Embryonic Of Stem Cell Research

The transfer of information, often shared through scientific reports and research, puts this topic in a highly international spotlight. Many supporters believe that stem cells will be able to help solve once untreatable diseases or injuries such as spinal cord injuries, skin burns, Parkinson’s disease, and some blood disorders. However, the main argument is if stem cells should be used in finding therapeutic treatments. The use of embryonic stem cells is viewed by many as a moral inconsistency; it is opposed by religious organizations and individuals believing that this research should be abandoned and existing, alternative methods be adapted.

STEM cell research according to scientists might be the key to saving lives due to organ failure, brain damage or even heart problems. The idea is stem cells provided by fetuses that have been aborted typically

Stem cell research has been quite a controversial topic since its origin in the 1960s by Gopal Das and Joseph Altman. Of course, anything that uses a human embryo would be. Stem cell research could open a vast number of new doors for modern science, it could let us test new drugs, one of which could be the unfound cure for AIDS or Alzheimer’s disease. However, this branch of science comes at a high price, the price of a human life that is only five to six days

Christopher Reeve, better known as superman, was not only an actor, but also an athlete and an adventurer. On two separate occasions, he flew an airplane sole across the Atlantic Ocean. On Memorial Day weekend in 1995, Chris rode his horse, Buck, to the starting box of a cross-country race in Virginia. Chris had trained and raced horses for almost ten years, so he felt the course ahead of him would be easy. But what Chris did not see coming was just as he and Buck approached the third jump, Buck would come to a sudden stop, sending Chris over the jump. He landed directing on his head, fracturing two vertebrae in his neck. From that day on, he was completely paralyzed. At the time, there was no known treatment, no medication, and no surgery to fix his damaged spine. For the rest of his days, Chris raised money and awareness for research into spinal cord injuries. One of the topics he pushed for was embryonic stem cell research. Christopher Reeve died on October 10th, 2004, never fulfilling his goal to walk again. But if he had gotten the support and funding for stem cell research, his story might have ended differently. Embryonic stem cell research should be funded in the U.S because it could lead to the treatment to many diseases, there are other sources of stem cells, but they are limited to their use, and the eight-celled blastocysts cannot grow any further to form a baby, so it is not harming living human beings.

Imagine living in a world without cancer, Parkinson 's, or even diabetes. While everyone may wish this is true, people are against a way that researchers can make this possible, which would be by the use of stem cells. There is major controversy on whether or not stem cell research should be allowed, especially when it comes to embryonic stem cell research. Although many consider it to be killing a potential life form, embryonic stem cell research may eventually be acceptable to use because there is consent and a lengthy process to make sure the donor understands what their embryonic stem cells will be used for. That may be viewed as a much better

With the advent of a wide variety of scientific advances in the medical field, especially those improvements in health-related fields, the quality of life for the earth’s inhabitants has improved greatly over the past century. Scientists continue to improve upon current knowledge and expand the field of medicine. Over the past few years, scientists have performed significant research pertaining to the study of stem cells. Many researchers see potential in the manipulation of stem cells - possible treatments for currently incurable diseases such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s (Goldstein). With these new discoveries, though, questions as to the morality of such practices arise. While few find an

Stem cell research is a medical advancement that many view as either morally wrong or a stepping stone to better medical treatments. Stem cells are defined by the National Institutes of Health as “cells that have the potential to develop into some or many different cell types in the body [and] can theoretically divide without limit to replenish other cells for as long as the person or animal is still alive.” There are two main types of stem cells, embryonic and adult stem cells. Embryonic stem cells are the main reason behind the controversy surrounding stem cell research due to the fact that they come from aborted human embryos. Considering cells are the building blocks of life and are responsible for creating all of our bones and organs,

Stem cells are cells in the body that can become many other parts of the body. They are a very important part of the body and the way it functions. Stem cell research has been studied for many years but the findings have recently been applied to the real world. With the new discoveries from stem cells, clinical trials can be more accurate and cost effective. The stem cells can be reprogramed and sent to parts of the body to help repair cell damage in the body, giving them the name the black box of reprogramming. Stem cells can also be used to help cure cancers and other diseases like Alzheimer and Parkinson. Some think that stem cell research is wrong and goes against their religious beliefs.

