StemCell Therapy

It's not so much the acutal medical risks, but the ehtical and moral implications of conducting research in the field.

The following is an excerpt from a research paper I recently wrote concerning stem cell research:

Embryonic stem cell research raises immense ethical and religious concern: The issue of research involving stem cells derived from human embryos is increasingly the subject of a national debate and dinner table discussions. The issue is confronted every day in laboratories as scientists ponder the ethical ramifications of their work. It is agonized over by parents and many couples as they try to have children or to save children already born. The issue is debated within the church, with people of different faiths- even many of the same faith- coming to different conclusions. Many people are finding the more they know about stem cell research, the less certain they are about the right ethical and moral conclusions. (Bush Embryonic Stem Cell Decision 1) Quite often, the status of an embryo is debated among scientists, politicians, theologians, philosophers, and even everyday people. There are many ideas circulating the globe as some vie to protect the embryo and others hope to use it to benefit society. Those that oppose stem cell research claim that the methods scientists use are not morally justifiable. Human embryos, in their minds, are not mere biological tissues or clusters of cells; they are the tiniest of human beings (Espejo 49). According to the Human Embryo Research Panel and the National Bioethics Commission, the embryo should be considered a living organism from its earliest stages (Espejo 46-50). People therefore claim that scientists are alienating the rights of living human beings by performing experiments on embryos: The painful lessons of the past should have taught us that human beings must not be conscripted for research without their permission- no matter what the alleged justification- especially when that research means the forfeiture of their health or lives. Even if an individuals death is believed to be otherwise imminent, we still do not have a license to engage in lethal experimentation- just as we may not experiment on death row prisoners or harvest their organs without their consent. (Espejo 49) The widespread Christian view that life begins at the moment of conception has caused many to believe that the destruction of the human embryo is murder (Espejo 4). People also believe that is irrelevant whether the embryos are capable of implanting in a uterus and developing, as they are embryos nonetheless (Morris 2). As Morris questions, are we willing to recognize life, even if its living in a Petri dish? (2). Those that sympathize with these concerns feel that research requiring the destruction of a human embryo should be banned. Others argue that since IVF procedures often generate more embryos than needed, the excess embryos should be used for potentially life-saving research rather than being discarded (Espejo 36-37). Also, they claim embryos do not have the same rights as adult humans. The suggestion that a mass of 50-100 cells with no heart and no brain is entitled to the same protections is unprecedented and not embodied in American law (Espejo 38). With this in mind, it seems that embryonic stem cell research should not be undermined by the aforementioned arguments. There are additional concerns however. The use of SCNT is often criticized by those opposed to cloning, as a majority of people view cloning as morally wrong. SCNT has been used in reproductive cloning, such as the cloning of Dolly the sheep. In the publics mind, the distinction between this form of cloning and therapeutic cloning, which involves SCNT used for medical purposes, has blurred. The two should not be confused however, as they are completely separate procedures. Outlawing the use of SCNT would prevent the development of very promising techniques for curing disease, such as the one mentioned earlier (Scott 49-56). Finally, there are claims that the science will not live up to the hope that has been generated. Opponents of stem cell research are quick to point out that stem cell technologies are still at a developmental stage and it is virtually impossible to predict the eventual outcomes of innovation in the field (Stem Cell Controversy 2). Some have even claimed that researchers have falsely raised peoples expectations in an attempt to secure funding and support (Stem Cell Controversy 2). Such statements should not be regarded as wholly true, but with ideas such as these spreading around the globe, it is no wonder why the topic has become so controversial.

Granted, it's somewhat lengthy, but there is alot of information in there. If you want me to send you the whole paper sometime, just let me know. But please, if you're using this for your own schoolwork, avoid plagarism.

Hope this helps!

See original here:
what are the negative aspects to stem cell therapy ...

This entry was posted on February 27, 2019 at 9:46 pm and is filed under Stem Cell Negative. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed. |