The Impact of Ethical Decisions on the Discovery of Knowledge in the Natural Science and Art

There are two different types of stem cells that are used in research: embryonic stem cells and non-embryonic “somatic” or “adult” stem cells, (NIH). Embryonic stem cells are derived from human embryos and are usually obtained through the process of in vitro fertilization in a laboratory setting. According to Bevington, embryonic stem cells are left over from attempted fertilization in fertility clinics and are donated to research by the patient with consent, (Bevington 2005). What makes embryonic stem cell research unethical is that the human embryo is destroyed through the research process. Adult stem cells are found among differentiated cells in a tissue or organ. The purpose of adult stem cells is to

As of 2015, 200 to 225 million animals are said to used in laboratory research for the biomedical industry annually worldwide. Typically defended by arguments of reliability and human health benefits, recently the question of ethics and values placed on animal testing have caused it to become a relevant and pressing topic that has been more widely discussed and debated. First off, the laboratory conditions that are instigated upon millions of animal models for the sake of medical research has been said to be unethical and cruel. Additionally, it has been debated that the results of animal experimentation are unreliable across a wide range of areas. Lastly, animal testing not only leads away from the direction of resources from more effective testing methods but also prolongs the duration of time humans may need to wait for an effective cure. Therefore, the potential benefits of animal experimentation are greatly outweighed by the risks and collective harm of humans and animals which is why resources should be directed towards more human-based testing procedures.

The art of medicine and curing diseases was not always approached in a scientific way. In fact, many advances occurred between 1919 to 1939, after technological advances allowed scientists to apply the scientific method to medical research. At this time, the ethics of using patients as test subjects either for new medicines or as samples for further testing were not considered. An extreme example of this was the Nazi’s using concentration camp inmates – including children – to run painful and invasive experiments. More modern examples are not so easy to identify as unethical, however. While amputating a leg to develop methods to deal with fractures and war wounds is obviously unethical, harvesting cells to develop a vaccine is not so clear cut, as the disadvantage to the patient is hard to identify. Coming from the various Nazi testing and especially the Nuremberg testing and trials, another code of ethics was developed, called the Nuremberg Code.

All researchers must respect these rights. Stem cells are retrieved from embryos that are a few days old, and it is that creates the ethical dilemma in relation to research using this type of tissue. • Role of

In discussion of animal rights, one controversial issue has been whether or not animals should be use for medical testing. On the one hand, some scientists argue that animal testing has contributed for many cures and treatments. On the other hand, animal rights activist contends that alternative methods now exist that can replace the need for animals. Others even maintain that animal testing is an essential part in medical research. My own view is that animals should not be used in medical testing because is no longer necessary now there are methods that are safer and have better results than animals do.

Test subjects in medical experiments have always been a controversial topic, but this argument is often only thought of when animals come in to play. What about the humans who get tested on unwillingly, or people who do not possess the capability to consent to such procedures? They are also in need of someone to look out for them. Throughout time, many governments have done extreme testing to move forward their population’s health and for what they call the greater good. Yet, more often than not, these test have no rules or regulations. A moral code has been established slowly after many of these ghastly occurrences became known. Even to this day, we still have people trying to bypass ethical codes such as the Nuremberg code and the

Animals can be burned, crippled, poisoned, and abused as a result of testing. And the list could go on forever. The way animals are being mistreated and tested on should be against the law. There is a different ways to do research other than killing and abusing animals. There are many alternate test that scientist can use to do there research without harming animals. Alternative test are defined as test that use the three “R’s”, a test that replaces a procedure that uses animals with one that doesn’t, a test that reduces the number of animals used in a procedure, and test that refine a procedure to cause less pain to the animal.(11 Facts about…)

If the only justification for these animal tests is if the only animal use in experimentation provides greater benefit to the health of humankind than the cost to the animals. Clinical trials, especially for drugs for alzheimers, asthma, polio, antibiotics, meningitis, and other critical diseases go through animal testing phases before reaching human test groups. Some of these drugs have been trialled successfully in humans, but their safety and efficacy was first established in small and observable animal populations. It begs the question that- if animals are hurt by testing, but in the long run, human lives are saved, what is morally correct?

There are only a small number of issues that are controversial as far as the public, the government and scientists are concerned. The father of all issues, however, is the debate that revolves around the ethics of stem cell research. Stem cells can be defined as "those cells in an embryo that essentially give rise to the entire organism" (Capra, 1999).

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

Animal testing has been bad of the years and it can even be dated back to the ancient times of the greek. Physicians would dissect animals with the pure interest to obtain knowledge. But even then, one such physician stated that he would rather use a pig as his subject because he wanted to.The ethics of animal testing has always been questioned. Humans do not want to think of animals as on the same level of us. The similarity is terrifying and makes the cruelness obvious. In the 16 century it has been recorded that early vivisectionists, scientists who perform experiments and operations on live animals, did not consider animals to be of the same lineage of us and barely cared for them.The remaining are used as test dummies for products.

Stem cell research is often at the forefront of heated ethical debates due to its assessment of human life. If stem cell research cannot be ethically defended, then it should not be conducted. “You cannot defend a study ethically unless the presumed cost is lower than expected benefits. The cost-benefit analysis of scientific research needs to include human/animal discomfort/risks, environmental issues, material costs, etc” which is necessary to support the positive outcome which the research claims to provide (experiment-resources, 2008).

The controversy about stem cell research is the concept that the research itself is “unethical” because it involves the development and usage, and possibly destruction of human embryos. This is not true for most methods of stem cell research. As stated

Immorality( being unethical) is a large issue in today’s society.Embryonic stem cell research is right next to abortion and murder on the “Immoral” list. I am strongly against embryonic stem cell research because , it is taking away the human rights of the child that could be born. All humans are conceived with the right of life. The intentional obtention of human embryonic stem cells deliberately destroys the human forming in the cell. All human beings, not just adults, not just children; not just

Every year, millions of animals suffer through painful and unnecessary tests. Animals in laboratories all over the world live lives of deprivation, pain, isolation, and torture. Even though vast studies show that animal experimentation often lacks validity, leading to harmful human reactions, we still continue to use this method of experimentation, while many other less-expensive and more beneficial alternatives exist. Going beyond the issue of animal experimentation being morally wrong, this form of research is also hindering medical progress. Although the use of animals in laboratories is said to be necessary for the welfare and health of humans, people mistakenly believe that this immoral and unscientific method of experimentation is