Stem Cells In Mary Shelley's Frankenstein

Given the choice, would you trade one person for multiple persons, would you give one life to save many? Now imagine that the person is already dead, would you have any objection to using them to cure diseases and save lives. It is highly debated as to whether or not stem cell researchers should be able to use stem cells from aborted babies in the research. A stem cell is defined as an undifferentiated cell of a multicellular organism that is capable of giving rise to indefinitely more cells of the same type, and from which certain other kinds of cell arise by differentiation (Stem cell). In the research stem cells from aborted fetuses or left over fetuses fertilized in in-vitro fertilization are used for medical and research purposes (Stem cell research). Stem cell research could be used to cure many diseases.

The objective of science is to expand human knowledge and attempt to find the answers to the multitudinous mysteries of the universe. Scientists attempt make discoveries through the conduction of research through trial and error with experiments. The question lies, how far can scientists actually go until it is deemed unacceptable? The article by Ed Regis, “A Frankenstein Monster Ended Up Being a Lamb,” focuses on a story of a lamb named Dolly who was cloned by Ian Wilmut, a scientist whose intention was to create a better alternative way to produce pharmaceuticals. Although Regis attitude about cloning seems to be empathetic when it comes to creating medicine, however, his views on Victor Frankenstein’s attempt at creating human life is an action he condemns.

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.

People have had severe diseases or possible injuries that have completely altered their lives. Ranging from heart damage, brain damage, becoming paralyzed, or suffering from severe injuries. Those people may have a way to regain their lives in the way of stem cells. Stems cells can help heal these wounded people and give them back their lives. As well as advancing understanding of other diseases and disorders and even finding cures for those diseases. That is why people should get their minds from thinking of abortion when they think about stem cells and think of the benefits of them. There are several other types of stem cells, not just stem cells acquired from fetuses.

Imagine being diagnosed with a life threatening or life changing disease, such as Leukemia or Alzheimer's and all hope has been lost, until someone tells you that stem cells could save your life. Stem cell research should be allowed because they can be used to cure various diseases, save lives with stem cell operations, and can be used for further research. Scientists continue to study this controversial topic to develop ways besides using embryonic stem cells so the use of stem cells altogether is more accepted throughout society.

By definition, discovery implies uncertainty, but progress cannot exist without either. They are codependent upon each other. Whether the use of embryonic stem cells is truly the destruction of human life and whether the potential of human life is equal to the possible realization of that potential is also codependent. Neither of these questions can be answered without simultaneously answering the other. Arguments from both sides of this issue are extremely valid, which is why it has become such a difficult question for anyone with consideration of the opinions of others to answer. That being said, a rational stance on this issue must incorporate views from both sides, as well as logic to keep from becoming indifferent. A moderate policy should be adopted by the United States, one that allows the funding of research on spare embryos from IVF as opposed to their disposal, and one that allows for the use of Nuclear Transfer for the purpose of therapeutic cloning as long as the eggs are obtained from willing donors, though a policy that does not permit the production of human embryos strictly for research besides in the context of therapeutic cloning. This policy can be justified through the logic of Kantian Ethics, John Harris’s, “Stem Cells, Sex, and Procreation,” John P. Lizza’s, “Potentiality and Human Embryos,” and a public opinion expressed by Ian Wilmut.

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

This proposal is immoral because it violates a central tenet of all civilized codes on human experimentation beginning with the Nuremberg Code: It approves doing deadly harm to a member of the human species solely for the sake of potential benefit to others. The embryos to be destroyed by researchers in this campaign are at the same stage of development as embryos in the womb who have been protected as human subjects in federally funded research since 1975.(4) President Clinton's National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC) and its 1994 predecessor, the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel, conceded that the early human embryo is a form of developing human life that deserves our respect(5). Treating human life as mere research material is no way to show respect.

I believe that this is happening with stem cell research just as Meilaender does. I do not believe that it is acceptable to let desire take control when a desired end is in sight. Meilaender does an excellent job at explaining how important it is to keep human dignity even with the huge benefits of stem cell research. I think that it takes away the benefits if human life is being destroyed as a means. The goal is to improve and save human life, the opposite should not be done to get there.

The embryonic stem cells are not children, and do not turn into a living functioning creature at any point. The monster, on the other hand, was a fully working being with emotions and the capacity to think. Shelley warned of the repercussions of messing with human life and science for selfish reasons, through the characters of Frankenstein and his monster, and scientists today passed those consequences.

As Mankind continues to advance it is pursuit of knowledge, it is faced with myriad dilemmas, particularly in the cases of cloning, stem cell experimentation, and the genetic sequencing of viruses and pathogens. The academic article “Bioterrorism, Embryonic Stem Cells, and Frankenstein” written by Patrick Guinan, discusses the morality and potential hubris of sciences continued exploration of seemingly forbidden areas, as well as humanities identity and potential desire to achieve knowledge to rival God. Guinan 's research aims to explore, question, and ultimately bring light to the potential issues that may arise from such pursuits. This research raises several questions, as well as causes of concern, which will all be addressed in this essay. The author of this article makes use of intelligent analysis, evidence from ages both recent and ancient, and well thought out discourse, in order to cause readers to consider just what ethics and morality is to science, as well as what it is to our identity as humanity as a whole.

Many, as of currently incurable diseases plague the Earth. Thanks to technological advancements and better understandings of cells, scientists believe that it may be possible to cure diseases by the use of embryonic stem cells. Embryonic stem cells are cells obtained from an embryo when they are only a few days old. Because they have only begun to differentiate, these cells have the capability of developing into any cell in the human body, and that's why they can be used for the progression of medicine. Scientists hope to cure some diseases but if that isn't possible they at least hope to create treatments using them.

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

We live in a world where genetic sciences have gone beyond laws, and past the imagination. We have come to a point where we don’t know anymore what is right, and what is wrong. We have to decide. In fact, studies are made on embryonic stem cells that for now have the purpose to better our overall health. These stem cells are extracted from extra IVF embryos; they are used and destroyed. While it’s true that this research could cure serious illnesses as Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, and orphan diseases for example; however, it’s also true that ending a potential life is immoral and illegal. We could definitely find an alternative to the embryonic stem cells to develop the science.

Can science go too far when it equips man with tools to manipulate life? Some of the underlying ethical dilemmas presented in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein are similar to ones we struggle with today, such as selective abortion. Shelley’s doomed creature mirrors the devastating result of bringing an unwanted offspring into the world, then shirking responsibility for it thereafter. The practice of playing God and choosing who does and who does not “earn” life ultimately results in profound negative moral consequences.