The Heated Debate Concerning Stem Cell Research Essay examples

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

In our government today Congress, the Supreme Court, and the President are all faced with making tough decisions for our country. These decisions are not only decided based off the constitution but the ideological shift as generations go on. Possibly one of the most controversial landmark decisions the government is currently being challenged with is the affair of abortion. In 1973 the Supreme Court of the United States was presented the case of Roe v Wade. The ruling decided a person has the right to privacy protected by the due process clause of the 14th amendment. This gave women the right to decide to have an abortion, but only under regulations from the state. As a result of this case, scientific research was conducted on stem cells starting in 1978 when a scientist discovered stem cells in human cord blood. From 1981 to 1991 scientist tested stem cells in mice, hamsters, and later in primates. 1998 marked an important discovery of pluripotent stem cells in an embryo, which is where the problem lies between the morals and ethics of citizens and the politicians’ jobs to decide for the people what is right for stem cell research.

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

Human embryonic stem cell research has been a hot debate for many years and with good reason. Many people believe that by performing this type of research we are violating the right to human life. In his article, Jim Eckman makes a compelling argument, but fails to really make any convincing arguments about why the negatives outweigh the medical benefits that stem cell research possesses and so for that I disagree with him.

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.

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.

The introduction and expansion of embryonic stem cell research initiated a highly debated ethical topic. Can our society agree to disagree? What are embryonic stem cells? What are stem cells? Is all stem cell research considered abortion? Debates surrounding embryonic stem cell research is further complicated by social standards and needs, religious beliefs, and personal morals.

In order to understand arguments against the use of stem cell technology in the United States, it is crucial to understand the sociopolitical background of its constituents. America is well known for having a varied and diverse ethnic background composing of immigrants from around the world, but in 2012, 73% of Americans claimed Christian affiliation (3). This overwhelming majority of Christianity means that its accompanying religious beliefs emerge in many aspects of our sociopolitical ideology. Much of the opposition to stem cell technology is grounded in the Christian tenet of anti-abortion, which is the source of embryonic stem cells. Although embryonic stem cells are still the gold standard in research and therapeutic use, use of non-embryonic stem cells such as induced pluripotent stem cells is rapidly increasing and does not require

The subject in this article is about the federal funding of embryonic stem-cell research. The argument is about Research on human embryonic stem cells and the development of therapies for chronic and debilitating diseases. The question is should the federal government of the United States provide funding for the stem cell research? The thesis of the argument is “others worry that even if research on embryos is not wrong in itself, it will open the way to a slippery slope of dehumanizing practices, such as embryo farms, cloned babies, the use of fetuses for spare parts, and the commoditization of human life.”

Research involving human embryonic stem cells and human non-embryonic stem cells has the potential to lead to better understanding and treatment of many disabling diseases and conditions. Advances over the past decade in this promising scientific field have been encouraging, leading to broad agreement in the scientific community that the full range of promising stem cell research should be supported by Federal funds. (White House)

With exponential increases in the capabilities of modern technology, it only fits that we use this technology to further our existence as a species. Embryonic Stem Cell Research is one of the ways we have come up with to advance our species into the future. However, the perpetrators and supporters have been under fire and controversy since its inception in 1979. The protesters are fighting it mainly because it is destroying unborn fetuses in the process.Personally, I have a special and specific connection to embryonic stem cell research. As a Type 1 Diabetic, I know that the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation uses embryonic stem cell research in its efforts to find a cure for Type 1 Diabetes. The main use for the stem cells they have is

Francois Rabelais, the famous Renaissance humanist, once said, “Science without conscience is the death of the soul” (Rabelais, Francois). Since the late 1960’s, this has been the stance for opponents of embryonic stem cell research. This is saying, if we are willing to take a fertilized embryo and kill it before it has even had time to develop, where is our conscience, our heart? We consider this form of stem cell research to be immoral and unethical. Scientists are looking for alternatives to this method of harvesting stem cells, similar to adult stem cell research, to provide a better, more humane approach to this breakthrough in science and medicinal therapy.

This brings us to the controversial position on stem cell research. Scientists want to do research on aborted embryos or fertilized human embryos left over from medical procedures, such as In Vetro Fertilizations (IVF). Since abortion is considered the murdering of unborn babies, is it still a good thing to do this research on embryos? The thought of many is, if the abortions are happening anyway; why not do the research on embryos? Another venue of stem cell research could be acquired from an adult’s blood or bone marrow. However, these stem cells may not as adaptable and may only grow into a few select tissues. In contrast, embryonic stem cells can grow into very nearly any tissue. The question continues, is it morally wrong to kill babies to possibly discover a cure for ailments of the world?

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,