Stem cells are cells that have the ability to help thousands of people. These cells can help make dreams of finally getting rid of the wheelchair or bed become realities. They have the power to differentiate into any cell type, giving scientists hope that one day they can fix and repair organs damaged by disease or birth defects and help fight against diseases that impair a person’s quality of life. However, it is not the uses or benefits that can come out of using stem cells, but it is how scientists and researchers obtain the stem cells that have sparked debate over if it is ethical, moral, or legal to first acquire, and then use, the cells for human use and research. Stem cells can be obtained through a mother having an abortion, excess embryos through in vitro fertilization, or by saving the umbilical cord by freezing it and using it for future needs.
This approach seems more reasonable than using this technology to choose one’s eye color or keep someone on life support just because it is something that can be done, whether or not that is acceptable or not. To start with, scientific breakthroughs are necessary to improve human health and longevity. With the advancements in biotechnology there comes the opportunity to cure diseases that once devastated the population which allows for a healthier generation of people. For example, many vaccinations for diseases such as H1N1 have been popular in order to avoid being caught with the virus. Vaccinations have been used for years because of their ability to prevent diseases from spreading where they normally would have infected hundreds to thousands of people otherwise.
Human Reproductive Cloning Should be Banned The issues concerning human reproductive cloning are shrouded in controversy, perhaps overshadowing the true advantages of cloning technology. Therapeutic cloning, which is often misunderstood as reproductive cloning, is less controversial than the latter as it does not involve the creating of an individual being. Instead, vital stem cells are extracted from human embryos, in order to generate tissues and organs for transplant. The goal of this process is strictly to harvest stem cells, resulting in the creation of “cloned organs”, which can be used to treat heart disease, Alzheimer’s, and cancer. However, because reproductive cloning involves the creation of a specific being with specific characteristics it is much more controversial, and has much more at stake than therapeutic cloning.
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.
But the big idea is to use the cells for good by using them for research to heal people who don’t yet have a cure yet. That’s the most important thing because the scientists don’t use them for steroids or drugs, they are used to give people the hope that they can get better and improve their health. People need to accept the fact that yes, it does involve the abortion of a baby, but it used to do tremendous things for so many other people. The stem cells from aborted fetuses should be used because this is the only hope of getting better for some people. Organ damage is usually permanent and people have to live with it for the rest of their lives.
However the big picture isn’t seen by many, and by allowing genetic engineering we will be able to save so many people’s lives that we never thought could be possible. Even though it is argued that we will not know exactly what will happen in the future of the genetically engineered person or how the new genes will react in their body, we do know that the risk is worth taking. People who do not give credit to genetic engineering think that “human g... ... middle of paper ... ...on of human embryos but they successfully argue that the benefits of therapeutic cloning outweigh the morally based objections regarding the process” (2011). Furthermore they emphasize the fact that human lives are spared and improved by the use of genetic engineering and that the destruction of human embryos can eventually be omitted out of the process in a near future through other forms of technology. All in all, there is a considerable amount of information on genetic engineering and steam cell research that could be beneficial to the public.
In reality, cloning, along with its counterpart gene therapy, is not intended for the production of a fully developed individual. Instead, cloning and gene therapy are about the medical advancement of the world's population through the control of diseases and replacement of missing hormones and organs. Although there are arguments against them, the possibilities of cloning and gene therapy are important for the production of organs and hormones and as a means to control diseases, but both must also be strictly regulated in order to outlaw the production of fully-developed human clones. Until 1997 the chance of mammalian cloning seemed just about as unlikely as finding a cure for AID... ... middle of paper ... ...mones and the control of disease to ensure the future health of the human race. Like In Vitro fertilization, humans need to open their eyes and accept these new techniques that are creeping over the horizon which can not only save lives, but increase our longevity as a society.
In the past two decades, many technological and scientific advances have been made in order to make life easier for many people who suffer from cancer, disease and sickness. Among these advances there is something revolutionary called stem cells. Stem cells can help restore and regenerate almost all parts of the human body such as the heart, kidney, liver, and many other organs. Although stem cells offer a lot, there are many views against and for stem cells, and among these views lies the debate of whether stem cells should be legalized or not (NIH 2). Stem cells offer exciting new opportunities in the field of science such as regenerating human body parts, but many people are still debating whether or not the use of stem cells is moral because using stem cells requires the destruction of embryos, and if embryos are not destroyed, then stem cells from bone marrow are used, which is often a very painful process (NIH 3).
In addition, this technology can avoid rejection reaction. Camporesi and Bortolotti (2009) explain that if transplanted cells are derived from the patient, as opposed to a donor, the cells will not be attacked by the patient’s immune system as foreign material so that patient will not suffer adverse effects brought by immune-suppr... ... middle of paper ... ...cloning can be divided into two broad category: potential safety risk and moral problems, and these concerns overweigh its achievement. In conclusion, with the development of cloning technology, public have different attitudes towards it. On one hand, serious diseases, like liver cancer, are likely to be cured by transplanting healthy cells and scientists have more access to medical research. It brings hope for infertile families to obtain a baby.
However, despite the infinite potential for medical treatments, the topic of stem cells is surrounded by enormous amounts of controversy. The questions that feed the controversy are about how the stem cells are acquired and about how the gained knowledge would be used. However, it is necessary for mankind to keep stem cell research alive in order to save lives while taking care of any unethical topics about it. There are three ways to acquire a sample of stem cells. The first method is very controversial, which is the extraction of an embryonic cell.