Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
arguments for stem cell research
problem with stem cell research
importance of stem cell research
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: arguments for stem cell research
Stem cell research has provided scientists with insight into new possibilities for effective therapies against difficult health conditions, but it has also created several ethical debates on an international level. From a scientific viewpoint, stem cell research has the potential to cure chronic conditions, such as Parkinson's disease, diabetes, chronic hearth conditions, spinal cord disabilities, and other conditions that require complete tissue regeneration for successful treatment. In other words, the cause for researching stem cells and their therapeutic properties could be justified despite the moral complaints against it. However, lack of proper regulations and several ethical complaints against stem cell research restrict its development. Two main complaints against stem cell research define it as a violation of human rights through the destruction of embryos and a potential cause of inhuman practices in the future. However, the therapeutic potential of understanding stem cells and working with stem cells is undeniable, and several scientists aim to defend the purposes of stem cell researches and propose regulations and moral values that would meet the expectations of both sides of the stem cell research issue. While there are already some common ground where both sides can agree and define stem cell research as moral and useful, further improvements in regulations, defining clear ethical viewpoints for stem cell research, and alternative scientific methods for achieving the same goals could expand the common grounds and achieve a better agreement between two sides with opposite viewpoints on stem cell research.
Although stem cell research promises immense progress in health care, there are two main moral objections to st...
... middle of paper ...
...er (SCNT) rather than finding appropriate methods of obtaining stem cells for therapeutic procedures. Although biological knowledge about cell development often seems as the most trivial benefit of stem cell research (Holm 496), SCNT research could clarify the genetic factors that cause diseases, so it would be possible to reprogram corrupt genes rather than look for morally acceptable methods and regulations of using embryos for the purpose of obtaining stem cells (McLaren 131). If reprogramming the somatic nucleus could produce the same results without harming embryos, there would be no reason to create ethical debates about the moral aspects of collecting research material. An alternative research method seems the most appropriate solution because it would avoid several major ethical debates, and it could possibly require much less legislations or regulations.
Embryonic stem cells research has challenged the moral ethics within human beings simply because the point at which one is considered a “human,” is still under debate and practically incapable to make a decision upon.
Over the past decade scientist and the U.S government have been debating about funds for stem cell research (SCR), the amount spent depends on who is in office. The Democratic Party fully supports SCR, but the Republican Party somewhat opposes the concept of SCR, arfuing it violates the Christian principle of life. As a result, this topic is considered controversial, but also beneficial if allowed. Despite the controversy, SCR should be well funded for medicinal use, because blank stem cells (SC) can be used to regenerate bones and muscle tissue, they can be used to control or even reverse neurodegenerative disease, and because they can be used for therapeutic cloning.
The conflict surrounding stem cell research is, with ethical consideration, whether it is a good or bad. The majority of Americans are advocates due to the possibilities of medical advancement, thus saving thousands of lives. Those in opposition believe that it is against
The President’s Council on Bioethics published “Monitoring Stem Cell Research” in 2004. This report was written in response to President Bush’s comments regarding research of human stem cells on August 9, 2001. President Bush announced that he was going to make federal funding available for research that involved existing lines of stem cells that came from embryos. He is the first president to provide any type of financial support for the research of human stem cells. A Council was created with people who are educated in the field of stem cells to help monitor the research and to recommend guidelines and consider the ethical consequences that this research could create. This report is an “update” given by the President’s Council in January of 2004 to make the public aware of the significant developments in the science and medical aspects of stem cell research. It also describes the ethical, legal and political implications that stem cell research may create. However, since the research is still in its beginning stages, this “update” does not describe a complete or definitive study of stem cells nor does it provide specific guidelines or regulations. This is a report that is suppose to help the President, Congress and general public make better-informed decisions as to the direction that we should go with stem cells.
The possibility to cure Alzheimer, Parkinson’s, AIDS, spinal injuries, and many more diseases and conditions is received by many in the medical world with excitement and anticipation. The discoveries of embryonic stem, ES, cells in 1998 by James A. Thomson, a biologist at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, was a great breakthrough for the medical world, showing great promise in the field of stem cell research. This is because they have the capacity to become any type of cell tissue in the body. To the medical world the opportunities seems endless. However, there is a great deal of debate by some who question the moral and ethical use of ES cells, believing that life begins at fertilization. Supporters argue that we have an obligation to help others who are suffering by using ES cells, because they are consider potential life. The question is do we have the right to use ES cells for research purposes when the embryos will be grown specifically for research and destruction? And if so, should this research be funded by the government?
As technology stem cell research intensifies, so does the controversy about whether such scientific progress is moral. In the past millennium to today the present stem cell research has become a controversial topic across the world. Stem cells are unspecialized cells that have unique regenerative abilities, allowing them to divide into specialized cell types. Understanding why these processes occur is essential to curing disease. Critics of stem cell research argue that the extraction of embryonic stem cells involves destroying an early embryo, equating the act of killing a human. Although stem cell research is a highly controversial topic, it is compulsory to continue stem cell research within ethical boundaries for the benefit of mankind.
