Stem Cell Research.
Stem cells are particular cells in the body that are able to renew themselves via mitosis and can differentiate into several diverse specialized cells. These cells play a key role in developing treatments for a variety of medical issues that result to deaths of thousands. Great success has been witnessed from stem cell research and several potential cures for future development have been connected to the study. In the beginning of 2009, the FDA supported and gave its consent on the first human clinical trials utilizing these embryonic stem cells (Korobkin 77). There are three major sources for acquiring stem cells. They include the cord cells, adult cells, and embryonic cells. According to studies, embryonic stem cells are more expansive than adult stem cells (Ruse 64). Adult stem cells are said to be, in general, limited to differentiating into diverse and different types of cells. Though, as embryonic stem cells are more favored and said to be more useful, there is a probability of it being rejected by the immune system as stem cells are not patients (70).
Stem cell research has been going on for the past fifty years. However, stem cell research is still considered to be a relatively new technology that takes human cells and develops them into other varieties of cells found in the human body. Stem cells have been used for degenerative conditions, physical trauma, as well as genetic disorders. Besides, the future research in the stem cell research will enable researchers to develop technologies that will help in treating serious cases, which result from spinal cord injuries, Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and Parkinsons diseases (Gurtner and Longaker 306) Stem cell research brings huge potential in curing several diseases that will be mentioned by the end of this research essay. Medical research has been anticipating the use of modern technologies to further enhance the stem cell research and be able to alleviate pains and disorders. The issue of stem cell research is controversial in the state of technology currently in use due to the conception that a human embryonic cell line necessitates the human embryo to be destroyed.
Pros
Stem cell research has been smothered with debate since it was first launched. It has both pros (positive) and cons (negative) which will be explored in this essay.
One of the most distinct positive sides to stem cell research is its contribution to the medical field. Stem cell research provides possible major breakthroughs in the field of therapeutic cloning and regenerative medicine (Bellomo 122). It has given way to several medical treatments possible today such as for patients of lymphoma and leukemia, and theoretically could bring more potential breakthroughs such as treatment for brain damage, conditions of the heart, and infertility throughout the medical field (Joseph 2004).
The main usage of the embryonic stem cells in stem cells research and the further usage of the results from the research for therapeutic purposes can be attributed to the superiority of the embryonic stem cells. The first delimitation associated with these cells is that they are easy to develop and isolate which makes it convenient for researchers while doing their laboratory exercises and analysis. Secondly, embryonic stem cells help in reducing the cost of research because they are simple to create thus high number of cells are generated and hence they keep the research programs continuing.
Promising is a word that can truly be attributed to stem cell research. Currently, several treatments and procedures for patients with leukemia would not be possible without the help of stem cell research. There are still more promising treatments that can cure serious and currently incurable diseases such as cancer and brain damage. If the cure for these diseases will be unlocked, millions if not billions of lives will be spared from these very serious illnesses.
At present, some treatments and procedures that could be linked to the breakthrough in stem cell research includes the use of bone marrow and even umbilical cord blood stem cells to cancer patients with leukemia and lymphoma. Even with its side effects, chemotherapy still is arguably the preeminent treatment a cancer patient can receive. But as one of its side effects, the cytotoxic agents in chemotherapy not only kill cancer cells but also most of the growing cells of a person, laying them most of the time weak change how this ends.
The unfortunate side effect of the treatment to patients are those that stem cell transplants attempts to reverse. With more and more breakthroughs, todays system of using matching donor stem cells can be replaced with a more efficient and more effective stem cells directly gathered from the patient himself (Holland 29).
Researchers anticipate being able to use breakthrough to find cures for diseases such as cancer, Type 1 diabetes mellitus, muscle damage, damage to the spinal cord and other currently incurable diseases and impairments with stem cells taken from the patient (Ruse 53). Very promising treatments are foreseen with the use of adult stem cells over with the use of embryonic stem cells, as there are no rejection issues for stem cells taken from the patient directly (Snow 103).
