Genetic Engineering

We know that many have made expansive claims for the benefits of human embryo research. However, all such claims are conjectural. Embryonic stem cell research has not helped a single human patient or demonstrated any therapeutic benefit. At the same time, adult stem cells have helped hundreds of thousands of patients and new

What if there was a way to cure previously in-curable diseases with the help of something in the very first stages of human life, but thousands upon thousands of lives had to be taken to perfect the use of this material? That is exactly what is happening with embryonic stem cells around the world. Pro-life activists, who originally organized to stop the abortions of unborn fetuses, were most angered with the process of actually destroying an embryo solely for research purposes. However, scientists, such as Dr. Andrew Yeager of the University of Pittsburgh, argue that embryonic stem cells are the future of medicine. “This is really where, I think, so much of biomedicine is going to be going in the twenty

“How can the use of stem cells be so controversial?”, one may ask. If the stem cells are donated out of free will or were going to be destroyed anyway, how can putting them to better use be controversial? Sure, a potential life must be destroyed to save a life, but only before one can tell that it is a human. Should the use of stem cells for medical research and use be regulated? These questions and more will be discussed and pondered throughout this paper.

Embryonic stem cell research is a very controversial topic in today’s world. A stem cell is

Research into embryonic stem cells holds a lot of promise thanks to its recognized potential to treat a wide range of conditions such as physical trauma, degenerative conditions, and genetic diseases. However, human embryonic stem cell research is a controversial issue for many as the creation of embryonic stem cell line requires the destruction of a human embryo. This ethical dilemma has resulted in research being held back as the debate rages on rather it’s right to use embryos in research. Despite this, embryonic stem cell research should be allowed to continue because of its potential.

A brief introduction to stem cells; Stem cells are cells that are undifferentiated, or, simply put, a cell that has not yet been given a job, such as cells that create molecules. In recent years, scientists have discovered the potency that stem cells contain, due to their versatility. For example, stem cells could be studied and used to cure a man of liver disease, a child’s handicap, a woman’s breast cancer, etc…, etc…. One may now be asking themselves? “That’s great… then why are so many people against stem cell research? What could possibly be the drawback? “. You see, stem cells are acquired by human embryos, or, in Layman’s Terms, unborn fetuses. Take for

For decades, researchers’ use of stem cells has caused a controversy and the consideration of the ethics of research involving the development, usage, and destruction of human embryos. Most commonly, this controversy focuses on embryonic stem cells. Not all stem cell research involves the creation, usage and destruction of human embryos. For example, adult stem cells, amniotic stem cells and induced pluripotent stem cells do not involve creating, using or destroying human embryos and thus are minimally, if at all, controversial. Many less controversial sources of acquiring stem cells include using cells from the umbilical cord, breast milk, and bone marrow. (Brunt, 2012) In 1998, scientists discovered how to extract stem cells from human embryos. This discovery led to moral ethics questions concerning research involving embryo cells, such as what restrictions should be made on studies using these types of cells? At what point does one consider life to begin? Is it just to destroy an embryo cell if it has the potential to cure countless numbers of patients? Political leaders are debating how to regulate and fund research studies that involve the techniques used to remove the embryo cells. No clear consensus has emerged. Other recent discoveries may extinguish the need for embryonic stem cells. With this in mind, we will discover both sides of the issue from a pros and cons point of view. Stem cell research has expanded at an exponential rate, but its therapeutic

While few can debate the potential “miracle cure” aspect that seems to be wrapped within stem cell research, the method for obtaining such cells has been a topic for debate. The process of extracting pluripotent cells destroys their host embryo, and as yet, no pluripotent cells have been found in older adult tissues. Opponents of research on embryonic cells claim that embryos – from the moment that fertilization occurs – are sentient human beings and should therefore be afforded the same protections against abuse as anyone else (“The Cases For”). But what if a method were readily available were viable stem cells could be extracted from an embryo in a manner that would not deny life – however such life were defined – to the unborn fetus? What if such a potential solution could ease the minds of not only those who oppose stem cell research but also help to quell the dispute of another “Do Not Kill” issue – abortion?

