Embryonic Stem Cell Research: An Ethical Dilemma

Stem cells are cells that have the potential to develop into different types of cells in the body. Stem cells also act as a repair system for many tissues in the body by dividing repeatedly to replenish other cells within a person (National Institutes of Health). Stem cell research seeks to further the advancement of the use of stem cells as well as to find an ethical way to study them. In November 1998, researchers found a way to isolate and culture human embryonic stem cells, (Bevington 2005). The ethics of stem cell research has been debated over the years and some people fully support the use of stem cells, whereas others are completely against the use of stem cells. This has been an ongoing battle for scientists over the span of two decades prior to the 1998 finding.

The studying of stem cells is a very controversial issue that has been around since 1998 when the research of the use of embryonic stem cell treatment began. The main issues surrounding the discussion of treating people with life-altering disabilities through the use of these pluripotent cells is the ethicality of the matter and whether or not it is a savage act against a fetus. Many who oppose the use of these stem cells derived from excess embryos use the formerly stated opinion to support their argument, while those who are pro research argue that the destroying of one life could save another. The core complications that arise in studying stem cells lies in many Christian-like ethics and morals, otherwise called Christian bioethics. These are rooted in the modern day controversies arising due to advancements made in biology and medicine, mixed with religious views that argue against it. The conflicting interests of the polar opposites which are scientists and those with religious views have caused many complications along the way to discovering new treatments and cures for diseased cells. This bumpy road which has refrained scientists from making tremendous breakthroughs must smooth itself out, and the only way possible is through coming to an agreement that certain stem cell research should be practiced, such as the IPSC and adult stem cells, and others like the

Embryonic stem cell research is a controversial topic nationwide, because of its clash of ethical and moral values. Many people, including those suffering from diseases that this research is seeking to cure, do not believe in killing a living embryo in order to advance research and science.

In November of 1998, a group of researchers announced that they had successfully isolated and grown a special kind of cell with the potential to develop into virtually any kind of human tissue. The scientists had made the discovery of embryonic stem cells. The discovery was considered to be an innovative

For this reason, embryonic stem cells should not be used is that life is destroyed when stem cell lines are created. "the only way to get pluripotent stem cells for research is to remove the inner cell mass of an embryo and put it in a dish" said on the stem cell debate is it over?).” This quote says that you have to kill embryos to study stem cells. When someone Murders someone they go to jail. When you kill an embryo you are becoming a Murderer. Embryos are still alive whether or not you think an embryo is alive

Society tends to only focus on the black and white when it comes to controversial issues and forgets about the gray area that is almost always there. Embryonic stem cell research and treatment is no exception to this phenomenon. Kristina Hug writes about what she believes to be the four arguments for the ethical dilemmas surrounding stem cell research in her article titled “Embryonic Stem Cell Research: An Ethical Dilemma”. Like the authors of the previous article mentioned said, Hug agrees that the two moral principles that stem cell research forces us to choose between are the duty to respect the embryo versus the duty to protect the sick. However, they offer other views along the spectrum and reasons why people are for and against each viewpoint. The first viewpoint provided states that “the embryo has full moral status from fertilization onwards”. It says the criteria for ‘personhood’ is notoriously unclear and different people define what makes a person a person in different ways. Ones who agree with this statement argue that development from an embryo into a baby is an ongoing process and it is impossible to pinpoint when exactly personhood begins. They also argue that an embryo is simply a person in the embryonic stage and although it does not currently have the characteristics of a person, they will eventually become a person and should be given the same rights and respect people receive. The second viewpoint states that “there is a cut-off point at fourteen days after fertilization”. The source says that some people argue that a human embryo deserves special protection from around day fourteen after fertilization. A reason why people argue that point is that fertilization is a process, not a ‘moment’ and an embryo in the earliest stages is not yet clearly defined as an individual. The third viewpoint in this

Embryonic stem cell research and use is a scientific advancement that could change medical history. There are two types of stem cell research, adult stem cells, and embryonic stem cells. Embryonic stem cells receive a very negative connotation in society, and there are many misconceptions about the process and the ethics of embryonic stem cell research. A large majority of society immediately assume that it is the use of aborted embryos because of the word embryonic, and adult stem cells are not as effective as embryonic. However, this is not the case. Embryonic stem cell research is in progress to help cure and reduce the effects of very fatal and harmful diseases that take many of societies precious lives. If research continues to

Those who are against embryonic stem cell research commonly bring up the point of the embryo being unconscious, so it should not be killed because of its inability of awareness. Those who do not support the research compare the state of being unconscious to being asleep. While a person sleeps, it would be unacceptable to do any harm to them, so people expect the same treatment to go to the unformed human as well. Though a fully developed human and a newly formed blastocyte are far from similar, many try to argue that by those enforcing the rights of humans while they are unconscious, then we should “exercise these capacities when they eventually become fully developed humans”(Key). The argument against this problem is that embryos will never gain consciousness, but humans will eventually regain it once they wake up. The difference is that a embryo never had the chance to become conscious.

