mrstickball said: No problem I'm in the kinds of circles that can, and do oppose stem cell research (the embryonic kind). I've listened to many newcasts from 'The Center for Bio-Ethics Reform' which is one of the most right-wing anti-everything groups out there (unless you want to see a recorded actual abortion, I don't recommend going to their site), and even *they* think stem cell research is great (the non-embryonic kind). Of course, its very close to say 'I oppose stem cell research' and 'I oppose embryonic stem cell research', so it may be hard to separate the two - one has been hugely beneficial and helped many people, while the other has been pretty shoddy at results, and is also questionable from an ethical standpoint.

Another (non-ethical) problem people have with embryonic stem cell research is that it is not (really) a practical source of stem-cells anyways; and resources need to be focused on producing stem-cells from other sources if we are ever going to use them on a wide scale.

Ok Ok, am I the only person going to point out the ridiculously contradicting title?

never mind, I don't want to offend anyone.

Huh, they just announced they were going to do this like... a month ago.

Good stuff.

TBH your thread name is misleading. If you are partially blind you can still see but not as well. (quality)

How so?

Sight is not a binary thing, it's not a case of perfect sight or no sight. My grandmother was registered as blind after an accident, it left her with ~10% of what was her regular sight, if she had a treatment to restore her sight from 10% to 50% then her sight would have been restored.

This man was partially blind, now he's not due to this treatment. His sight has been restored.

Sight is not binary.

My point is that he was never blind. His vision was just inhibited. Being blind means you CANNOT see and this man obviously could.

Partially blind!! Partially, that's the key word here. Partially. You can be partially blind and have your sight restored. Did you not read what I wrote? Being blind is not a binary thing, as in it can only be one way or the other. Being blind does not mean that you can't see full stop, if you're missing 90% of your vision then you are by definition partially blind.

Partially blind is a perfectly viable term to us. No-one said he was 100% blind, they said he was partially blind.

Well someone doesn't have to be 100% blind to be considered blind anyway.

If you have 10% of the vision of a normal person, your just considered blind.  Not even "Partially blind."

Something like.... 13% of people over 65 are considered blind legally.

So, lets hope this treatement gets cheap soon.

Your lack of common sense is disturbing.

Before we get in a yelling match, what do you think partially blind means?