Numerous people die every day from diseases such as ALS, Parkinson’s, cancer, and many other things. These deaths may be preventable, through a somewhat new field of science, embryonic stem cell research. This field involves research that could develop cures or methods of preventing, treating, or medicating people afflicted with these debilitating, often deadly disorders. This field, unfortunately, is not supported by everyone. In fact it is so controversial, that in America, federal funding is not allowed. This severely limits the opportunities that these special cells can provide. Yet scientists continue to research these cells, because they feel that it is a field worth

Another milestone in science has been reached: the discovery of stem cells in the 19th Century. Stem cells have the ability to divide for indefinite periods in culture and to give rise to specialized cells (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2009). According to the National Institutes of Health, embryonic stem cells derive from four to five day old embryos, also known as blastocyst, that have been fertilized in vitro and donated to research purposes with informed consent from the donors. Adult embryonic stem cells are found in differentiated cells in a tissue or organ. The main purpose of these cells is to repair the damaged tissue in which they are found. Since this discovery, there has been controversy over whether embryonic and adult stem cell research should be federally funded, and the ethics involved.

The issue at discussion in this report is ESCR (embryonic stem cell research) and current use. This issue causes controversial concerns because the first isolation of the embryo was in 1998, which is still very recent and the policies around it are grey areas. Many countries including the United States of America have removed funding because of issues that have risen due to religious, ethical and legal formalities. Some of the benefits that ESC (embryonic stem cells) promise are the cure for many diseases and even the creation of organs between other scientific advances that could save numerous lives. The benefits that ESC could provide are sometimes questioned to be worth all the ethical issues that they bring. Some

In the Declaration on the Production and the Scientific and Therapeutic Use of Human Embryonic Stem Cells, the Pontifical Academy for Life presents the field of stem cell research with a statement regarding the official Roman Catholic position on the moral aspects of acquiring and using human embryonic stem cells. They have declared that it is not morally legitimate to produce or use human embryos as a source of stem cells, nor is it acceptable to use stem cells from cell lines already established. Thus, bringing up the conflicting topic concerned with the point in time in which a human embryo becomes more than a simple mass of cells, but a human individual with a well defined identity. Gerard Magil and William B. Neaves, in their paper Ontological and Ethical Implications of Direct Nuclear Reprogramming has conflicted the Academy’s position on stem cell research with an alternative understanding of adult stem cells. In what follows, I will argue that the Academy does not adequately defend the Church’s standpoint on stem cell research. However, I will also suggest that even if the Church’s position were accepted, this would not provide an adequate solution to the ethical question revolving around stem cell research.

Stem cells can become many different types. Later in life, stem cells also can replace worn-out or damaged cells. Embryonic stem cells can be grown relatively easily in culture. These cells come from embryos that are three to five days old. Embryonic stem cells can become all cell types of the body because they are pluripotent. These are pluripotent stem cells, meaning they can divide into more stem cells or can become any type of cell in the body. Adult stem cells are thought to be limited to differentiating into different cell types of their tissue of origin. Unlike embryonic stem cells, adult stem cells cannot transform into any and every cell type. These stem cells have been identified in many organs and tissues, including brain, bone marrow, peripheral blood, blood vessels, skeletal muscle, skin, teeth, heart, gut, liver, ovarian epithelium, and testis.

People wonder if using embryonic stem cells is feasible. Stem cells is a new area of innovation where scientists are not yet comfortable; stem cells is an area that is not fully understood. Stem cells challenge the limits of possibility. Innovation is built around the question “what if”; what if it might just be possible? Before a plane was invented, people thought flying was impossible. Before vaccines were discovered, people thought smallpox was impossible to cure. Everything has a before. Stem cells are in their before right now, yet people still denounce the idea as crazy. The Wright Brothers first ever airplane flight lasted only 12 seconds, now commercial airlines control a multi-billion dollar industry. Currently, stem cells are still only able to fly for 12 seconds, but if society would allow innovation to take place, if they could just forget about religious ideology, and only think of the good of humanity, stem cells would be able to cure people in millions. In the words of Joe Palca, “nobody was ever cured from a kidney transplant until somebody had the idea to try it”. Nobody will ever be cured by stem cells if no one ever has the courage to reach past the limitation of what is considered possible, and just try

Could you imagine having someone close to you who needed nonspecialized cells which have the potential to create other types of specific cells in order to survive? Those cells are called Stem Cells and they are very crucial to develop organisms. Stem cell research is a subject that most people in the world have a different viewpoint on. Some view the issue of stem cell research and stem cell therapy as morally wrong and a crime against humanity, others view the study of stem cells as the next step in modern science (Reeve.) I think in some twisted way, stem cell research can be useful.