Stem Cell Research Argument

Through change and uttermost struggle, the people who care about a subject always seem to push through for what they believe in. For the sake of Embryonic Stem Cell research, the advocates tried their best to show the advancements stem cells may withhold, and for the people who disagree with the research, always seemed to put a new light on the subject, simply humanizing the research. Although the destruction of a human embryo is not something many people would view as ethical, it is something that could hold much promise for those who suffer from terminal illnesses (Sherley). When the miracle of assisting those who could not reproduce children through In Vitro Fertilization transpired the world of stem cell research was acquired (Tauer 924).

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.

This source starts by talking about stem cells. Stem cells are the building blocks of every tissue on the human body. The research of stem cells has great potential to show just how effective it can be to heal any wound or disease. While adult stem cells are easily rejected, embryonic stem cells are much easier to use, can treat a greater variety of ailments, and are less likely to be rejected. Despite this, the use of embryonic stem cells are controversial due to the process of receiving them which is to kill a human embryo.

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

Stem cell research is conducted with embryonic stem cells, as well as adult stem cells. Stem cells are undifferentiated cells that have great potential to develop into many different type of cell and have the ability to treat a wide range of diseases. The main controversy is over the use of embryonic stem cells, these include fertilized eggs created for in vitro fertilization (Camp, 2013).

Richard’s response to the question clearly comes from a more capitalistic and economic standpoint. However, he still manages to touch upon the heart of the issue and the overall goal, which would be promoting the common good. He recognizes that the demand for healthcare certainly does exceed the supply however he fails to offer a legitimate proposed solution. Murray, on the contrary, does offer some insight on this. She argues from the Catholic perspective that one must have a preferential option for the poor, which embraces the poor class with a genuine purpose. She points to the fact that the Catholic Church has advocated for a Universal Healthcare system since it ultimately is their belief that health and healthcare access is a fundamental

Incurable and degenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, and cancer cause death of millions of people annually. Scientists use drugs to treat symptoms, but they don’t have effective therapies for cure these diseases. Embryonic stem cells have treatment potential due to their pluripotent characteristic, which means that they can develop into any cell of the human body. Some people oppose embryonic stem cell research since they think it violates human rights and thus should not be allowed to pursue. However, embryonic stem cell research is ethical since five-day-old embryos lack most of the human characteristics, embryonic stem cells have the potential to cure degenerative diseases, and they are better to other kinds

In recent years, stem cell research has become a prominent way of treating: heart disease, cancer, HIV/AIDS, spinal problems, and much more ; moreover, in recent years as Stem cell research became more popular, it has sparked controversy over the religion aspect of stem cell research. Stem cell research begins with culturing an embryonic cell and then injecting the stem cell into the area of concern(Robertson). Pluripotent stem cells are gathered and used to treat the areas, pluripotent stem cells are those that are in the earliest stages of development ; in addition, at this stage, cells can learn the jobs and take shape of cells that did the job once before (Robertson).

The ethics of research involving fetuses or material derived from fetuses have been widely debated for over three decades, portrayed by its proponents as holding the key to scientific and medical breakthrough and by its opponents as devaluing the most basic form of human life. The latest chapter in this long saga involves the use of embryonic stem cells. Research in this field took a great leap forward in 1998, when the first successes in growing human stem cells in culture were reported independently by Drs. James Thomson and John Gearhart. According to the National Institutes of Health, embryonic stem cell research "promises...possible cures for many debilitating diseases and injuries, including Parkinson 's disease, diabetes, heart disease, multiple sclerosis, burns, and spinal cord injuries. The NIH believes the potential medical benefits of human pluripotent stem cell technology are compelling and worthy of pursuit in accordance with appropriate ethical standards (National Institutes of Health 2000). Research in this new and developing field has sparked controversy centered on the moral implications of destroying human embryos and poses several compelling ethical questions. Among them: Does life begin at fertilization, in the womb, or at birth? Might the destruction of a single human embryo be justified if it can alleviate the pain and suffering of many patients?

The issue of embryonic stem cell research is a great controversy. Some say it is morally wrong and that the cell is a human life. They believe that the research is destroying a life and it should not be funded. Others say it is a great development in research and can help prevent genetic diseases such as blindness and spinal injuries. Embryonic cells can also be fertilized and implanted into a woman's uterus to help conceive pregnancy. Should public funding be provided? Is the research really destroying a human life?

Improved technologies in science and health has led to the elongation of human life. Even with this progress, there are still illnesses and injuries that cannot be treated. The use of stem cells to treat patients is a relatively new, but promising, area of science. Although there are several types of stem cells, most people think of embryonic stem cells when discussing stem cell research. While this cell type has shown the most potential, it brings up ethical dilemmas. Negative opinions associated with stem cell research due to embryonic stem cells hinder prospective studies. Stem cell research offers potential therapies, but the procurement of embryos and the destruction of the embryo to isolate embryonic stem cells leads to problems with

“The misleading debate on stem cell research” written by Mona Charen is a cautionary tale of the escalating manner in which life will be dehumanized should society begin to support this research with federal funding. Stem cell research crosses a moral line that society should be reluctant to cross even for the best intentions (Charen). Stem cell research has been picketed by pro-lifers since the first whispers of its use. The results of stem cell research are rarely attacked since we really don’t know the fruits of such research without funding and supporting it. In the United States, stem cell research remains legal, however it is not funded by the government. Germany, Italy, Portugal, Luxembourg, and Austria all have a ban on it, begging the question to be asked “What do they know that we don’t?” (Charen). Going a step further we are warned that scientists have been frustrated by their inability to ascertain certain results, speculating things will go a step further. What is to stop the research from moving forward to allowing an embryo to reach a later stage of development (Charen)? It is easy to shame society into shying from the idea of growing embryos for spare body parts to be dismantled by mad scientists, and yet that is not where the argument currently lies. Instead, scientists use embryos that will be discarded and whom the owner has agreed to their donation to science. It is wrong to take a scientific matter and wrap it in a morality issue.

“At its core, this issue forces us to confront fundamental questions about the beginnings of life and the ends of science. It [stem cell research] lies at a difficult moral intersection, juxtaposing the need to protect life in all its phases with the prospect of saving and improving life in all its stages.” George W. Bush in his address at the Bush Ranch in Texas precisely captures the essence of the issues surrounding stem cells. “Stem cells are undifferentiated cells that have the capability of self replication as well as being able to give rise to diverse types of differentiated or specialized cell lines.” (Stien). Researching these cells can lead cures some of the most devastating ailments. Despite the research’s vast

In the past decade, stem cell research has gained popularity in the biomedical field. Many scientists believe stem cells could be the breakthrough tool that is necessary to change the way we understand medicine. The same scientists feel stem cells, embryonic in particular, open the door for many opportunities to cure diseases that are otherwise known as incurable. However, the benefits of embryonic stem cell research do not outweigh the value of a life that never gets to begin. While there can be benefits to stem cell research, embryonic stem cell research is unethical because stem cells can be found in other places, the research is not always effective, and it ultimately destroys a human life.

Stem cells are cells with the ability to divide for indefinite periods in culture and to give rise to specialized cells. They have the potential to develop into several different types of cells within the body during early life and growth. When a stem cell divides, they can either remain a stem cell or become another type of specialized cell (NIH, n.d.). Scientists use these cells because they give them the opportunity to "engineer" stem cells for use in transplants or disease treatments. For example, before scientists can use any kind of tissue, organ, or cell for transplantation, they must make sure that the patient’s immune system does not reject the transplant. In the future, however, scientists may be able to change stem cells by using