In the past decade, stem cell research has gained popularity in the biomedical field. Many scientists believe stem cells could be the breakthrough tool that is necessary to change the way we understand medicine. The same scientists feel stem cells, embryonic in particular, open the door for many opportunities to cure diseases that are otherwise known as incurable. However, the benefits of embryonic stem cell research do not outweigh the value of a life that never gets to begin. While there can be benefits to stem cell research, embryonic stem cell research is unethical because stem cells can be found in other places, the research is not always effective, and it ultimately destroys a human life.

Embryonic Stem Cell Research holds the key to unlocking cures for many currently considered “incurable” diseases and even though Embryonic Stem Cell Research holds the potential to alleviate malicious disabilities, replacing harmful cancer cells and regrowing new tissue; with a little guidance from scientist. Embryonic Stem Cell Research is one of the biggest controversial topic centered primarily on the ethical implications of the destruction and use of the embryos during research. Since Stem Cells are the source of all tissues in our body, understanding how they develop and work will give scientists a better understanding in human biology, in health and sickness.

Opponents to stem cell research challenge that “demand for embryos may encourage laboratories to grow them for the sole purpose of research, in effect producing embryos with the knowledge that they will be killed in the process” (Preface to “Is Stem Cell Research Ethical?”). Because of the medical benefits of adult and induced pluripotent stem cells, the use of embryonic stem cells have decreased. To continue searching for more possible cures of stem cells, excess embryos to the “needs of in virto fertilization, rather than be destroyed, [] should be used for basic biomedical research” (Embryonic Stem Cell Research Fulfills Christian’s Duty to Save Lives). Although embryonic cells are one stem cell that researchers are exploring, these types of cells are not the only types. Researchers are exploring more alternatives to embryonic cells including the induced pluripotent stem cell and stem cells from other types of blood that have shown promising results and may soon end the testing on embryonic cells. In fact, in the case of Joe Davis, Jr. and his brother, the younger brother survived infancy. The treatment allowed both brothers to live healthy lives. “More than 90% of the work involving stem cells is not controversial,” the morals and ethics of using the embryo tends to be the deal breaker (A Beginner’s Guide to Understanding Stem Cells [analysis]). The majority of stem cell research is like most other treatments: there is some risk to the patient but the results of the procedure are projected to be worth it. As stem cell research becomes more popular, opponents challenge that “there has been a proliferation of websites offering dubious treatments, luring people with incurable diseases who are emotionally vulnerable” (What Lies Behind the Hype and Hope of Stem Cell Research and Therapy [analysis]). No matter what the treatment is, there will always be scam websites

Genetic engineering has become a rising controversial issue in the world today because of its possible positive uses but further more its likely serious consequences and downsides. To understand the controversy we must first understand exactly what human genetic engineering is. Genetic engineering is the manipulation of the human genome to alter or get rid of undesirable genes; these include negative physical traits along with health related genetic problems such as disease and disability. Potentially, it could allow us to decide and design exactly which traits a newborn would inherit before birth.

In a world with science and medicine advancing everyday, one of the most promising and exciting discoveries ever made were stem cells. Scientists discovered an undifferentiated cell that could morph into anything they needed it to, from skin all the way to a liver. The only problem that arose was the fact that undifferentiated stem cells could only be harvested from embryos. As advances in research were made, along came the discovery of adult stem cells, umbilical stem cells, and induced pluripotent stem cells. Although science is advancing, scientific research continues to be conducted on stem cells harvested from embryos and aborted fetuses despite the social, political, and ethical arguments against it and the growing potential for stem cells to be collected from adults, umbilical cords, and induced pluripotent stem cells.

Contrarily, supporters of embryonic stem cell research argue that such research should be pursued because the resultant treatments could have significant medical potential. In addition, leftover embryos could be given with permission and

The opponents of embryonic stem cells stick to the belief that destroying one human’s life to save and cure others is not worth it because it makes you wonder, where will the line be drawn? Can the killing and experimentation of homeless people, for example, be justified by the possibility of saving a few Alzheimer’s patients’ lives? Will the world allow the destruction of the elderly just to save the younger generation? The opponents of embryonic stem cells realize that if the world begins using embryonic stem cells to make everyone healthier, than there is no telling what the world is willing to sacrifice in order for them to survive and if the world does go down that path, who gets to decide who deserves to live or die? (“Using Embryos is Immoral”). The destructive view that the world has towards embryonic stem cells is made evident not only by the ongoing debate about whether or not embryonic stem cells should be used but also by the restriction placed on embryonic