Stem Cell Research And The Arguments For And Against Its Development

Embryonic stem cell research is a highly debated and sensitive topic.  There is a lot of good that can come from researching this technology of stem cell research because many people all across the globe would benefit from it.  The United States will soon fall short while other countries are already using this advancement if we cannot come to a logical conclusion on this vital issue.

Most people are against Embryonic Stem Cell research mainly because they consider it unethical to use aborted fetuses for research. The two main issues concerning the research are the ethics (Cons) and the benefits (Pros). In any scientific case, ethics must always be considered. But the use of fetuses is something that is of the utmost importance. The costs are generally measured based off of people’s feelings, morals, and knowledge about the subject up for debate. The use of aborted fetuses for stem cell research may have many positive outcomes that can come of it, but many negative outcomes as well; If using aborted fetuses for research can, in the near future, save lives, then it is a research that should be supported, even though some

Stem Cell research and its funding have caused a lot of controversy throughout the past years. Stem cells are cells that are present in all living organisms. These cells have the potential to grow into any type of cell, including blood cells, nerves, muscles, and pancreatic cells. Stem cell research is essential because of the beneficial aspects it has to offer. Stem cells could potentially treat conditions such as Alzheimer 's, Parkinson 's, birth defects, strokes, Diabetes, cancer, and help in the reconstruction of severely damaged organs. Although stem cell research withholds great potential for many medical advances, a lot of controversy surrounds the sources and methods of obtaining stem cells and the possibility of improper usage of the knowledge acquired from research and experimentation. It is necessary for scientist to continue research as well as recognizing any ethical issues that may be present.

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

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.

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).

In 2001, President Bush emphasized “Embryonic stem cell research offers both great promise and great peril. So I have decided we must proceed with great care” (Bush). This decision not only halted the research but it forced new scientists and researchers to find new ways to use stem cells in an ethical way or they were basically forced out of the country to finish their progress. But in 2009, President Obama lifted this ban for stem cell research that Bush implemented. Although there is an amendment, the Dickey-Wicker Amendment, that still blocks funding for stem cell research that has to do with embryos. Along with Bush’s’ statement, the amendment pressured stem cell researchers to find new ways to get cells that are as pluripotent as the embryonic stem cells that come from the newly fertilized embryos. But the real question is how is the use of embryonic

“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 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

In the contemporary world of today, the issue of embryonic stem cell research is one of this controversial significant topic regarding which there is neither fair/moral agreement nor understandable, wide-ranging laws. As far as the ethical debate is concerned, it focuses on the verifiable piece of information that stem cell research consists of destroying the very early embryos of the human beings. The federal government has restricted the financial support for stem cell research to research that makes use of the stem cells obtained from a small amount of stem cell "lines" (Shapiro, 2006).

What may researchers may possibly learn from studying how embryonic stem cells develop into spinal cord (neurons) cells, for example, could provide clues about what factors may be able to directly induce a cell to repair itself. The cells could be used to study disease, identify new drugs, or screen drugs for toxic side effects. These have a significant impact on human health without transplanting a single cell. The ethical dilemma for embryonic stem cell research poses a moral dilemma. It forces us to choose between two moral positions: 1) to prevent or alleviate suffering and/or 2) to respect the value of human life.

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?

The first step towards embryonic stem cell research is obtaining the embryos. Currently, most embryos used in stem cell research are spare embryos from In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) treatment (de Wert & Mummery, 2003). This is because using the embryos for research is a better option than discarding them as medical waste. Besides donating or destroying the embryos, couples can also opt to let other couples adopt the embryos or continue to store them, which can get expensive (Fischbach & Fischbach, 2004). Along with treating infertility, the embryos are used for researching potential therapies. While donating embryos to research avoids the wasting of embryos, there are concerns about the quality of spare embryos. Embryos with the highest chance of resulting in a pregnancy will be chosen for the IVF treatment, potentially leaving less durable embryos as spares (de Wert & Mummery, 2003). This leads to researchers preferring to generate new embryos and embryonic cell lines for their own studies. While using spare embryos to further our knowledge in health and science is approved of, knowingly creating an embryo with the intention of destroying it, even for research, is

Embryonic stem cells research has challenged the moral ethics within human beings simply because the point at which one is considered a “human,” is still under debate and practically incapable to make a decision upon.

There are many good things that could occur from embryonic stem cell research, including numerous areas of scientific potential. Over 100 million americans suffer from stem cell related diseases, such as Alzheimer’s disease, arthritis, cancer, etc., and a breakthrough in stem cell research could find causes and solutions of the problem