Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on the ethics and science of embryonic stem cells
Embryonic stem cells essay
Embryonic stem cells essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The possibility to cure Alzheimer, Parkinson’s, AIDS, spinal injuries, and many more diseases and conditions is received by many in the medical world with excitement and anticipation. The discoveries of embryonic stem, ES, cells in 1998 by James A. Thomson, a biologist at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, was a great breakthrough for the medical world, showing great promise in the field of stem cell research. This is because they have the capacity to become any type of cell tissue in the body. To the medical world the opportunities seems endless. However, there is a great deal of debate by some who question the moral and ethical use of ES cells, believing that life begins at fertilization. Supporters argue that we have an obligation to help others who are suffering by using ES cells, because they are consider potential life. The question is do we have the right to use ES cells for research purposes when the embryos will be grown specifically for research and destruction? And if so, should this research be funded by the government?
First of all, what are ES cells and how can they help us? ES cells are non-specialized cells found in the human body and are capable of multiplying and creating all types of specific cells. ES cells are developed in an in vitro fertilization clinic and not in a woman’s womb, as the name seems to indicate. Because these cells have the ability to develop into any type of cell, the research potential for ES cells is very promising. If the correct genes can be turned on they could regenerate tissue cells that are incapable or too damaged to replace themselves. Or they can be used to find and correct genetic defects or degenerative diseases. ES cells offer a promising future to many people even if that f...
... middle of paper ...
... Future of Medicine." The Guardian. The Guardian UK, 1 Mar. 2009. Web. 16 Jan. 2012. .
Sansom, Dennis L., P.H.D. "How Much Respect do we Owe the Embryo? Limits to Embryonic Stem Cell Research." Ethics & Medicine 26.3 (2010): 161,173,131. ProQuest Research Library. Web. 13 Jan. 2012.
Schechter, Jody. "Promoting Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research: A Comparison of Policies in the United States and the United Kingdom and Factors Encouraging Advancement." Texas International Law Journal 45.3 (2010): 603-29. ProQuest Research Library. Web. 13 Jan. 2012.
Simon, Stephanie. "THE NATION; Stem Cell Dissent Roils States; Even Where Voters have Moved to Support the Embryonic Research, Opposition is Fierce." Los Angeles Times: A.12. Los Angeles Times; National Newspapers Core. Aug 01 2007. Web. 13 Jan. 2012
The concepts discussed within the article regarding medicalization and changes within the field of medicine served to be new knowledge for me as the article addressed multiple different aspects regarding the growth of medicalization from a sociological standpoint. Furthermore, the article “The Shifting Engines of Medicalization” discussed the significant changes regarding medicalization that have evolved and are evidently practiced within the contemporary society today. For instance, changes have occurred within health policies, corporatized medicine, clinical freedom, authority and sovereignty exercised by physicians has reduced as other factors began to grow that gained importance within medical care (Conrad 4). Moreover, the article emphasized
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.
Stem cell research has been a heated and highly controversial debate for over a decade, which explains why there have been so many articles on the issue. Like all debates, the issue is based on two different arguments: the scientific evolution and the political war against that evolution. The debate proves itself to be so controversial that is both supported and opposed by many different people, organizations, and religions. There are many “emotional images [that] have been wielded” in an attempt to persuade one side to convert to the other (Hirsen). The stem cell research debate, accompanied by different rhetoric used to argue dissimilar points, comes to life in two articles and a speech: “Should Human Cloning Be Allowed? Yes, Don’t Impede Medical Progress” by Virginia Postrel; “Should Human Cloning Be Allowed? No, It’s a Moral Monstrosity” by Eric Cohen and William Kristol; and “Remarks by Ron Reagan, Jr., to the 2004 Democratic National Convention” by Ron Reagan, Jr. Ethos, pathos, and logos are the main categories differentiating the two arguments.
“What are the potential uses of human stem cells and the obstacles that must be overcome before these potential uses will be realized?” . InStem Cell Information. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2009.
This is a cruel end to many great people: to be straddled with hundreds of thousands in debt and no easy way to pay it back. Not to mention the need to rebrand itself apart from medicine. Having an M.D. doesn’t make it in any way easy to do something else. Wake up to the sands! Stand with me to make a difference for everyone.
Late one night a woman is driving home on the freeway, she’s hit head on by a drunk driver and killed. The man is charged with two accounts of murder; the woman, and her four-week-old embryo inside her. By law, everyone human being is guaranteed rights of life; born or unborn they are equal. The same law should be enforced concerning human embryonic stem cell research. Dr. James A. Thomson discovered stem cells in 1998 and they’ve intrigued scientist ever since. The stem cells themselves are derived from a three to four day old cluster of cells called a blastocyst and they are so coveted because they are pluripotent, meaning they can differentiate into any type of cell in the human body. Although embryonic stem cells show amazing potential to cure various disease such as cancer, congestive heart failure, Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease, muscular dystrophies, and more. The methods by which they are obtained is controversial. Research on embryonic stem cells is unethical, unnecessary, and purely homicide.
