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 the developing treatments for a variety of medical issues that result in the deaths of thousands. Great success has been witnessed from the stem cell research and several potential cures for future development have been connected to the study. It was early 2009 when the FDA supported and gave its consent on the first human clinical trials utilizing these embryonic stem cells (Korobkin 77). There are three foremost sources for acquiring the stem cells and these are the cord cells, adult cells, and embryonic cells. According to studies, embryonic stem cells are more expansive than other adult stem cells (Ruse 64). Adult stem cells are said to be in general limited to differentiating into diverse and different cell kinds. 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 the patients (70).
Stem cell research has been going on for the past fifty years However, it is still considered to be a somewhat 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.
This stem cell research brings huge potential in curing several diseases that will mentioned by the end of this research. 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 has long been controversial as the conception of a human embryonic cell line necessitates the human embryo to be destroyed considering the current state of technology that is present at the moment.
Pros
Stem cell research has been smothered with debates sparking since it was first launched. It has brought upon two sides to the topic, the positive and the negative side. The positive are the pros of stem cell research, while the negative are the cons.
One of the most distinct positive sides to stem cell research was its contribution to the medical field. It provides possible major breakthrough in the fields of therapeutic cloning and regenerative medicine (Bellomo 122). It had given 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, heart conditions, and infertility throughout the medical field (Joseph 2004).
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 unlock, 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 the stem cell research include the use of bone marrows 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 growing cells of a person, laying them most of the time weak. The unfortunate effects of the treatment to the patients are those that the Stem Cell Transplant attempts to reverse. And with more and more breakthrough, the todays system of using matching donor stem cells can be replaced with a more efficient and more effective stem cell directly gathered from the patient himself (Holland 29).
Researchers anticipates someday being able to use breakthroughs to find cure for diseases such as cancer, Type 1 diabetes mellitus, muscle damages, damages 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 are taken from the patient directly (Snow 103).
An argument pro to embryonic stem cell research emphasizes the use of unused embryos from unused zygotes that are not transplanted after its 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. These wasted embryos could mean the discovery of cure for life threatening or life taking diseases humans face. 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 generates these many excess of embryos that will only be destroyed anyway. Rather than putting the embryos to good use, they are instead destroyed by whatever means possible (Snow 140).
There are also arguments with the beginning of life with regards to the use of embryos. Claims that life begins with fertilization can be counter acted 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 fuses together and develops 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 thus the ethical concerns can be dismissed.
The foremost argument of those against any form of stem cell research is the importance of the human life. Critics contend that the human life should not be messed with, and that people should not play like God. Arguments on how stem cell research might lead to knowledge on cloning humans in the future have been presented. No specific evidences have backed up these cloning issues yet critics are very watchful and very much in opposition of this scientific research. Whether or not the stem cell research will lead to cloning humans, research-programs have had destructive consequences like the nuclear research (Ruse 78).
There will be other methods available that can be of help to the human population. 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 as 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 born 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 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 does not include the use of destroying blastocysts. Also, there are several scientific claws in the embryonic stem cell research and the technologies used for it. Another is that the research potential of embryonic stem cell research are overstated and overused.
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
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, it is still considered to be a somewhat 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.
This stem cell research brings huge potential in curing several diseases that will mentioned by the end of this research. 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 has long been controversial as the conception of a human embryonic cell line necessitates the human embryo to be destroyed considering the current state of technology that is present at the moment.
Pros
Stem cell research has been smothered with debates sparking since it was first launched. It has brought upon two sides to the topic, the positive and the negative side. The positive are the pros of stem cell research, while the negative are the cons.
One of the most distinct positive sides to stem cell research was its contribution to the medical field. It provides possible major breakthrough in the fields of therapeutic cloning and regenerative medicine (Bellomo 122). It had given 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, heart conditions, and infertility throughout the medical field (Joseph 2004).
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 unlock, 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 the stem cell research include the use of bone marrows 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 growing cells of a person, laying them most of the time weak. The unfortunate effects of the treatment to the patients are those that the Stem Cell Transplant attempts to reverse. And with more and more breakthrough, the todays system of using matching donor stem cells can be replaced with a more efficient and more effective stem cell directly gathered from the patient himself (Holland 29).
Researchers anticipates someday being able to use breakthroughs to find cure for diseases such as cancer, Type 1 diabetes mellitus, muscle damages, damages 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 are taken from the patient directly (Snow 103).
An argument pro to embryonic stem cell research emphasizes the use of unused embryos from unused zygotes that are not transplanted after its 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. These wasted embryos could mean the discovery of cure for life threatening or life taking diseases humans face. 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 generates these many excess of embryos that will only be destroyed anyway. Rather than putting the embryos to good use, they are instead destroyed by whatever means possible (Snow 140).
There are also arguments with the beginning of life with regards to the use of embryos. Claims that life begins with fertilization can be counter acted 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 fuses together and develops 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 thus the ethical concerns can be dismissed.
The foremost argument of those against any form of stem cell research is the importance of the human life. Critics contend that the human life should not be messed with, and that people should not play like God. Arguments on how stem cell research might lead to knowledge on cloning humans in the future have been presented. No specific evidences have backed up these cloning issues yet critics are very watchful and very much in opposition of this scientific research. Whether or not the stem cell research will lead to cloning humans, research-programs have had destructive consequences like the nuclear research (Ruse 78).
There will be other methods available that can be of help to the human population. 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 as 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 born 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 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 does not include the use of destroying blastocysts. Also, there are several scientific claws in the embryonic stem cell research and the technologies used for it. Another is that the research potential of embryonic stem cell research are overstated and overused.
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
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:
1 comments:
My ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis) symptoms started out with a "foot drop" on my left foot. From there my left leg lost all muscle tone and then the entire left leg muscles were gone. Also my fingers and thumbs "contract" at times. Left arm was losing muscle tone too.I was given medications to slow down the progress of the disease,i resorted to a wheelchair (Perbombil C300).This was till my husband's sister introduced my husband to a herbal clinic in Johannesburg who sell herbal medicines to cure all kind of diseases including ALS, we contacted the herbal clinic via their email and purchased the ALS herbal remedy, we received the herbal medicine via courier within 7 days and commenced usage as prescribed, its totally unexplainable how all the symptoms gradually dissapeared, my speech has greatly improved and am able to walk a distance now with no help, contact this herbal clinic via their email healthherbalclinic@gmail.com Or website www.healthherbalclinic.weebly.com
Post a Comment