Ethical Controversy: The Stem Cells That Heal

Just recently, in March of 2009, President Obama lifted the Federal ban on the funding stating: “At this moment, the full promise of stem cell research remains unknown and it should not be overstated. But scientists believe these tiny cells may have the potential to help us understand, and possibly cure, some of our most devastating diseases and conditions.” Obama believes, like many others, that this type of research, though ethically triggering, can improve the survival rate of some diseases and in turn improve the live span of many worldwide. “Medical miracles do not happen simply by accident. They result from painstaking and costly research, from years of lonely trial and error, much of which never bears fruit, and from a government willing to support that work.” Obama also understand that research like this can take years to produce a positive and worthwhile result, but in order to produce such a result, support is needed by both the government and the people. He understands the costs, but believes that the benefits outweigh them. (“Obama on lifting…”)

A stem cell can be described as the primary building block of the human body and have become important because of its ability to develop into a different cell type. Due to this ability to develop into different cell types, scientists have continued to build up ways to use stem cells to renew or repair damaged tissues or organs. As a result of such efforts, it's expected that stem cell research can contribute to the discovery of new therapies for various medical conditions like diabetes, heart disease, and Alzheimer's disease. However, it's difficult to estimate the duration of time that it could take in order for stem cell research to accomplish these measures. Regardless of these attempts, stem cell research has continued to generate huge debates and controversies across the world since it emerged. These controversies and debates have hugely affected stem cell research policies and contributed to various legal issues.

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

The President’s Council on Bioethics published “Monitoring Stem Cell Research” in 2004. This report was written in response to President Bush’s comments regarding research of human stem cells on August 9, 2001. President Bush announced that he was going to make federal funding available for research that involved existing lines of stem cells that came from embryos. He is the first president to provide any type of financial support for the research of human stem cells. A Council was created with people who are educated in the field of stem cells to help monitor the research and to recommend guidelines and consider the ethical consequences that this research could create. This report is an “update” given

Controversy surrounding research and therapeutic use of stem cells has been a contentious and socially polarizing matter for a few decades. Arguments lie largely between the scientific community and the general public, although intragroup disagreements also persist today. These disparate views for and against stem cells arise out of the bioethical implications of an inchoate innovation, the general public’s tenuous understanding of the underlying technology itself, and sociopolitical ideologies. Due to the somewhat aged debate, recent revelations and advancements have changed the principle arguments and should be addressed accordingly.

Millions of people die every year from diseases, accidents, and defects, one only needs to turn on the nightly news to hear of the devastating effects of cancer or of horrific accidents that have left people disfigured or paralyzed. Stem cell research is a part of biomedical science that has the potential to cure diseases and defects, create organs for patients needing transplants, regenerate axons in spinal cord injuries, and create new treatments, drugs, and immunizations. However, federal funding is limited and does not cover embryonic stem cell research to an extent that would make a difference in medicine. The United States should support embryonic stem cell research by increasing federal funding, opening new stem cell lines for

A mother has developed Alzheimer’s, preventing her from having a normal relationship with her family. A newly born baby girl has a spinal cord issue, making for many years of rehabilitation ahead her. A diabetic wife struggles to take care of her household duties because of constantly having to monitor her blood sugar and deal with insulin shots. With the development of stem cell research, and the more controversial embryonic stem cell research, every one of these instances could not only be cured, but prevented, within the next half century. In fact, diseases that are predicted to be treated by means of stem cell research are figured to now plague the likes of 100 million Americans. Looking at the arguments dealing with stem cell

Millions of people die every year from diseases and accidents; the nightly news is filled with reports about the devastating effects of cancer, horrific accidents, and disasters that leave people disfigured or paralyzed. Embryonic stem cell research is a part of biomedical science and has the potential to ease the suffering of sick people by curing diseases and defects, creating organs and tissue for patients needing transplants or skin grafts, regenerating axons in spinal cord injuries, and creating new treatments, drugs, and immunizations. However, America’s government does not support this research to an extent that would make a difference in medicine; only a few stem cell lines are authorized, and federal funding is minimal. The

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

Imagine that a patient enters a hospital because they have been having trouble urinating. After the patient goes through a series of tests, they are told that their kidneys are failing. In order to survive they are told that they must have a kidney transplant within the year, but the donor list they are going to be placed upon is extremely long and the patient would probably not get a kidney for five years. The patient would surely die due to this long list, but luckily there is a new form of treatment, stem cell therapy. Stem cell research and therapy should not be as regulated as it is in the United States, because it has the potential to cure many diseases, disorders and ailments.

While some people might say that stem cell research is immoral and unethical, others believe that it is a magical solution for almost any problem, thus leading to a very controversial issue. Scientists have been searching for years for ways to eradicate incurable diseases and perform other medical procedures that yesterday's technology would not fix. With the rapidly arising, positive research on stem cell technology, the potential that exists to restore any deficiency is in the same way, likely to destroy humanity. America is suffering from its inability to choose who holds precedence over this issue. Too many of us find it impossible to reach a basis for which our differing opinions can be shared and formed into a universal and

      Biomedical technology is getting much press due to the stem-cell debate.  A controversial topic in itself, with the President of the United States taking a stand on the issue for funding purposes, the topic has received even more press over the consequences resulting from President Bush's decision.  With the President's approval rating well over 80 percent since the September 11th attack, those who contest any of his decisions have been receiving feelings of anger from those who support him.  I, however, would like to take a stand and contest Bush's decision to limit the stem cell research funding.  This paper presents two articles that examine Bush's decision in different ways; one looks at

There are millions of people in the world right now that have serious diseases. Stem cells can develop cures for these serious diseases. Funding stem cell research can allow to transplant organs and tissues in the body. Also, funding of stem cells can understand how body tissues and diseases form in our body. Finally, stem cell research can come up with a cure for diseases, like cancer and Alzheimer’s disease. In Summary, stem cells for scientific research is ethical because it can allow to transport organs and tissues, understand how body tissues and diseases form, and can come up with a cure with diseases.Stem cells have the remarkable potential to develop into many different cell types in the body during early life and growth. In addition,

Stem cell related diseases affect over 100 million americans (White). Right now, there are plenty of government funds for stem cell research, and if we continue on the same path as we are now, stem cell research should be successful; however, the ethics used for embryonic stem cell research are incomprehensibly horrific (Stem cell policy). If this continues to be funded, it could have answers to numerous major diseases, including why they are caused, prevention, and cures for the diseases. More scientific research, however, needs to go into more possible solutions, to find a more humane method of treating these diseases that pleases both sides of the stem cell research debate, for the solutions, now, are not very strong. Because stem

American inventor and scientist Thomas Alva Edison once said that “opportunitiy is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work.” Edison’s quote, while concise, reveals a great truth, one that is directly related to an ongoing debate in the United States. The procedures, morality, and potential success of stem cell research have been discussed in America for more than one decade, and it remains one of the most-debated topics in today’s classrooms, newspapers, and Senate hearings. According to the National Institutes of Health’s website, stem cells are cells which have the capability of becoming virtually any other type of cell. As the NIH points out, this differentiation ability could lead to the cures of