Embryonic Stem Cell Research Debate

The embryonic stem cells can be a very good use in surgeries. Can even help cure cancer. But why embryos? Why not use adult stem cells. By permitting this research we don't only increase the number of dangerous procedures women go through. But we also make people think that abortion is a good and can help others. Not everyone agrees with the destruction of their embryos to do research. Some others simply just don't want to get their embryos experimented on. By this research abortion would most likely have to become legal. These treatments go against our lifes rights. The people in need of these treatments would most

“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

In humans adult stem cells, not embryonic stem cells, have been used in therapies for more than forty years. People with blood disorders have used stem cell therapy to take the opportunity to improve upon their life. On the other hand, embryonic stem cells have a very high potential to treat or even cure numerous diseases like diabetes and heart disease. They are much more versatile in their usage compared to adult stem cells. Another practical use for embryonic stem cells is to treat damaged nerves ("Testing The Use…”). These nerves could have been impaired in a spinal cord injury. As of today, scientists have already performed stem cell transplants in people whose cells were damaged through chemotherapy of disease.

Embryonic stem cells could cure many things such as Alzheimer 's disease, Parkinson 's disease, Diabetes, and many other things (Stem Cell Information). This category could broaden but how will that ever be known

There are a number of advantages associated with the stem cell research. As these stern cells obtained from embryos possess the capability to renew them and can set apart into a broad cell type range, the research on these stem cells can have potential comprehensive and influential applications. One of the great examples of this is the fact that embryonic stem cell research can have significant benefits for those who suffer from Type I diabetes. Moreover, embryonic stem cell research put forwards remarkable

Embryonic stem cell research could one day hold the key to many new scientific discoveries if it is continuously funded in the years to come. I chose to base my research around the question, Should embryonic stem cell research be government funded? When I finish highschool I hope to pursue a career in the medical field. Although I wish to become a doctor and may not be directly researching stem cells, they may one day be a treatment that I will have to administer to patients. To answer this question I first had to understand why embryonic stem cells are a topic for such heated debates. This is another thing that interested me greatly. I had known about how stem cells were produced, but I had not known about the ethics and great amount of

Currently, the use of research is to understand how the body develops from a fertilized egg and investigating how to produce more cells (Cox 1). However, there are limitations because of the uncertainty of how to fully control differentiation of these type of cells (Cox 1). Although they have solely been used for these specific expenditures, the problem still lies with “murdering” human lives. The people who support the embryonic stem cell research claim that the week-old blastocysts are only clusters of cells; therefore, they do not constitute as human beings (Rebecca 2). This is where they are wrong. They believe that because these cells, embryonic stem cells, are not “human”, they should not have the same human rights granted to the more advanced stages of cell growth. This is unjust because once the fetus starts to develop in the mother’s womb, it is a child with a life. The implementation of the embryo into the uterus wall around six days after fertilization counts as having life (Hug 1). Overall, embryos possess the same rights and are thus entitled to the same protections as are afforded to other human beings and in 2006, President Bush had ordered the limited funding of research involving human embryonic stem cells because of its violation of human rights (“Euro Stem Cell” 2). This demonstrates the seriousness of embryos having

. Embryonic stem cells have been identified by scientist as a type of stem cell that can advance regenerative medicine. The potential of regenerative medicine ranges from allowing pancreatic cells to produce insulin for diabetics to reconnecting the nerves in severed spinal cords. However, the greatest potential embryonic stem cells presents are its ability to change into any of the more than 200 different cell types in the body. This ability to change into any cell type can produce cures for Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, or any of the other conditions that stem cell therapy might help therefore improving the lives of those who live with these

Those who are against embryonic stem cell research commonly bring up the point of the embryo being unconscious, so it should not be killed because of its inability of awareness. Those who do not support the research compare the state of being unconscious to being asleep. While a person sleeps, it would be unacceptable to do any harm to them, so people expect the same treatment to go to the unformed human as well. Though a fully developed human and a newly formed blastocyte are far from similar, many try to argue that by those enforcing the rights of humans while they are unconscious, then we should “exercise these capacities when they eventually become fully developed humans”(Key). The argument against this problem is that embryos will never gain consciousness, but humans will eventually regain it once they wake up. The difference is that a embryo never had the chance to become conscious.

