Stem Cell Paper . Framework. No Medical Advancement Has

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 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

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

Stem cells on the other hand can be obtained from early human embryos. They develop with the baby and these cells become more committed to certain destinations of the body. The book has provided different cases, of which, Rios Case is very interesting. The Rios died childless because their embryos were frozen in the lab for years and were deteriorating, and made the issue moot (Pence, 2015). Another chapter was “Medical Research on Vulnerable Human Subjects” which explores the ethical problems of medical research. It gives great details on the entire conflict happening in medical research, especially those researches sponsored by pharmaceutical companies. (Pence, 2015) The other chapter, we read was “Surgeons’ Desire for Fame: Ethics of the First Transplants”. Fame is something that everyone wants, and to achieve this even the doctors can play an ugly game. This chapter talks about how doctors have been involved in questionable heart implants and other illegal materials. Doctors are supposed to save lives, not destroy lives just to get famous or to be the first to do something. These were the terms I have been hearing a lot, but I never read in great detail about. It was very helpful to get all the information. (Pence,

The use of embryonic stem cells for research has been a controversial issue for many years. There have been benefits and risk toward the use of stem cells. The purpose of this paper is state the argument of both sides, how laws are brought into act, the position the state of Florida legislation has against using embryonic stems cells, how nurses can benefit being a health care policy advocate, and the position I chose in regards to fetal stem cell research.

Through change and uttermost struggle, the people who care about a subject always seem to push through for what they believe in. For the sake of Embryonic Stem Cell research, the advocates tried their best to show the advancements stem cells may withhold, and for the people who disagree with the research, always seemed to put a new light on the subject, simply humanizing the research. Although the destruction of a human embryo is not something many people would view as ethical, it is something that could hold much promise for those who suffer from terminal illnesses (Sherley). When the miracle of assisting those who could not reproduce children through In Vitro Fertilization transpired the world of stem cell research was acquired (Tauer 924).

The importance of ethical issues is often understated in public knowledge. Embryonic stem cell research should be of the utmost importance in the American society due to increased federal funding and the promises research in this field hold. As with many other controversies, embryonic stem cell research can be described as a dispute between religion and science due to the destruction of a viable human embryo. Depending on the status an individual grants an embryo will likely determine their stance on the issue. Next, many changes in legality and public acceptance have prompted leaders to increase funding and expand research nationally. Since taxpayers’ dollars are at work, the public should be aware of this prevalent and advancing ethical issue and be informed of its specifics. The public should also be aware of the advancements in healthcare that this research promise. Due to the changes in funding and legality, many discoveries have been made, pushing this science further. Many scientists believe embryonic stem cell research holds the key to curing many bodily injuries and deadly diseases such as spinal cord and brain injuries, Alzheimer’s, and Parkinson’s. Also, many scientists conceive that, in the future, it will be possible to “grow” human organs from an individual’s stem cells for transplantation. The latter are only a few of the plethora of anticipated and promised treatments research in this field holds. Lastly,

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.

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

“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

“Embryonic stem cell research will prolong life, improve life, and give hope for life to millions of people,” said politician Jim Ramstad. This is a very powerful statement, and a very accurate statement. The solution to curing many diseases is just around the corner because of the advancements in embryonic stem cell research. The much needed support of society can speed up the progression of this research so lives can start to be saved. Embryonic stem cell research should be pursued because it has the potential to help or even cure many diseases, shows more promise than adult stem cells, and is morally ethical.

There has been a controversial debate on whether or not embryonic stem cell research should be morally justified if it leads to the enhancement of treatments for acute and chronic diseases. Stem cell research is important because it leads to new potentials for regenerative therapies and treatments for diseases such as blindness, spinal cord injuries, and myocardial infarctions. In addition, stem cell research allows scientists to learn their fundamental properties and what makes them different from adult stem cells. In this essay, I will investigate the differentiation between adult stem cells (somatic stem cells) and embryonic stem cells. I will discuss the potential benefits of embryonic stem cells and the process of harvesting these embryos. Furthermore, I will examine the moral status of the human embryo based on rationality and when the embryo takes on human form. In this essay, I plan to accomplish that embryonic stem cells are scientifically more beneficial than adult stem cells because

Abortion, gay marriage, and illegal immigration are all hot button topics currently being faced by Americans. As ardently as each side defends their stance on a controversial issue, an opposing side fights with equal diligence for the beliefs they feel should be valued by our nation. Perhaps nowhere is this battle more heated than in the fight over stem cell research. While supporters of this new field of science tout it’s potential to cure everything from blindness to paralysis, those against stem cell science liken the procedures used by scientists to murder. It is my intention to bring to light the positive benefits of stem cell research as well as counter the claims used by many Pro-life groups who believe the scientists driving this