Well, it is not accurate for one thing.
1) What do you mean by "foreign"? If the Tissue is human, it does not have to have the same DNA. If that were true, there would be no organ transplants.
http://www.nfb.org/Images/nfb/Publications/vod/vod213/vodsum0601.htm
I would recommend just saying the use of stem cells from a person who has a transplant has the potential to greatly reduce the complications of tissue rejection, as the donating body recognizes the new tissue as its own.
How would you put this in your own words. I'm having some trouble can you please help me out. Organs that are grown from stem cells from a foreign source would have foreign DNA that does not match the DNA of the individual. That patients would have to take anti-rejection drugs for the rest of their life.
4 answers
What would one or two cons be for the benefits of therapeutic cloning. I have one so far.
Here is the viewpoint of the nut element.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/clo_ther1.htm
http://www.religioustolerance.org/clo_ther1.htm
There are two types of 'foreign' stem cells, adult and embryonic being investigated.
As you say there is an issue about rejection, depending on where these are to be used in the body. Some parts of the body have less immune response than other parts, e.g. the brain.
There are also some types of adult stem cells that seem to be able to be ignored by the immune system (can't remember what they are called).
As you say there is an issue about rejection, depending on where these are to be used in the body. Some parts of the body have less immune response than other parts, e.g. the brain.
There are also some types of adult stem cells that seem to be able to be ignored by the immune system (can't remember what they are called).
1 answer