For decades, researchers’ use of stem cells has caused a controversy and the consideration of the ethics of research involving the development, usage, and destruction of human embryos. Most commonly, this controversy focuses on embryonic stem cells. Not all stem cell research involves the creation, usage and destruction of human embryos. For example, adult stem cells, amniotic stem cells and induced pluripotent stem cells do not involve creating, using or destroying human embryos and thus are minimally, if at all, controversial. Many less controversial sources of acquiring stem cells include using cells from the umbilical cord, breast milk, and bone marrow. (Brunt, 2012) In 1998, scientists discovered how to extract stem cells from human embryos. This discovery led to moral ethics questions concerning research involving embryo cells, such as what restrictions should be made on studies using these types of cells? At what point does one consider life to begin? Is it just to destroy an embryo cell if it has the potential to cure countless numbers of patients? Political leaders are debating how to regulate and fund research studies that involve the techniques used to remove the embryo cells. No clear consensus has emerged. Other recent discoveries may extinguish the need for embryonic stem cells. With this in mind, we will discover both sides of the issue from a pros and cons point of view. Stem cell research has expanded at an exponential rate, but its therapeutic

While embryonic stem cell research has been ongoing for more than 30 years, it has only become a controversial topic over the past decade. The embryonic stem cell was first isolated in 1981 by two scientists at the University of Cambridge. However, it wasn’t until 1998 at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, where the first batch of embryonic stem cells were created in a test tube. In 2001, President George W. Bush approved the use of federal funding for research on this topic, following this action the stem cell controversy has been developing. The controversy around this topic focuses heavily on the ethical portion of stem cell research rather than the scientific evidence. Stem cell research has shown great promise for potentially

Embryonic stem cells are stem cells that have been taken from the inner cell mass of a blastocyst. The blastocyst is formed approximately four days after conception. The blastocyst has an outer layer of cells that will form the placenta and other supporting tissues needed for fetal development in the uterus. (Swomley, 2002) In fetal development the blastocyst is what develops into an embryo but embryonic stem cell research removes the inner cells of the blastocyst essentially killing the embryo and prohibiting it from developing into a healthy fetus. These embryonic victims come from two main sources: surplus embryos donated by fertility clinics, and discarded fetuses from abortion clinics. (Vallance, 2005) While many claim this type of research is critical for the advancement of medicine it is an unnecessary method to advance

According to embryonic stem cell therapy ‘morally unacceptable’ it states “ An estimated 56 diseases have been treated with the use of adult, human stem cells.” This supports my claim because it shows that stem cells are good because it shows that it can treat diseases and can help save people's life. Also that some diseases that could not be cured that now can be. Finally it show that stem cells work and are worth to study more into the potential of stem cells.

Patrick Guinan says that the ethical view of embryonic stem cell research needs to be questioned because it kills off something that has the ability to be a human being (Williams). Some people may think that but Catherine Waldby says that the embryo as just an “idea of human life” (Lauritzen) and finds no destructive behavior used in stem cell research. Even though the issue over stem cell research goes on, sixty-seven percent of Americans say they support the use of embryonic stem cell research (Hall).

Stem cell related diseases affect over 100 million americans (White). Right now, there are plenty of government funds for stem cell research, and if we continue on the same path as we are now, stem cell research should be successful; however, the ethics used for embryonic stem cell research are incomprehensibly horrific (Stem cell policy). If this continues to be funded, it could have answers to numerous major diseases, including why they are caused, prevention, and cures for the diseases. More scientific research, however, needs to go into more possible solutions, to find a more humane method of treating these diseases that pleases both sides of the stem cell research debate, for the solutions, now, are not very strong. Because stem