A pro argument to embryonic stem cell research emphasizes the use of unused embryos from unused zygotes that are not transplanted after conception. It is narrowly noted that the world destroys hundreds of thousands of unused embryos supposedly for in vitro fertilization or for test tube babies (Young et al. 115). These wasted embryos could mean the discovery of a cure for life threatening or life taking humankind diseases. Additionally, the value of the embryos could not equal the value of the human lives it may save as it is used for the research - Blastocysts are no more human that a skin cell as its cells are still clustered and have not been differentiated into any distinct organ tissues. They are more comparable to a skin cell than a human at that stage. It is clear that in Australia over 70,000 unused embryos are destroyed (Korobkin 297). In vitro fertilization, many excess embryos that are generated are destroyed regardless. Rather than putting the embryos to good use, they are instead destroyed by whatever means possible (Snow 140).
There are also arguments related to the beginning of life with regards to the use of embryos. Claims that life begins with fertilization can be counteracted with the example of twins. A single fertilized egg can split into two to form identical twins, or a less common phenomenon is the fertilization of two different eggs that makes up fraternal twins but then fuse together and develop into a single human individual, such as a tetragametic chimera (Joseph 267). With these phenomena, it provides information that a human life does not exist at fertilization and therefore, the blastocysts used for embryonic stem cell research still do not have human life and hence ethical concerns can be dismissed.
Ultimately, the current population in developed countries such the US and European counties that have adopted stem cell research have enjoyed longer life expectancy as compared to those in developing world and therefore stem cell research should be advocated for in order to increase the life expectancy of both populations in developing and developed countries. This would be possible due to emerging methods of curing ailments at the old age through adoption of new technologies in the stem cell research. This would greatly help in reducing the inconveniences caused by ailments such as absenteeism from work.
Cons
The foremost argument of those against any form of stem cell research is the importance of human life. Critics contend that human life should not be messed with, and that people should not play God. Arguments on how stem cell research might lead to knowledge on cloning humans in the future have also been presented. No specific evidence has backed up these cloning issues yet critics are very watchful and very much in opposition of this form of scientific research. Whether or not stem cell research will lead to cloning humans, research-programs have had destructive consequences much like the nuclear research (Ruse 78).
Other available methods can be of help to the human population according to opponents of stem cell research. Researchers and scientists should focus more on finding and developing more ethical methods like the use of adult stem cells in order to have an ethical scientific breakthrough. Using embryonic cells in research is just unethical for the destruction of blastocysts, which are formed from the laboratory-fertilized human eggs, is inevitable (189). The blastocyst is considered a human life as upon conception, life begins.
Destroying blastocysts is morally wrong and intolerable.
Unless an egg is inhibited, it will become and develop into a human being once fertilized. Hence the value for an embryo should be as a high as a living breathing human being. Religious doctrines can establish this theory as the beginning of life or the existence of soul starts during conception. It is simply unjust to voluntarily damage and destroy human life through embryonic stem cell research. Arguments that have been laid out on how an embryo develops to human life remains to be subjective (Holland 89).
Another argument against the use of embryos for embryonic stem cell research focuses on the lives of these embryos. It follows that with the fertilization of an egg, unless inhibited, will mark the beginning of the human life. There are alternatives to embryonic stem cell research that do not include the use of destroying blastocysts. In addition, there are several scientific claws in the embryonic stem cell research and the technologies used for it. Also research potential of embryonic stem cell research are overstated and overused which calls for other alternatives.
Critics are also very firm with their argument on how this scientific research has ethical concern and issues on the work on aborted fetuses. It has been supposed that the possible help or benefits from the stem cell research cannot justify the disregard for ethical concerns. According to these critics, the value for human life should be given even to a fertilized egg. Life should never be compromised for the sake of a scientific study.
It is not and will never be ethical to destroy one human life for a probable solution or treatment to save another life.
