Embryonic stem cells work to help cure diseases because of the fact that they can turn into any cell type the body needs. Scientists can manipulate embryonic stem cells into the cells that their patients need. The major questions regarding stem cell research are is it morally permissible to destroy an embryo in search of cures of diseases? Those who are against embryonic stem cell research would argue that stem cell research destroys a potential human life. On the other hand, those who are for stem cell research would argue that genetic tests and stem cell research can help detect and find cures for diseases that as of right now have no cures.
When James Thomson at the University of Wisconsin and John Gearhardt at John Hopkins University were able to culture human embryonic stem cells in a lab in 1998, they opened up an entire world of controversy now known as the stem cell debate. The importance of embryonic stem cells to modern science and medicine rests largely on the fact that they are pluripotent. This means that they have the ability to form into any cell necessary within the body; they can be encouraged to become skin cells, brain cells, etc. Organs could be grown in a lab and transplanted into patients, and these cells could be used to test new drugs, rather than a live human subject. This technology, according to scientists, could foster the ability to cure any disease, illness, or injury, but at what cost?
“Some of the most prominent advocates of the research are scientists and patients who believe that embryonic stem cell research will lead to the development of treatments and cures for some of humanity’s most pernicious afflictions (such as Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, heart disease, and diabetes).”(The center for bioethics & human dignity, n.d.). Among the most vocal opponents of the research are those who share the desire to heal, but who object to the pursuit of healing via unethical means. CBHD’s view is that because human embryonic stem cell research necessitates the destruction of human embryos, such research is unethical regardless of its alleged benefits. Ethical alternatives for achieving those benefits should be actively pursued. What are human embryonic stem cells and how are they obtained?
Human right activists and some religious groups are against this type of research because the harvesting of stem cells from embryos is seen as the destruction of human life. These activists believe using human tissue as a starting point for new cell development is unnatural; killing one person to help another (author). Nevertheless, it is an unconventional and controversial type of medicine that could prove to be groundbreaking. With the proliferation of disease such as cancer in our society, stem cell research must be furthered implored in order to cure diseases and save countless lives despite the ethical controversy it has created. Stem cells are cells that have not differentiated to form specialized tissues, and can be found in the blastocyst during the embryological growth, as well as in the bone marrow of adult tissues.
The negative side to the use of embryonic stem cells is that they are derived from early embryos, which is what many view as the beginning of life. These embryos are being destroyed in the process of research thus preventing life from running its natural course. The ethical controversies that arise in embryonic stem cell research are safety, resource allocation, and methods of harvesting cells. The safety of the existing cell lines is a concern because most of the cells have been grown in culture with the help of mouse stem cells which could lead to the transfer of dangerous animal viruses to humans. (3) The methods of harvesting the embryonic stem cells results in killing a living embryo, but some of these stem cells are produced by cloning.
I have complete understanding of embryonic stem cell research, and its potential to end human suffering, however it is unethical to do so. First and foremost, embryonic stem cells have the potential for life. Using stem cells for research shows a lack of consensus regarding the meaning, bonds, and sense of life. Knowing we can does not mean we should. There are limits and using embryonic stem cells for research purposes requires the destruction of the human embryo, and putting an end to potential human life crosses the line.
(Hurlbut, 2006) This poses a significant ethical dilemma, as ES cells are sourced from pre-implantation embryos leftover from In Vitro Fertilisation (IVF). The destruction of embryos is seen by many as an abuse of human life, an exploitation of those that are living, but cannot decide their own fate. (Masters, 2005) Before ES cell research is to make a positive impact on modern medicine and the global scientific community, this ethical predicament must first be considered. Embryonic stem cell research will allow for an emerging era of medicine, where researches will be capable of providing a cure for many of todays degene... ... middle of paper ... ...velopment, Monash University, Australia Fuchs, E 2008, Stem Cells: Biology, Ethics and Potential for Medicine, L'annuarie du College de France, France Denker, H 2006, Potentiality of Embryonic Stem Cells: An Ethical Problem Even With Alternative Stem Cell Sources, University of Duisburg-Essen, Germany Scott, C 2008, Stem Cells: new frontiers of ethics, law and policy, Stanford University, United States of America Healey, J 2007, Cloning & Stem Cell Research, Volume 265 edn, The Spinney Press, Sydney, Australia Morgan, S 2006, From Microscopes to Stem Cell Research: discovering regenerative medicine, White-Thomson Publishing, Oxford, United Kingdom Dowswell, P 2000, Genetics: the impact on our lives, Hodder & Wayland, London, United Kingdom Maters, C 2005, DNA and your body: what you need to know about biotechnology, UNSW Press, Sydney, Australia
Suggestive of this metaphor (commences) a very similar issue: Embryonic Stem Cell Research. Like the scenario of the island stampeded by the liitle critters, Stem Cell Research involves an extremely controversial awareness to the eyes of the public: the killing of the embryo. Should this unethical procedure be banned or should its potential benefits empower the ruling of its unethicality and immorality? To understand and possibly resolve this highly controversial predicament, it is essential to delve in the details of Embryonic Stem Cell Research. What exactly is a stem cell?
Clearly, neither the people in the state and the government approve of human cloning, there won't be no federal laws regulating human cloning research. The enacted law of 2002 made it illegal to clone or engage in a human being or human reproductive cloning, and slightly amended the definition of cloning to include the use of “non-human” as well as human egg cells. This change was presumably made to ensure that the law to prohibit cloning for any reproductive purposes (State Law on Human Cloning). If the government can prohibit the act of cloning, then it shouldn’t even be continuing. Clearly, this says a lot about scientists because some still further the act of cloning and disrespect the law of human cloning, and dishonor society's value as a whole; I mean we will love to get the answer for illnesses but not through cloning.
After many successful cloning experiments on increasingly complex animals, scientists have begun thinking about human cloning. This has raised many debates about the ethics and safety of experimentally cloning humans. While some advantages could be gained from human cloning, it should not be performed due to significant medical, societal, and religious concerns. The most successful cloning results were produced using a procedure known as Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer, or SCNT. SCNT cloning processes are performed by removing the nucleus with genetic material from an unfertilized egg, then replacing it with genetic material from the adult cell being cloned.