A mother has developed Alzheimer’s, preventing her from having a normal relationship with her family. A newly born baby girl has a spinal cord issue, making for many years of rehabilitation ahead her. A diabetic wife struggles to take care of her household duties because of constantly having to monitor her blood sugar and deal with insulin shots. With the development of stem cell research, and the more controversial embryonic stem cell research, every one of these instances could not only be cured, but prevented, within the next half century. In fact, diseases that are predicted to be treated by means of stem cell research are figured to now plague the likes of 100 million Americans. Looking at the arguments dealing with stem cell …show more content…
This news was welcome news for the medical society, and those suffering from such a disease. Since the 1970s, stem cell research has been funded to study, but not until 1998 were embryonic stem cells able to get isolated, giving them potential to be turned into an unlimited variety of cell types. In 1998, Dr. James Thompson at the University of Wisconsin first discovered how to successfully isolate human embryonic stem cells. This discovery created much debate from a philosophical, religious, political, and moral standpoint. The division of viewpoints was especially prevalent after this discovery because in order to isolate an embryonic stem cell for research, it must be destroyed. Even though it is many times the case that the debate of stem cell research is a matter of someone being pro-life or pro-choice, this is not always the case. In fact, it is found that many people are opposed to human suffering more than anything, causing them to agree with embryonic stem cell research as a way to potentially alleviate human suffering due to disease. There are many different religions with radical followers that do believe that a human embryo contains at least some moral status, making the destruction of a human embryo considered to be murder. Then there is the philosophical point that some take that an embryo has no moral status because it isn’t able to anticipate the future, or have any personal desires for its’ future. Although there are different opinions on
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
Millions of people die every year from diseases and accidents; the nightly news is filled with reports about the devastating effects of cancer, horrific accidents, and disasters that leave people disfigured or paralyzed. Embryonic stem cell research is a part of biomedical science and has the potential to ease the suffering of sick people by curing diseases and defects, creating organs and tissue for patients needing transplants or skin grafts, regenerating axons in spinal cord injuries, and creating new treatments, drugs, and immunizations. However, America’s government does not support this research to an extent that would make a difference in medicine; only a few stem cell lines are authorized, and federal funding is minimal. The
On August 9, 2001 President Bush announced that he would allow limited federal funding for embryonic stem cell research under certain conditions. Under Bush's new ruling only the 64 stem cell lines that were already in place before August 9 were to be funded. He said that the government would not fund further destruction of embryos to create more lines. Also stem cells could not be obtained from embryos created for that purpose or from the left over embryos from in-vitro fertilization. However, private sectors would be allowed to continue producing new lines through the destruction of embryos.
Abortion, gay marriage, and illegal immigration are all hot button topics currently being faced by Americans. As ardently as each side defends their stance on a controversial issue, an opposing side fights with equal diligence for the beliefs they feel should be valued by our nation. Perhaps nowhere is this battle more heated than in the fight over stem cell research. While supporters of this new field of science tout it’s potential to cure everything from blindness to paralysis, those against stem cell science liken the procedures used by scientists to murder. It is my intention to bring to light the positive benefits of stem cell research as well as counter the claims used by many Pro-life groups who believe the scientists driving this
The transfer of information, often shared through scientific reports and research, puts this topic in a highly international spotlight. Many supporters believe that stem cells will be able to help solve once untreatable diseases or injuries such as spinal cord injuries, skin burns, Parkinson’s disease, and some blood disorders. However, the main argument is if stem cells should be used in finding therapeutic treatments. The use of embryonic stem cells is viewed by many as a moral inconsistency; it is opposed by religious organizations and individuals believing that this research should be abandoned and existing, alternative methods be adapted.
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
In the 2004 presidential election, one of the most controversial issues facing voters was the battle over embryonic stem cell research. In the weeks leading up to the election, polls were indicating that 47 percent of Bush supporters agreed that the destruction of embryo cells is unethical; however, 53 percent of Bush voters supported stem cell research. The overwhelming majority of Kerry backers also supported stem cell research, indicating that the majority of American voters support stem cell research. Embryonic stem cell research, while still in its infancy, has the potential to treat or perhaps even cure more than 100 million people suffering from a variety of illnesses and conditions. Scientists agree that stem cells could be one
The society has evolved over the decades. Medical advances, greater technologies, better understanding of the world around us, the sky is the limit! The progression of a society is astounding from where it was just twenty years ago. One is able to do things that the forefathers would have never dreamed! Science has discovered ways to travel to the moon and back, reach some of the deepest depths of the oceans and discover new species, and drive hybrid cars. The achievements of today’s society have reached a new high; however, with great achievement comes great questions of ethics.
While some people might say that stem cell research is immoral and unethical, others believe that it is a magical solution for almost any problem, thus leading to a very controversial issue. Scientists have been searching for years for ways to eradicate incurable diseases and perform other medical procedures that yesterday's technology would not fix. With the rapidly arising, positive research on stem cell technology, the potential that exists to restore any deficiency is in the same way, likely to destroy humanity. America is suffering from its inability to choose who holds precedence over this issue. Too many of us find it impossible to reach a basis for which our differing opinions can be shared and formed into a universal and
Throughout the last couple of decades the rise of technology has influenced the lives of Americans in many ways. From the time scientists started in depth experiments with stem cells in the 1980s, to the present day, the use of stem cells in research has been a prominent topic not only in legislation, but also in everyday conversations (Bush). This is because of the controversy these conversations introduce, as well as the hope in the potential outcomes and cures they may bring (Clemmitt). Some people believe that stem cell research should not be performed due to the fact that using embryonic stem cells is considered a form of
When you ask most people, stem cell research and transplants don’t mean anything to them, and some don’t even know what stem cells are. Are you one of those people? Are you somebody who is completely blind to the hope this wonderful thing can bring? Stem cells are special cells your body creates that have specific purposes. As said perfectly by the Mayo Clinic staff, “Stem cells are the body's raw materials — cells from which all other cells with specialized functions are generated“(1). These cells can be used for so many different things. Stem cell research (SCR) and transplants (SCT) can cure diseases or lessen them, and use stem cells in an effective and ethical way.
What kind of research sparks a battle between religious-ethics, political, and scientific theories and beliefs? What makes you question right or wrong, moral or immoral, good or bad? The answer is stem cell research. So what is a stem cell? “Stem cells… are in effect, a human self-repair kit.” (Christopher Reeve, activist Larry King, CNN) Stem cells are cells that exist in an undifferentiated state, and can transform into any of the 220 types of cells that exist in our body. Stem cells have the ability to repair many classes of damaged human tissues without the fear of tissue rejection. There are two types of stem cells but the most promising are the embryonic stem cells- labeled as today’s
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
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
research; conservatives and pro-choice activists are highly against further research, but the tremendous advances in health care and President Bush’s recent decision to fund more