Viability is yet another standard wherein fetuses as well as embryos are deemed to be human lives. In one case in the Unites States, it was concluded that the acceptability of abortions carried out for reasons other than that of the womans or mothers health was determined by viability. Viability is defined to be the point where a fetus has the potential to be able to live outside the womb of the mother albeit by means of artificial support or aid (Snow 111).
It takes about 22 weeks to determine and decide the point of viability. It used to take 24 to 28 weeks but with the advancements in medical technology, fewer weeks were needed. As further technological breakthroughs will be made and will allow an egg and sperm to be combined and entirely conceive outside of a womb, the embryo will be viable and under the viability standard, it ascertains that life begins during conception (Korobkin 176).
Much of the stem cell research controversy has sprung out from the different laws and policy governance implemented that concern the study and use for treatments of stem cells. These stem cell laws vary considerably by country and region. Stem cell research, with the use of human embryo is allowed in several countries in the European Union including Belgium, Finland, Greece, Sweden, Denmark, and Britain. It is however considered illegal in the Italian, Portuguese, Austrian, and German territories.
In the Americas region, the United States is divided with some states being pro stem cell research while others being very much against it. Canada permitted doing research on discarded embryos through in vitro fertilization process since 2006 (Korobkin 312). It however still prohibits the conception of human embryos for the purpose of research. In South America particularly Brazil, legislation has been passed that allows stem cell research by in vitro fertilized embryos given that these have been frozen for at least 3 years.
China does not allow human reproductive cloning but is in favor of creating human embryos for research as well as therapeutic intentions or purposes. Japan follows the same policy as well as South Korea who promotes cloning as long as its for therapeutic purposes. Australia is moderately in support of stem cell research while New Zealand prohibits the research.
For decades, stem cells have been used in treating conditions such as lymphoma and leukemia. With further studies, it is believed that these stem cells can be a potential treatment for numerous widespread disorders and diseases such as heart and brain damage, deafness, spinal cord injury, vision impairment and blindness, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, diabetes, orthopedics, infertility, and neural as well as behavioral birth defects.
Those against the stem cell research are firm in their beliefs that it still lacks practicality and is very much unethical. On the other hand, supporters solidly claim that advances will come through further studies and with more time. Breakthroughs in the research are said to be unpredictable and will yield positive results in the medical field. The stem cell controversy still remains to be a strongly debated issue on both aspects.
Stem cell research has been going on for the past fifty years. However, stem cell research is still considered to be a relatively new technology that takes human cells and develops them into other varieties of cells found in the human body. Stem cells have been used for degenerative conditions, physical trauma, as well as genetic disorders. Besides, the future research in the stem cell research will enable researchers to develop technologies that will help in treating serious cases, which result from spinal cord injuries, Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and Parkinsons diseases (Gurtner and Longaker 306) Stem cell research brings huge potential in curing several diseases that will be mentioned by the end of this research essay. Medical research has been anticipating the use of modern technologies to further enhance the stem cell research and be able to alleviate pains and disorders. The issue of stem cell research is controversial in the state of technology currently in use due to the conception that a human embryonic cell line necessitates the human embryo to be destroyed.
Pros
Stem cell research has been smothered with debate since it was first launched. It has both pros (positive) and cons (negative) which will be explored in this essay.
One of the most distinct positive sides to stem cell research is its contribution to the medical field. Stem cell research provides possible major breakthroughs in the field of therapeutic cloning and regenerative medicine (Bellomo 122). It has given way to several medical treatments possible today such as for patients of lymphoma and leukemia, and theoretically could bring more potential breakthroughs such as treatment for brain damage, conditions of the heart, and infertility throughout the medical field (Joseph 2004).
The main usage of the embryonic stem cells in stem cells research and the further usage of the results from the research for therapeutic purposes can be attributed to the superiority of the embryonic stem cells. The first delimitation associated with these cells is that they are easy to develop and isolate which makes it convenient for researchers while doing their laboratory exercises and analysis. Secondly, embryonic stem cells help in reducing the cost of research because they are simple to create thus high number of cells are generated and hence they keep the research programs continuing.