Speaking of life, much debate occurred over whether or not an embryo should be considered a human. Patrick Lee, and Robert P. George, two of these individuals, Lee, a professor, and George, a politician, have often collaborated on many articles about stem cell research, and have gone on record by agreeing that embryos are in fact human from conception(33-41). The two argue that, from conception, an embryo immediately strives toward purposeful development. They then go into the science behind this claim. For our purposes, we won’t go into the science behind said development, because there is too much information

There have been an argument about whether embryonic stem cell research should be used or not. Embryonic stem cells are derived from the inner mass of a human embryo. They are pluripotent which means they can grow into most cells. They can also become all cell types of the body. Embryonic stem cells have the capability of spreading themselves indefinitely in an undifferentiated state.

There are several new methods that have been developed since the start of the highly controversial stem cell debate which rectifies the major differences on both sides. New solutions such as Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells (iPS) acts as an alternate method to embryonic research in that it uses cellular reprogramming of adult skin cells.“The benefit of iPS is that stem cells can be created without the use of embryos, however, the cells resemble embryos in that they can, theoretically and under the appropriate conditions, be made to differentiate into any type of cell found in the body ” (Phillips, 2010). . There are also techniques being developed that use amnionic fluid, or stem cell extraction techniques that do not damage the embryo, that also provide alternatives for obtaining viable stem cell lines ” (Phillips, 2010). The only caveat to all of these newly developed alternatives is that no solution has been studied long enough to claim that it can be an effective substitute 100%. “To begin with, demand for

One of the biggest problems that biomedical scientists struggle with today is finding a cure to cancer. Thousands of scientists across the world devote their time and resources to solving this puzzle and saving thousands of lives. Over the last few decades, technology and medicine has advanced significantly increasing the life expectancy of the average human life. However, further steps need to be taken to achieve what doctors and scientists have set out to accomplish. In order to do this, many believe that embryonic stem cell research could be the key to unlocking a variety of medical problems. However, in the early 2000’s, the United States saw a significant decrease in federal funding available for this research. This could set back the medical advances by years if researchers could not continue their work. A decrease in restrictions while increasing federal funding for embryonic stem cell research is vital for taking steps forward in ethically finding cures for many injuries and diseases that affect millions of people every day.

Through the process of obtaining the embryonic stem cells the fetus that was forming becomes terminated or in other words it dies. Research poses a moral dilemma. It forces us to choose between two moral principles; the duty to prevent suffering and pain or the duty to respect the value of human life (2011 Hug, Kristina).

Many of the ethical debates about embryonic stem cells involve when a human being is actually defined as a human. Embryonic stem cells can be taken from the blastocyst, a very early stage of development that is a hollow ball with about 150-200 cells and is barely visible to the naked eye. According to the 2010 statistics of the World Health Organization, worldwide 5.7 million people die of Alzheimer’s disease, and 10 million people die of Parkinson’s disease each year. Both Alzheimer’s disease and Parkinson’s disease are currently incurable, but with the use of stem cells, scientists can find a cure for many diseases across the country. If scientists can sacrifice something for the greater good of mankind,

Stem cells not only exist in developing embryonic cells but also in the adult nervous system of all mammalian organisms which include humans. Stem cells can also be derived from developing mammalian nervous system. Embryonic stem cells have vast possibility in the field of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine as they have the capacity to produce each type of cell and tissue in the body. On paper, it could revolutionize the way human diseases and organ transplants are treated by creating any type of cell in a laboratory whenever needed. However, like any type of biological research there is bound to be many ethical issues that surround it and with the study of embryonic stem cells there are many who would call it inhumane as they would say an embryo is life and by destroying one it would be murder. However, in 2006 some researchers at Kyoto University in Japan have identified a way to produce cells with a stem cell like state without having to use embryos as testing. Their research has allowed them to recognised conditions that would create reprogrammed undifferentiated adult and human cells from already specialised cells skin, hair.