Question about stem cells...

[shootingguard]

A lot of people are taking about how George Bush's banning of private research for stem cells set the hair regrowth movement back a long time...my question (forgive the ignorance) is that why would this really affect anything? Couldn't other nations have contributed?

 

[khali]

I wouldn't blame Bush for this. In Economics class my prof said that hair loss medicine which actually grows hair is artificially scarce. Therefore, even if Bush had allowed this research to take place, it wouldn't have made a difference. When the US economy begins to stabilize, then we should expect some type of advancement for hair loss medications.

 

[ClayShaw]

I wouldn't blame Bush for this. In Economics class my prof said that hair loss medicine which actually grows hair is artificially scarce. Therefore, even if Bush had allowed this research to take place, it wouldn't have made a difference. When the US economy begins to stabilize, then we should expect some type of advancement for hair loss medications.

So effective hair loss treatments have been perfected in the last 5/6 months and are artificially scarce due to the recession? I dont think so.

 

[shootingguard]

I guess it just seems to me that so many nations with more scientists than us would have already made tons of progress since they don't have roadblocks stopping their progress

 

[MDbaldeagle]

the ban only involved FEDERAL FUNDING of embryonic stem cells. Which means, that they could (and were) testing all kinds of stem cells (they just weren't able to use FEDERAL DOLLARS)