I understand. You merely wanted sources for my claims and you seem to have found one by yourself, which was my point.
If you want to be picky with sources maybe you should try looking some up because being vague with me isn't going to get us anywhere. Actually, nothing is getting us anywhere because you refuse to believe that hey, maybe embryonic stem cells aren't as useful as your side of science is trying to claim. And you've posted one source that you admit merely weights the pros and cons of each, so you have no place to get huffy because you don't believe me. Tell me how that even begins to be more legit than anything I've posted.
But let's get some things straight before I grace you with more of what you want which will inevitably be rendered "unreliable" to you because that's what you seem to be fixated on doing. I never claimed that adult stem cells are just as flexible as embryonic ones. They are not; it's one of few cons against adult stem cells. They are very flexible, especially stem cells derived from the umbilical cord/placenta (which are just as flexible as embryonic stem cells), but embryonic stem cells are more flexible because they can become any cell. However, their plasticity and rapid growth, something looked upon as both pros, are the very thing that leads to cancer in the patient receiving the treatment. So to say "well hey embryonic stem cells are more flexible" is certainly true and perhaps a benefit in the meantime, but honestly, I'd say their extreme plasticity is a con rather than a pro. As for damage to the genes, I did already address this issue. I mentioned that adult stem cells can be taken from one individual and then given to another individual which would avoid any genetic issues the latter individual may have due to an illness or the like. You do the same thing you would with an organ transplant. As I said, there is the potential for rejection but that is also there with embryonic stem cells. I also already covered ease of production in probably every single one of my replies. You really need to touch up on your reading comprehension if you seriously think I haven't already addressed this. I noted several times that embryonic stem cells are harvested in greater numbers than adult stem cells. ...So? Why is this significant? It's easier for me to collect a bunch of Fs in school than a bunch of As but does that mean I should opt for the easiest route? It's about the quality, not the quantity, and so far embryonic stem cells have proven to not help/add more problems.
part 1
If you want to be picky with sources maybe you should try looking some up because being vague with me isn't going to get us anywhere. Actually, nothing is getting us anywhere because you refuse to believe that hey, maybe embryonic stem cells aren't as useful as your side of science is trying to claim.
And you've posted one source that you admit merely weights the pros and cons of each, so you have no place to get huffy because you don't believe me. Tell me how that even begins to be more legit than anything I've posted.
But let's get some things straight before I grace you with more of what you want which will inevitably be rendered "unreliable" to you because that's what you seem to be fixated on doing.
I never claimed that adult stem cells are just as flexible as embryonic ones. They are not; it's one of few cons against adult stem cells. They are very flexible, especially stem cells derived from the umbilical cord/placenta (which are just as flexible as embryonic stem cells), but embryonic stem cells are more flexible because they can become any cell. However, their plasticity and rapid growth, something looked upon as both pros, are the very thing that leads to cancer in the patient receiving the treatment. So to say "well hey embryonic stem cells are more flexible" is certainly true and perhaps a benefit in the meantime, but honestly, I'd say their extreme plasticity is a con rather than a pro.
As for damage to the genes, I did already address this issue. I mentioned that adult stem cells can be taken from one individual and then given to another individual which would avoid any genetic issues the latter individual may have due to an illness or the like. You do the same thing you would with an organ transplant. As I said, there is the potential for rejection but that is also there with embryonic stem cells.
I also already covered ease of production in probably every single one of my replies. You really need to touch up on your reading comprehension if you seriously think I haven't already addressed this. I noted several times that embryonic stem cells are harvested in greater numbers than adult stem cells. ...So? Why is this significant? It's easier for me to collect a bunch of Fs in school than a bunch of As but does that mean I should opt for the easiest route? It's about the quality, not the quantity, and so far embryonic stem cells have proven to not help/add more problems.