There have been many types of medical advances, but one in particular that has been said that it can help on the treatment of different type of diseases. Stem cells are multicellular organisms that can develop many more of their kind and then give birth to new kind of cells. This types of cells come from the umbilical cord of a new born. This became a huge dilemma where there’s a competing with moral and ethical values. The rumor is a never ending debate. This dilemma is not just in the U.S.A, but all around the world since this stem cell are so effective even though there’s some places where stem cells is ether no restriction or restricted .
The ethical issues behind the method in which stem cells are obtained out weigh the benefits of stem cell therapy. We should not try to play God, in the aspect of creation of living beings just to be sacrificed for the “betterment of mankind”. Many egregious acts have been committed under the guise of “the greater good”. This is one instance in which the ends do not justify the means.
The controversy behind the stem cell research has been raging since the first experiments. The United States Congress banned federally supported human-embryo research in 1996, forcing scientists to solicit funding from private sponsors. Since stem cells are harvested from aborted fetuses, the ethical issues surrounding abortion act as a stigma in the public’s view. However, in September of last year, the National Bioethics Advisory Commission concluded that harvesting stem cells from discarded embryos is morally akin to removing organs from dead people for transplant. Stem cell research continues to be very controversial, yet prevalent in the scientific community.
Despite the unquestionable gains that embryonic stem cell research has brought and may continue to bring to medicine, I believe the ethics and morality of stem cell research is questionable. Embryonic stem cells are taken from a human embryo, which is “the developing organism from the time of fertilization” (conception) “until the end of the eighth week of gestation, when it becomes known as a fetus” (National Institutes of Health). These embryos are fertilized in an in vitro fertilization clinic, and their stem cells are extracted from their inner cell mass of the blastocyst after three to four days. They must be extracted because after five days of the embryonic cell’s development, these undifferentiated stem cells no longer exist. In the process of extracting these cells from the infer mass of the blastocyst, the human embryo is destroyed. Since human life begins at the moment of conception (when sperm fertilizes an egg), the destruction of the human embryo is the destruction of a human being. Killing a human being and disregarding the irrevocable value of human life is morally wrong; therefore, embryonic stem cell research is not morally acceptable. I will be arguing this point throughout the paper, taking into consideration counterarguments and building upon others that are also against embryonic stem cell research.
Robertson, J. (2010). Embryo stem cell research: ten years of controversy. Journal Of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 38(2), 191-203. doi:10.1111/j.1748-720X.2010.00479.x
From the discussion above it is very clear that there are different opinions on the pros and cons of stem cell research. Based on the recent researches, scientists have the capability to work out the alternatives for embryonic stem cell research. And the usefulness compare to embryonic stem cell remains unknown. Undeniably, the stem cell research issue has its most complex parts to be resolved and surmounted. But perhaps we can disclose the way to carry out stem cell research with the balance of bioethics and most importantly, do no harm for humankind one day.
One of the most controversial topics in the media today is the question of the morality of research on human embryonic stem cells. According to a Gallup poll taken in May of 2010, 59% of Americans believed medical research using stem cells obtained from humans was morally acceptable, where 32% believed it was morally wrong. (Saad) This will always be a difficult issue for me to take sides on. There are so many arguments for and against and so many ethical theories that support and oppose it. I am going to try to touch on a few of these theories and how they apply to the research done on human embryonic stem cells.
Within the past few years, scientist have made several breakthroughs with human stem cells. These breakthroughs have catapulted the issue of stem cell research into the middle of a national debate. Most people have no problem with the research itself, however the source of the stem cells (adult or human embryos) used in research is the primary cause of the debate. Some people feel that destroying an embryo is comparable to murder, even if the research it promotes may help people with serious illnesses. Other believe that an embryo is not a person and therefore research on an embryo is the same as research on any other group of cells.
Stem cells offer exciting promise for future therapies, but significant technical hurdles remain that will only be overcome through years of intensive research. Stem Cells have the incredible potential to develop into many different cell types in the body during early life and growth. Scientists primarily work with two kinds of stem cells from animals and humans. The embryonic stem cells and the non-embryonic stem cells. Stem cells are the cells from which all other cells originate. In a human embryo, a large portion of the embryo’s cells are stem cells. These stem cells can be used for cell-based therapies. Cell-Based therapies are treatments in which stem cells are induced to differentiate into the specific cell type required to repair damaged or destroyed cells or tissues. Stem cells are versatile and offer the possibility to treat a number of diseases including Alzheimer’s, stroke, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, etc. The problem is that for the process of embryonic stem cell research and embryo will be destroyed if used. This raises a moral issue and questions of whether stem cell research is unethical or not.