Promising is a word that can truly be attributed to stem cell research. Currently, several treatments and procedures for patients with leukemia would not be possible without the help of stem cell research. There are still more promising treatments that can cure serious and currently incurable diseases such as cancer and brain damage. If the cure for these diseases will be unlocked, millions if not billions of lives will be spared from these very serious illnesses.
At present, some treatments and procedures that could be linked to the breakthrough in stem cell research includes the use of bone marrow and even umbilical cord blood stem cells to cancer patients with leukemia and lymphoma. Even with its side effects, chemotherapy still is arguably the preeminent treatment a cancer patient can receive. But as one of its side effects, the cytotoxic agents in chemotherapy not only kill cancer cells but also most of the growing cells of a person, laying them most of the time weak change how this ends.
The unfortunate side effect of the treatment to patients are those that stem cell transplants attempts to reverse. With more and more breakthroughs, todays system of using matching donor stem cells can be replaced with a more efficient and more effective stem cells directly gathered from the patient himself (Holland 29).
Researchers anticipate being able to use breakthrough to find cures for diseases such as cancer, Type 1 diabetes mellitus, muscle damage, damage to the spinal cord and other currently incurable diseases and impairments with stem cells taken from the patient (Ruse 53). Very promising treatments are foreseen with the use of adult stem cells over with the use of embryonic stem cells, as there are no rejection issues for stem cells taken from the patient directly (Snow 103).
A pro argument to embryonic stem cell research emphasizes the use of unused embryos from unused zygotes that are not transplanted after conception. It is narrowly noted that the world destroys hundreds of thousands of unused embryos supposedly for in vitro fertilization or for test tube babies (Young et al. 115). These wasted embryos could mean the discovery of a cure for life threatening or life taking humankind diseases. Additionally, the value of the embryos could not equal the value of the human lives it may save as it is used for the research - Blastocysts are no more human that a skin cell as its cells are still clustered and have not been differentiated into any distinct organ tissues. They are more comparable to a skin cell than a human at that stage. It is clear that in Australia over 70,000 unused embryos are destroyed (Korobkin 297). In vitro fertilization, many excess embryos that are generated are destroyed regardless. Rather than putting the embryos to good use, they are instead destroyed by whatever means possible (Snow 140).
There are also arguments related to the beginning of life with regards to the use of embryos. Claims that life begins with fertilization can be counteracted with the example of twins. A single fertilized egg can split into two to form identical twins, or a less common phenomenon is the fertilization of two different eggs that makes up fraternal twins but then fuse together and develop into a single human individual, such as a tetragametic chimera (Joseph 267). With these phenomena, it provides information that a human life does not exist at fertilization and therefore, the blastocysts used for embryonic stem cell research still do not have human life and hence ethical concerns can be dismissed.
Ultimately, the current population in developed countries such the US and European counties that have adopted stem cell research have enjoyed longer life expectancy as compared to those in developing world and therefore stem cell research should be advocated for in order to increase the life expectancy of both populations in developing and developed countries. This would be possible due to emerging methods of curing ailments at the old age through adoption of new technologies in the stem cell research. This would greatly help in reducing the inconveniences caused by ailments such as absenteeism from work.
Cons
The foremost argument of those against any form of stem cell research is the importance of human life. Critics contend that human life should not be messed with, and that people should not play God. Arguments on how stem cell research might lead to knowledge on cloning humans in the future have also been presented. No specific evidence has backed up these cloning issues yet critics are very watchful and very much in opposition of this form of scientific research. Whether or not stem cell research will lead to cloning humans, research-programs have had destructive consequences much like the nuclear research (Ruse 78).