The conflict surrounding stem cell research is, with ethical consideration, whether it is a good or bad. The majority of Americans are advocates due to the possibilities of medical advancement, thus saving thousands of lives. Those in opposition believe that it is against
...e gap in attitudes between pre-medicalized and modern time periods. The trends of technological advancement and human understanding project a completely medicalized future in which medical authorities cement their place above an intently obedient society.
While many support embryonic stem cell research, some people oppose it say that it is an unethical practice. According to these people, embryonic stem cells require murdering a baby, human life is defined by rational beings, those capable of rational thought or a consciousness. In order to be rational one must have a consciousness, the ability to have thoughts and feel pain, to begin with. “For a fertilized egg, there is no consciousness and also no history of consciousness” (Stem). If abortions are allowed within the United States, why shouldn’t embryonic stem cell research be? Another claim against embryonic stem cell research is that it devalues human lives. “Some argue that researching embryonic stem cells will lead us into cloning technology” (Embryonic). While embryonic cloning is a possibility, we already possess the capabilities to clone so cloning is an invalid argument. The final argument against embryonic stem cell research is that there are alternatives, like adult stem cells. While adult stem cells may be utilized, they won’t be as effective. Embryonic stem cells are not only efficient but also renewable. They can be grown in a culture where as adult stem cells are extremely rare, if there are any. They can only be found in mature tissue. Isolating these extremely rare cells is challenging and has a high failure rate if not harvested correctly. “One major difference between adult and embryonic stem cells is their different abilities in the number and type of differentiated cell types they can become” (Stem). Using adult stem cells we might never understand our development from conception ...
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 of the greatest revolutions in modern medicine. On the opposing side of the issue, many citizens believe that destroying an embryo is the equivalent to killing an unborn child. While many people assume the battle is about the use of stem cells for research purposes, it now seems that the major political controversy is the role of the federal government in funding human embryo research. Many scientists contend that the furor began with President Bush's August 2001 decision to limit government funding to embryonic stem cell lines that had already been created. Since then, scientists have been scrambling to expand funding for stem cell research with few alternatives. The central question is, "Should private funding from companies, individuals, and foundations control the future economic, public health, and social benefits of stem cell research or should the federal government?" Allowing the federal government to fund and, thereby, control stem cell research ensures appropriate regulation and ...
Monroe, Kristen, et al., eds. Fundamentals of the Stem Cell Debate: The Scientific, Religious, Ethical and Political Issues. Los Angeles/Berkley: University of California Press, 2008. Print
Van Der Weyden, M. B. (2006) It’s Time for Change and Resolve. Medical Journal. Retrieved on March 29th, 2011 from http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/187_11_031207/van11312_fm.html.
On April 28, 2011 - the United States Appeals Court overturned the rule of a federal judge because of several issues that emerged with stem cell research being funded by the government. Although, the science of human embryonic stem cell is in its initial stages - there is much hope for scientific advancement due to the ability for human embryonic stem cells to grow into virtually various kinds of cells Favorably, advocates for stem cell research and pharmaceutical companies strongly believe that stem cells may pave a way to discover new methods of treatment for devastating ailments; such as, Leukemia, Alzheimer’s disease, Heart disease, Parkinson’s disease and diabetes- a prospect that is inspiring to both scientists and those who are seeking cures for themselves and family members. In contrast, numerous pro-life advocates are against federal funding for stem cell research because of the method in which these stem cells are extracted. In addition, several other groups argue that the federal government has abandoned more substantial as well as promising and less controversial adult and cord stem cell research. Instead, the government has dedicated a majority of their funding in favor of the more popular and controversial stem research. Ultimately, as long as humans exist - the need for a more extensive and technological progress will be abundant and crucial to humanity's survival. However, does the needs of the human species outweigh the potential lives embryos represent? With so much on the line, let us explore exactly what human embryonic stem cell (HESC) research is and what may be potentially weighing in the balance for the human race if we proceed down this road.
Medicine as a Form of Social Control This critique will examine the view that medicine is a form of social control. There are many theorists that have different opinions on this view. This critique will discuss each one and their different views. We live in a society where there is a complex division of labour and where enormous varieties of specialist healing roles are recognised.
Pfeffer, N., Kent J., (2006). ‘Consent to the use of aborted fetuses in stem cell