue (and yes I voted for George junior because "non of the above" was not on the ballot). I envy the Brits and their "vote of no confidence" option. Thought for the new millenium: In a world without walls and fences, who needs Windows and Gates? - Open Office - Firefox - Thunderbird - Gimp -Ubuntu - Red Hat -

May 25th, 2005	Top \| #9
Steevo Spammer representing. Joined: September 2004 Posts: 2,566 Blog Entries: 2 Reputation: 1630 Power: 136	Re: stem cell research /leaves quietly Meow. Equal oppertunity hater.

May 25th, 2005	Top \| #10
Sazar F@H - Is it in you? Joined: April 2002 Location: Between Austin and Tampa Posts: 14,888 Reputation: 4110 Power: 313	Re: stem cell research Cells from dead embryo's do nothing for research. The lines currently in use are mostly tainted. New lines are needed for additional research. Help to find cures for Alzheimer's, Mad Cow (BSE), CJD, ALS, Huntington's, Parkinson's disease, and many Cancers. Folding@Home, is it in you?

May 25th, 2005	Top \| #11
Mainframeguy Debiant by way of Ubuntu Joined: August 2002 Location: London, UK Posts: 3,763 Blog Entries: 5 Reputation: 1390 Power: 169	Re: stem cell research I know I've been quiet here lately - but this is one I feel strongly about. Seems to me (OK a layman, but we are all somewhat of that in this advanced field) that stem cells have the most incredible potential for medical advancement and pioneering treatments that enable damaged tissues to self repair and regenerate. To me this has the smell of a real potential and I know from a recent new story here that it has already restored sight to a blind child with a damaged cornea. I am not sure what the American vote or veto is, but I say anythung standing in the way of this research would need to be a really serious ethical no-no.... this is nothing like genetic engineering - I can only see good coming of this. hosted by Lord

May 25th, 2005	Top \| #12
Petros Thief IV Joined: May 2003 Location: Pacific Northwest Posts: 3,038 Reputation: 1647 Power: 156	Re: stem cell research Here is a short test on stem cell research. 1. Embryonic stem cells are used to cure/treat (or create cures/treatments for) __________________________ . People say, "There is so much potential in this research, but so far, stem cell research has yielded nothing in a century outside of bone marrow transplants. Embryonic stem cell research is a relatively new field, but has yielded nothing in its 20-30 years. Why don't they research animals first to determine what kinds of advancement, if any, can be made from embryonic stem cells? Isn't that the normal scientific way--to see if it works on animals before experimenting on human subjects? Why do they start with embryos before adult stem cells? There are too many safety steps they are skipping when scientists start with human embryos. Galileo's situation was a matter of fact. Where human life begins is a matter of philosophy. If one accepts the premise that human life begins at conception, then embryonic stem cell research is equal to the human experiments of Japan and Germany on live soldiers in WWII. If a person doesn't accept the premise of life at conception, that is a different view. It doesn't make their view right or wrong, and it doesn't make the other side's view right or wrong. It's a matter of philosophy, not a matter of fact.

May 25th, 2005	Top \| #13
LeeJend OSNN Veteran Addict Joined: January 2003 Location: Fort Worth, TX Posts: 5,261 Reputation: 3386 Power: 199	Re: stem cell research When the US House and Senate pass a law the President has to agree with it also. If he doesn't he can Veto it (stop it from going into law). If the House and Senate feel there is compelling need for the law they can override the veto with a 2/3 majority vote. The house and senate fall well short of the 2/3 veto override right now but could be pressured into raising enough votes if there is a popular uproar. Say 10,000 people in wheel chairs blockading the house and senate buildings while they are in session. Wouldn't hurt to circle the wagosn around the White House either. Thought for the new millenium: In a world without walls and fences, who needs Windows and Gates? - Open Office - Firefox - Thunderbird - Gimp -Ubuntu - Red Hat -

May 25th, 2005	Top \| #14
perris OSNN Godlike Veteran Joined: January 2002 Location: new york Posts: 12,258 Reputation: 4333 Power: 291	Re: stem cell research Originally Posted by Sazar Cells from dead embryo's do nothing for research. The lines currently in use are mostly tainted. New lines are needed for additional research. ya, and there's the rub in my delema I think a solution is to choose a random week and harvest what could be harvested the problem with allowing the research and harvesting stem cells at will is that it will create a market for these cells, and it might encourage women to go forward with a decision to terminate their pregnancy which they might not otherwse have made I agree with that line of thought IT'S NOT WHAT YOU'VE DONE IT'S WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO DO

May 25th, 2005	Top \| #15
Mastershakes OSNN Veteran Addict Joined: July 2004 Location: Montreal Posts: 1,721 Reputation: 1040 Power: 124	Re: stem cell research Originally Posted by muzikool Hmm? muzi - what I'm getting at.... several other countries already research stem cells. There is also massive $$$ in private research in the US.... From: http://www.newsbatch.com/stemcells.htm The decision will certainly limit the number of government funded research projects but it has no effect on private stem cell research except that there will be a continuing ban on the cloning of embryos for the purpose of extracting stem cells. Because this technology is so promising, it is likely that there will be privately funded research. so, who cares what he does....