Other available methods can be of help to the human population according to opponents of stem cell research. Researchers and scientists should focus more on finding and developing more ethical methods like the use of adult stem cells in order to have an ethical scientific breakthrough. Using embryonic cells in research is just unethical for the destruction of blastocysts, which are formed from the laboratory-fertilized human eggs, is inevitable (189). The blastocyst is considered a human life as upon conception, life begins.
Destroying blastocysts is morally wrong and intolerable.
Unless an egg is inhibited, it will become and develop into a human being once fertilized. Hence the value for an embryo should be as a high as a living breathing human being. Religious doctrines can establish this theory as the beginning of life or the existence of soul starts during conception. It is simply unjust to voluntarily damage and destroy human life through embryonic stem cell research. Arguments that have been laid out on how an embryo develops to human life remains to be subjective (Holland 89).
Another argument against the use of embryos for embryonic stem cell research focuses on the lives of these embryos. It follows that with the fertilization of an egg, unless inhibited, will mark the beginning of the human life. There are alternatives to embryonic stem cell research that do not include the use of destroying blastocysts. In addition, there are several scientific claws in the embryonic stem cell research and the technologies used for it. Also research potential of embryonic stem cell research are overstated and overused which calls for other alternatives.
Critics are also very firm with their argument on how this scientific research has ethical concern and issues on the work on aborted fetuses. It has been supposed that the possible help or benefits from the stem cell research cannot justify the disregard for ethical concerns. According to these critics, the value for human life should be given even to a fertilized egg. Life should never be compromised for the sake of a scientific study.
It is not and will never be ethical to destroy one human life for a probable solution or treatment to save another life.
Viability is yet another standard wherein fetuses as well as embryos are deemed to be human lives. In one case in the Unites States, it was concluded that the acceptability of abortions carried out for reasons other than that of the womans or mothers health was determined by viability. Viability is defined to be the point where a fetus has the potential to be able to live outside the womb of the mother albeit by means of artificial support or aid (Snow 111).
It takes about 22 weeks to determine and decide the point of viability. It used to take 24 to 28 weeks but with the advancements in medical technology, fewer weeks were needed. As further technological breakthroughs will be made and will allow an egg and sperm to be combined and entirely conceive outside of a womb, the embryo will be viable and under the viability standard, it ascertains that life begins during conception (Korobkin 176).
Much of the stem cell research controversy has sprung out from the different laws and policy governance implemented that concern the study and use for treatments of stem cells. These stem cell laws vary considerably by country and region. Stem cell research, with the use of human embryo is allowed in several countries in the European Union including Belgium, Finland, Greece, Sweden, Denmark, and Britain. It is however considered illegal in the Italian, Portuguese, Austrian, and German territories.
In the Americas region, the United States is divided with some states being pro stem cell research while others being very much against it. Canada permitted doing research on discarded embryos through in vitro fertilization process since 2006 (Korobkin 312). It however still prohibits the conception of human embryos for the purpose of research. In South America particularly Brazil, legislation has been passed that allows stem cell research by in vitro fertilized embryos given that these have been frozen for at least 3 years.
China does not allow human reproductive cloning but is in favor of creating human embryos for research as well as therapeutic intentions or purposes. Japan follows the same policy as well as South Korea who promotes cloning as long as its for therapeutic purposes. Australia is moderately in support of stem cell research while New Zealand prohibits the research.
For decades, stem cells have been used in treating conditions such as lymphoma and leukemia. With further studies, it is believed that these stem cells can be a potential treatment for numerous widespread disorders and diseases such as heart and brain damage, deafness, spinal cord injury, vision impairment and blindness, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, diabetes, orthopedics, infertility, and neural as well as behavioral birth defects.
Those against the stem cell research are firm in their beliefs that it still lacks practicality and is very much unethical. On the other hand, supporters solidly claim that advances will come through further studies and with more time. Breakthroughs in the research are said to be unpredictable and will yield positive results in the medical field. The stem cell controversy still remains to be a strongly debated issue on both aspects.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment