Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Debate over government funding of stem cell research
Discursive essays on the ethics of "stem cell" research
Embryonic stem cell essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Debate over government funding of stem cell research
Stem cell research is one of the most controversial topics, people oppose it because they think that the destruction of an embryo is the same as abortion. They believe that the embryo constitutes life because it has the potential to fully develop into a human being. I personally think that life begins when the baby takes its first breath out of the womb. Once a baby is aborted, it is going to be deposed of. So, if it is going to be wasted, then why not use the stem cells from the embryos to help people? Also, it is important to do research on embryonic stem cells because it increases our knowledge on how cancer and birth defects form. Plus, these cells are undifferentiated, allowing them to be used in all parts of the body, giving them the …show more content…
potential to cure hundreds of diseases with the use of all of the different cells that can be created from them. Another advantage is that embryonic stem cells are very similar to cancerous cells, so studying these cells will likely progress in cancer research. One big reason that people are opposed to embryonic stem cell research, is that “people should not be messing with human life.”.
These embryos have already been created and can either be destroyed or used for research, destroying them would simply be a waste of resources. And if we were to truly stick to the fact that “humans should not be messing with human life”, then we really shouldn't be performing any surgeries or anything of that nature. Because we are technically messing with life, and playing God in a way. If an elderly needed a new heart to survive, would you deny him/her because “we shouldn't be messing with human life”? You have to make the decision if doing embryonic stem cell research is worth all the advances that it could potentially bring. Also, something that could potentially become a human does not have to be treated as if it actually were a person. The embryo has no morals, personal feelings, beliefs, desires, expectations, aims, it doesn't even know its alive. The embryo is just another part of your body until it has developed enough to survive on its own. It is the woman’s property in a way, if she chooses to abort the baby and give the embryo to science for research, then its her choice. Same as if you want to sell one of your kidneys, it is your body, and your
choice. After 14 days, the embryo can no longer split into multiple humans. Before day 14, the embryo has no nervous system so it is equivalent to a patient who was been declared brain dead. If it is okay to use the deceases healthy body parts to do transplants, then why is it not okay to use the unborn embryos cells? The cells don't come straight from an aborted fetus, they are just a cluster of cells. Many religious groups believe in embryo stem cell research, for example Protestants. Also, most Islamic and Jews do not consider a young embryo to be a human being.
Stem cell research has always been a widely debated topic in 'social and political forums' ever since the case of Roe vs. Wade in 1973. In that case the Supreme Court gave women the right to have an abortion whether or not they have a medical reason to. Whereas beforehand 'they needed a medical reason'. This "sparked controversy" over stem cell research with aborted fetuses. For many of those in favor of using fetal tissue for research it has too much "potential" in the future of medicine in terms of providing cures for diseases and "". Those against fetal tissue research believe it unethical to take one human life in order to preserve another.
Are stem cells ethical to use in medical research? The most basic cells in the human body are stem cells. Because doctors use stem cells for medical treatment of chronic ailments, stem cells play an important role in human medical research. However, despite the benefits of stem cells in medical treatment, controversy surrounds the methods employed to obtain them. Should researchers continue to use stem cells?
This is because I do not see the human embryo as being alive, a view even supported by the Church of Scotland, a group against therapeutic cloning, as they are “unsure about when life begins” in regards to the embryo. As the embryo is not alive, “killing” it to benefit a large number of people who would no longer suffer is morally acceptable. It would also prevent any suffering from anything similar ever again, again justifying using embryos for therapeutic cloning; a contrasting view to this would be the view of the Roman Catholic Church who believe that the human embryo is a part of God, and therefore harming the embryo is harming God. Therefore they completely disallow the collection of STEM cells from embryos and ignore the positive consequences that are a result of using STEM cells from
Could you imagine being able to create new organs, tissues, muscles, and even food? With embryonic stem cell technology, believe it or not, these things are possible. Stem cells are the body's raw materials. Specifically, they are cells from which all other cells with specialized functions are generated. Under the right conditions in the body or in a laboratory, stem cells can divide to form more cells called daughter cells. These daughter cells either become new stem cells or turn into specialized cells with a more specific function, such as blood cells, brain cells, muscle cells or bone cells. The possibilities are almost endless. The debate and main issue with this technology is that the actual stem cells come from embryos. Embryos are an unborn or unhatched offspring in the process of development. Although there is controversy surrounding these cells, embryonic stem cells should continue to be researched and used, because they have so much potential.
Because of these high standards, all embryonic cells used for research come from embryos that have been formed for in vitro fertilization. The unused embryos, which are not used for the process, are discarded unless the donor gives explicit consent for their use in stem cell research (CIRM, 2015). Some who oppose stem cell research use scripture (col. 1:16) as a basis against using products of “sin to do good”. (Which is true). This verse only holds weight if you believe that you are ending a life five days after fertilization. I tend to side with Dr. Peter Kraus in this matter. He believes this early in the developmental stages there is nothing for the spirit of god to enter into. You might as well be taking a sample of the placenta, or cord blood (Kraus, 2010). The process of in vitro, which is where the samples come from, is further the product of man (i.e. Scientist) introducing the sperm to the egg. True, what follows after the embryo is introduced to the womb is a gift from god. Is not also a sturdy structure, a gift from god to a carpenter, when it is god who gave him the talent to build it? Lastly, if the stance is based on the topic of what is considered murder, are we not murdering the millions that could be helped with stem cell therapy by doing nothing?
...ting embryos specifically for stem cell research should not be allowed. Continued stem cell research will benefit all of mankind with its promise of medical advances. Opponents’ concerns about destroying human life will be quelled because stem cells will be taken from already doomed embryos. The federal government will be able to regulate the research and ensure that it is lawfully conducted.
I think that stem cell research has advanced in so many ways, with all the discoveries being made, and the new possibilities being explored. Although it still remains unethical because embryonic cells are one of the sources of stem cells. Why is somebody else’s life more valuable than someone else? Just because an embryo cannot talk, doesn’t mean, its life has any less value than a normal human being.
Human cloning research has once been the subject of terrifying science-fiction films and novels, science experiments gone wrong, accomplished only by the evil scientists twirling their moustaches. However, ideas presented on page and screen are rarely accurate. The possibility of cloning an exact copy of another human with one already fully developed is almost impossible, but through meticulous research, scientists have discovered the numerous benefits of cloning humans, either with individual cells or an embryo.
Have you ever seen a movie or read a book where they can tell what your child will look like or if they have a disease or birth defect. Or have you ever wondered how the world would be shaped if we could have clones or even erase genetic diseases. All of these things are theoretically possible with stem cell research. If we are able to reach this point what would we have to sacrifice in the process. To understand humanity would we have to sacrifice the values that truly make us human? What would the fail rate be if we are able to genetically enhance the human body?
Every year countless people are diagnosed with cell based diseases, 7.6 million a year alone receive the petrifying news that they have cancer. But what if we could eliminate the idea that a cancerous diagnosis is the equivalent of a death sentence? The use of embryonic stem cells could, for the first time, make diseases like cancer or parkinson a non-issue. This is why the use of embryonic stem cells should not be viewed as unethical but rather a huge step towards unthinkable medical breakthroughs and the eradication of life threatening diseases.
Stem cell research should be allowed on adults but not on humans. Only allowed on humans who are willing to be a part of the stem cell research but no one should be used against their own will. Embryos should not be used for embryonic stem cell research. An embryo being used for their stem cells and then discarded devalues that human life. This follows along the same unethical issue as abortion. When stem cells are removed from human embryos, a unique individual dies. However, if abortion is legal in the state that this research is conducted than research may be conducted on only aborted fetuses. That would be an...
Embryonic stem cell research is wrong. When using embryos in research, the embryo is manipulated to be anything scientists need it to be. But, scientists dispute the fact that the parts of the embryo they use could also grow into a fetus. When harvesting the stem cells of an embryo, the destruction of the blastocysts, “the blastula of the mammalian embryo, consisting of an inner cell mass, a cavity, and an outer layer, the trophoblast” (Dictionary.com), must occur. This kills the embryo because taking away the stem cells strips the organism of the ability to develop. The use of live embryos in research is wrong because it takes an innocent life.
One problem that I think is an issue in the stem cell debate is the destruction of the stem cells and how it’s practically the same thing as destroying a human being. I don’t believe that researchers and scientists should continue using embryonic stem cells for research because we are obviously not finding a cure for human diseases yet although for animals we are, it’s just not right to destroy a human being if we cannot find treatments for major diseases within a decade or so.
Contemporary human genetics is fast becoming a force to be reckoned with. Genetics, specifically human genetics, has come a long way, with new research and ground-breaking discoveries sky rocketing in the past decade, and with new breakthroughs being made daily in both treatment of diseases, and some more unorthodox or morally challenging scientific discoveries, human genetics is at the forefront of modern day scientific research. This makes human genetics an interesting and exciting field to be in, but as exhilarating as all the breakthrough discoveries are, some can be rather daunting, as human genetics is consistently pushing the boundaries of ethics, morality and the notions of humanity we previously thought we understood so well. Our Genetic content is the culmination of who we are: How we
Learning is something that I have always enjoyed from a young age. I have found that curiosity is synonymous with passion for learning and similarly observed that the process of gaining knowledge is enhanced by the complexity and relevance of a particular subject. It is for this reason that I have decided to pursue a graduate degree in regenerative biology since it is a challenging field whose relevance extends widely through its applications. My success as a scientist involves thorough understanding of the complex network of molecular processes mediated within a cell. This requires an extensive and well-established background in the field, one which I believe am prepared to successfully cultivate through the Massachusetts Institute of Technology,