The Debate Of Embryonic Stem Cell Research

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

“I truly believe that stem cell research is going to allow our children to look at Alzheimer’s and diabetes and other major diseases the way we look at polio today, which is a preventable disease” (Solomon). Susan Solomon has founded the New York Stem Cell Foundation and has been seen as the hero for stem cell scientists around the world. Over the past couple years, stem cell research has been at its high; scientists all over the world are using these cells to try to find new ways to cure life threatening diseases. Some have used stem cells to treat patients who have been brain dead recently and these cells made the dead portion of the brain start functioning again. Also, some scientists and doctors have

“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 cells have the ability to grow into any type of cell that your body contains and can potentially aid in curing diseases and or repair many essential things in your body such as a kidney or a lung. This sounds like an extremely favorable advantage to medical advancements but this subject does summon some intense debates on where the stem cells come from. Embryonic meaning that it comes from the embryo veers many people’s opinion to totally protest any use of embryonic stem cells. Opposing abortions and the use of embryonic stem cells go hand in hand. Many people are just not ready for the responsibility of having a child so they take matters into their own hands and many consider having an abortion. In the end everyone takes their own decision and they fit it to what they feel is best for their lives. Many people may see an abortion as killing an innocent life but people make their own decisions and no one can stop them. Abortions are a solution to unprepared individuals that can not handle the responsibility of having a child; why not use the cells from the procedure to save a life. Children are wonderful gifts but some people are just not ready to take up the responsibility of raising that gift so they can use that gift to help another needy life.

Embryonic Stem cells have led to a very long line of discussion. Whether to see it as immoral not to pursue research or immoral to pursue research, it is nonetheless very difficult to discuss. Questions are uncovered during this debate, for example, Is killing possible life (Embryos) lesser or greater than saving the already living, such as people with incurable diseases? The debate goes deeper and deeper into moral judgment and it doesn't matter whether you are religious or not in this argument because in both cases it is a life. But what if it didn't have to be a life? Further forms of research may be used to help save lives both from people who have incurable diseases and the embryos. If such research can be formed without a moral block, performance of such research should not be delayed. The possibility to save loved ones is incredible, to do so without victimizing women for embryos and killing those embryos, which could possibly behold life, only to maybe

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

Embryonic stem cell research has been a heated debate for upwards of 30 years due to the controversial nature of extracting embryos for research purposes. Recently the ban for federal funding to research embryos has been lifted; therefore, sparking even more debate on whether or not embryonic stem cells research is ethical. Embryonic stem cell research is the extracting of embryos in order to conduct research in cell repair and growth. There are two moral principles to choose between: is it used to prevent or help suffering and pain, or should we respect the value of human life? Embryonic stem cell research is considered murder by many. Also, with thousands of embryos preserved in in vitro fertilization (IVF) clinics, “it appears that there

Research regarding each type of stem cell gives way to a moral conflict for many people. In particular, there is much controversy surrounding the advancements and use of the human embryonic stem cells. This is in large part due to the way they are harvested, as extraction cannot be done by doctors and researchers without killing the embryo. There is also a perceived idea that researchers are "playing god". In regard to this moral dilemma, Caulfield and Zarzeczny state "While the majority of these technologies do not involve human embryos and may have distinct scientific purposes and advantages, they are nonetheless commonly linked with hESC research in the prevalent discourse." In other words, despite the fact that stem cell research only involves a small percentage of hESC in the grand scheme and also offers many advantages, people tend to be focused on the morality involving the use of hESC, possibly blinding them to all of the potential positive advantages of the other forms of stem cell research.

Stem cell research also offers an alternative to unused embryos from in vitro fertilization. With consent of the patient, the unused embryos can be donated to stem cell research. When left unused, the embryos are seemingly "thrown away." The issue of involving in vitro with stem cell research is also a controversial topic. [The question is] "Whether a frozen embryo stored in a refrigerator in a clinic is really equivalent to an embryo or fetus developing in a mother's womb" (Hatch3). The argument of "committing murder" if the embryos are used for research, is contradicted by the discarding of them. If the embryos are not going to be used for in vitro fertilization, then who is to say that discarding them is not "committing murder." In 2001, President George W. Bush declared that embryonic stem cell research can only be used with existing cells (Hatch1). This law only proves how vital in vitro embryos are to the research. "Now that the president has permitted only research from existing stem cell lines, the Democratic Senate is sure to loosen the standard and permit stem cell research from discarded

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

The use of embryonic stem cells has caused many debates because of the destruction of an embryo. It has also become a part of controversies in abortion, religious groups, politicians, and the public. People who are pro-life compare the destroying of an embryo to an abortion. They believe that the embryo is equal to life because it has full opportunity to become a human being. The people against embryonic stem cell use believe that it is immoral to destroy one life to save another. By using the stem cells then getting rid of the embryo, people against the research think that the embryos future life is being taken advantage of. Which can cause problems for future research studies that similarly “belittles” life, even though people find it wrong to use embryos for stem cell research, it is a good way to save

Even though scientist have other promising ways of researching the same goals, using only adult stem cells for research instead, many abortion opponents oppose both techniques, some supporters say harvesting potentially life saving cells from embryos that otherwise would be destroyed is justified. But some supporters of the research argue against the creation of embryos for the sole purpose of harvesting cells and then destroying them. The political and religion debates are endless on whether further research should be done, but I believe it is necessary to continue the research of stem cells to treat and cure diseases. In my opinion stem cells are a valuable research tool and might, in the future, be used to treat a wide range of diseases. Some of the most serious medical conditions, such as cancer and birth defects, are due to abnormal cell division and differentiation. Therefor a better understanding of the genetic and molecular controls of these processes may yield information about how such diseases arise and suggest new strategies for therapy. Stem cell research offers patients and their family hope of a

Embryonic stem cell research is a highly controversial topic in today's society, this kind of stem cell commits to regenerate any type of tissue. Unfortunately, Embryonic Stem Cell Research has a dark side. To obtain these cells will kill the embryo automatically. In other words, the acquirement of the Human Embryonic Stem Cell includes performing an abortion. To obtain these cells, it would kill the embryo. This has created controversy since abortion is such a divisive topic. Politicians are uneasy to take sides. The Human Embryonic Stem Cell issue is today's Pandora's Box due to all the unwittingly chaos that it can bring to our lives. By having this new option available in the medical world,

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

The desecration of life by use of embryonic stem cells is not necessary with alternatives such as adult, placenta, and umbilical stem cells available which hold promising results. Stem cell research definitely has shown its ability to benefit humanity, but at what lengths? At what cost? America along with the world continues to battle against embryonic stem cell research as it results in termination of a human life form. With a clear understanding of what stem cells are and how they are used the evidence clearly shows that alternative forms of stems cells can lead to the same promising results without arising any ethical concerns.