The large amount of attention was because of the answers stem cells held for diseases and other problems. The ethical dilemma was focused on the fact scientists were destroying human embryos. New advancements in technology may resolve this controversy and bring the fight to an end. Scientists have discovered how to make a patients cells act and respond like embryonic cells. This decreases the demand for human embryos in experimentation and instead uses stem cell therapies (Genetic Science Learning Center).
It’s a very interesting question, and scientists are certainly looking at that” (Landis 77). Continued embryonic stem cell research is required to answer those questions. Why let them become medical waste when they can be used for a greater cause?
For example, a patient with nerve damage as a result of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) can have some of their inactive ne... ... middle of paper ... ... conclusion, stem cells show great potential as pluripotent cells that can mimic the task of specialized cells throughout the body. Due to the numerous amount of genetic diseases in our society that have yet to have a cure, stem cell research must be furthered implored to make necessary advancements in the field of medicine despite the potentially harmful effects it can have to the human embryo. With this being said, the solution is that stem cells should be primarily obtained through the aborted in vitro fertilization. So stem cells don’t have to be extracted from living embryos, which means this process doesn’t have to be linked with abortion. This is good on both sides of the debate: the groups against stem cells research argue that killing an embryo doesn’t justify saving another life, while still satisfying the scientist that want to research stem cells.
The stake over the issue of stem cells revolves around the human life itself. Proponents of stem cells say that until an embryo has not been embedded into the uterus, it does not have a human status and therefore could be used to treat patient who already are persons. They also propose to obtain cells through IVF as opposed to abortion because abortion is attributed to a deliberate act of killing human life while the fo... ... middle of paper ... ...of optimism and bring forth a new way of life and medical abilities all around the world for the benefit of people, family, friends, and oneself. Science can be described as the pursuit of innovation, advancement and opportunity. Stem cells have offered scientists and the world a new doorway to treat diseases and help millions.
Human cloning is one of the most controversial subjects in modern times. Supporters claim that cloning is a great advance in science and can lead to great discoveries and medical breakthroughs. Opponents feel that cloning is a threat to human individuality and is potentially disastrous. Both sides make reasonable arguments, however I feel that Wesley takes things a bit too far in his grim outlook on the future of humanity. Sure, there are downsides to cloning, and yes it can be dangerous if it is used for the wrong purposes.
Stem cells can be saved and used later to make specialized cells, when needed (par. 1). The opposition feels that stem cells deal with the issue that human embryos are involved in stem cell research. These factors are the good and bad effects of stem cell research. Those who oppose stem cell research do not want fetuses and fertilized eggs used for research purposes.
This technology, according to scientists, could foster the ability to cure any disease, illness, or injury, but at what cost? Opponents of stem cell research believe that the practice of embryonic study and culture is immoral, while proponents suggest that this technology is necessary for the advancement of medical research. In 2001, then President George W. Bush quickly sided with those believing the research to be immoral. During his primetime address, he advocated only to allow research on cell lines already in existence. Much of this side of the argument is based on the idea that human eggs are fertilized with sperm to create an embryo, and then destroyed to harvest the stem cells within the blastocyst.
In order for cloning to be a successful endeavor in the medical field, misconceptions and fears have to be reduced by educating people on the subject. Things such as the 10,000 Hitlers scenario, a fear of loss of identity in the clone, and ¡§playing God¡¨ are reasons people give to ban all types of cloning. On the other hand, cloning for medical research, as I have demonstrated, can prove to have amazing results. It is still a young science that is imperfect, but with the funding and support of others cloning can cure many genetically inherited diseases, prevent deaths for people who wait endlessly for an organ transplant, and help parents to not pass their genetic diseases on to their children. To ban this research will be a loss of technology that can change the way modern medicine is applied and medical research is implemented in the future.
Also in 1998, two independent teams of US scientists successfully isolated and cultured stem cells obtained from embryos (On human embryos and medical research, 01). Scientists refer to embryonic stem cells as pluripotent meaning that each has a capacity to develop into any kind of cell in a human body (Stem cells the seeds of hope, 03). With more funding for stem cell research we will be able to unlock the infinitive value in the use of e... ... middle of paper ... ...wever it is a very controversial topic in the United States. Many people disagree with stem cell research and also tried to put laws restricting it. In the past under the Bush administration there was in fact laws passed to try to keep embryonic stem cell research from going anywhere.
Now think of a loved one suffering from Alzheimer’s disease or paralysis. Would you deny them a life without suffering if the cure for the disease could be obtained by performing research on an aborted fetus already destined for destruction? It is my belief that scientists should be able to do stem cell research within carefully defined moral parameters because this research is so promising to cure so many diseases and teach us so much about how our bodies work. However, embryos destined for destruction should be used for stem cell research rather than created embryos because there are several thousands of embryos that will be destroyed so it is not necessary to create more embryos and destroy them. Stem cell research remains highly promising in that “Animal research suggests stem cells may some day provide a way to repair or replace diseased tissues and organs” and it holds immense possibilities for cures of diseases such as Alzheimer’s, paralysis, Parkinson’s disease, and diabetes (The Lancet par.