> That's what I've been saying. ASC results are for results now, ESC > are > for the future, maybe. Given the choice of where to invest, they went > with the better odds.
Not sure where my reply earlier today went (probably will show up later!) but basically it said the fastest road to success is not necessarily the best. Medical research in particular is filled with examples of earlier treatments succeeded by ones that took longer to develop but were ultimately more effective. If the argument that was being made was simply that yes, ASC can be used for some therapies, sure, that's clearly true. Big deal, this doesn't mean *anything* about the effectiveness of ASC over ESC. When it comes to funding projects, it's pretty typical to start with stuff that will produce results in the short term before you can go after money for the long term. That's nothing new, and it's obvious that ASC research has a clear head start and can come to clinical use much sooner....for a limited number of applications. But will ASC win out long-term for the multitude of things that stem cells can be used for, if both are given opportunity to be developed? That's definitely not an argument that can be made. --- Mary Jo ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:306857 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