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Help Wanted with Research (Survey)	Grandmaster	Green Room	11	March 4th, 2008 6:26pm
research button in browser	perris	Windows Desktop Systems	2	July 9th, 2006 3:33am
NanoMemory Research!	mlakrid	Green Room	0	March 17th, 2005 4:00pm
Microsoft Research prototypes...	NetRyder	Windows Desktop Systems	9	July 23rd, 2004 8:14pm
Mice Research	RagnaroK	General Hardware	12	May 6th, 2003 4:35pm

May 25th, 2005	Top \| #16
muzikool Act your wage. Joined: December 2001 Location: Texas, USA Reputation: Yes, please. Posts: 7,626 Reputation: 2900 Power: 232	Re: stem cell research Originally Posted by Mastershakes muzi - what I'm getting at.... several other countries already research stem cells. There is also massive $$$ in private research in the US.... I know, but to say The rest of the Western world has embraced it. is kind of a blanketing statement, isn't it?

May 25th, 2005	Top \| #17
Sazar F@H - Is it in you? Joined: April 2002 Location: Between Austin and Tampa Posts: 14,888 Reputation: 4110 Power: 313	Re: stem cell research Originally Posted by Unwonted Here is a short test on stem cell research. 1. Embryonic stem cells are used to cure/treat (or create cures/treatments for) __________________________ . Insert anything, parkinsons, alzheimers, spinal injury research. Stem cell research has led to very promising results in animals thus far. People say, "There is so much potential in this research, but so far, stem cell research has yielded nothing in a century outside of bone marrow transplants. Embryonic stem cell research is a relatively new field, but has yielded nothing in its 20-30 years. I think you might want to look up some of the breakthroughs made over the past 2 years. Why don't they research animals first to determine what kinds of advancement, if any, can be made from embryonic stem cells? Isn't that the normal scientific way--to see if it works on animals before experimenting on human subjects? Again please look up the information about the breakthroughs made. They are not making stuff up, there are ACTUAL and TANGIBLE benefits. Google is your friend since you are more than adept at finding links. Why do they start with embryos before adult stem cells? There are too many safety steps they are skipping when scientists start with human embryos. This is simple. Embryonic cells are more easily manipulated and act faster. Galileo's situation was a matter of fact. Where human life begins is a matter of philosophy. If one accepts the premise that human life begins at conception, then embryonic stem cell research is equal to the human experiments of Japan and Germany on live soldiers in WWII. The embryo's in the petri dishes at fertility clinics are going to be thrown away anyways. Where is the philosophy in that? Further this is a fertility clinic setup we are talking about, what is the philosophy about playing god and creating life in a petri dish? There was research done obviously to be able to get these cells to become live beings in a dish, is that also abhorent and since it was done with the destruction of life? These are simple questions as well, almost as simple as yours except not as one-sided and biased. If a person doesn't accept the premise of life at conception, that is a different view. It doesn't make their view right or wrong, and it doesn't make the other side's view right or wrong. It's a matter of philosophy, not a matter of fact. It's a matter of ignorance and PR, not philosophy because the philosophy you speak of is hypocritical by its very essence. Without ignorance and lack of education on the matter it is very easy to have judgements clouded. Help to find cures for Alzheimer's, Mad Cow (BSE), CJD, ALS, Huntington's, Parkinson's disease, and many Cancers. Folding@Home, is it in you?

May 25th, 2005	Top \| #18
Mastershakes OSNN Veteran Addict Joined: July 2004 Location: Montreal Posts: 1,721 Reputation: 1040 Power: 124	Re: stem cell research Originally Posted by muzikool I know, but to say is kind of a blanketing statement, isn't it? Yes, yerright... little too broad.

May 25th, 2005	Top \| #19
muzikool Act your wage. Joined: December 2001 Location: Texas, USA Reputation: Yes, please. Posts: 7,626 Reputation: 2900 Power: 232	Re: stem cell research Originally Posted by Sazar It's a matter of ignorance and PR, not philosophy because the philosophy you speak of is hypocritical by its very essence. Without ignorance and lack of education on the matter it is very easy to have judgements clouded. I'd like you to elaborate on this point a bit. I believe life begins at conception, how is that a matter of ignorance and PR? Can you prove that life does not begin when conception occurs? If you can prove that, undeniably, then anyone who argues could be considered ignorant. PR?

May 25th, 2005	Top \| #20
Petros Thief IV Joined: May 2003 Location: Pacific Northwest Posts: 3,038 Reputation: 1647 Power: 156	Re: stem cell research Originally Posted by Sazar It's a matter of ignorance and PR, not philosophy because the philosophy you speak of is hypocritical by its very essence. To hold a belief that life begins at conception is not hypocritical. Philosophy is not an action. Hypocrisy is "The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness". So I googled like you said. Check this out: MILAN - A five-year-old boy has been cured of thalassaemia with stem cells taken from the umbilical cord blood of his two brothers, who are twins. Stem cells from one of the twins were multiplied successfully at the laboratories of the Franco Calori Cell Factory of the Milan Polyclinic, opening the possibility of obtaining blood stem cells in sufficient quantity to treat adults, as well as smaller patients. The operation, the first of its kind in the world, was performed on August 12 in the paediatric oncology and haematology unit, directed by Professor Franco Locatelli, at the San Matteo Polyclinic in Pavia. Yesterday morning, Health Minister Girolamo Sirchia was in attendance when the Italian achievement was presented in Milan at the Marangoni pavilion. It was here ten years ago that Sirchia, as head of the transfusion and transplant immunology centre, set up a bank of placenta and umbilical cord blood. Currently, the bank holds 5,000 units, each containing 100 centilitres of cord blood. And nobody had to terminate an embryo.