Federal Funding For Stem Cell Research example essay topic

An Assessment of The Greatest Medical Breakthrough-the use of Pluripotent Stem Cells Team B Learning Environment Res 110 Mr. HoeftAugust 20, 2004 Abstract A critical review of the pro and con analysis, of arguably, the most controversial issue of the 21st century-the use of stems cells. In addition, the ensuing synthesis and prescription based upon empirical data and critical thinking. Given the enormous promise of stem cells to the development of new treatments for the most devastating diseases, we believe our scientific researchers and medical professionals should be permitted and encouraged to simultaneously pursue stem cell research. Further, the ban on federal funding of research on new stem cell lines should be overturn, allowing doctors and scientists to explore their full potential with the appropriate ethical oversight.

An Assessment of The Greatest Medical Breakthrough-the use of Pluripotent Stem Cells Thesis: The greatest medical breakthrough in any lifetime-the use of stems cells. Background: Stem cell research continues to be a controversial issue. Stem cells are cells that have a particular function, like blood stem cells whose function is to make different types of blood cells or skin stem cells whose function is to make various types of skin cells. Stem cells evolve from stem cells, cells that makeup the inner cell mass of the embryonic. As the stem cells specialize, they form stem cells with the specific kinds of purposes mentioned above. Stem cells are controversial because the most useful variety of stem cells comes from embryos at the blastocyst stage, meaning the cells are taken from embryos of aborted fetuses or from surplus embryos left over from In Vitro Fertilization (IVF).

Despite such controversy, many researchers and medical professionals argue that embryos have "the potential to revolutionize the practice of medicine and improve the quality and length of life" for millions of individuals (NIH, 2002, p. 1). For these reasons, the use of stem cells potentially represent the greatest medical breakthrough of any era in history and federal funding for such research must be approved. Pro Analysis: The unique ability of embryonic stem cells shows tremendous medical promise. Pluripotent stem cells shed light on the way cells are programmed to specialize. Understanding this information may lead to cures for cancer, birth defects, Parkinson's disease, multiple sclerosis, diabetes, lymphoma, spinal cord injuries or other deadly diseases, as many such conditions are caused by "abnormal cell specialization" (NIH, 2002, p. 3). Likewise, many people in need of organ transplants must wait until a suitable donor organ is available and a significant percentage die because no such suitable organ becomes available.

Pluripotent stem cells offer the ability to grow new tissue or organs that would be suitable for such transplant patients. In addition, stem cells offer the promise of a cure for diseases that transplantation does not resolve, "For juvenile diabetes and many other diseases, there is not a suitable transplantation therapy or other cure" (Goldstein, 2000, p. 1). Pluripotent stem cells also offer great promise for streamlining the development and testing of new drugs. Currently, animal testing that is not always applicable to human beings or human testing that is fraught with risks are the only ways to test new drugs. Researchers could use human stem cell lines to test new drugs before developing them for human use. The capabilities of stem cells enable researchers to test such drugs on a variety of different cell types, as opposed to current methods that are limited to cancer cells.

As the National Institutes of Health (NIH, 2002) maintains, "Only the drugs that are both safe and appear to have a beneficial effect in cell line testing would graduate to further testing in laboratory and human subjects" (p. 3). Polls show a majority of the public, even Republicans and conservatives, support allowing federal funds to be used for research on stem cells from 400,000 unwanted embryos frozen in fertility clinics. So do 58 Senators and 200-plus House members. In June 2004, some of the most influential Republicans, including Orrin Hatch, Kay Bailey Hutchinson and John McCain joined senior Democrats including Presidential hopeful, John Kerry, John Edwards and Ted Kennedy, sent President Bush a letter urging him to lift the ideologically-driven restrictions on stem cell research. Most ominous for the president, one out of five Bush voters polled in July 2004 by Zogby International said they'd switch to Kerry, if he proposed a bold stem-cell research program. President Bush's ideological-driven ban has been forced to play defense on embryonic stem cell research.

The restrictions he imposed three years ago on federal funding for the potentially lifesaving research were ill-advised. Now they " re also unpopular. So unpopular that the dispute over the cells with the wondrous ability to develop into any of the body's tissue types is looking like a wedge issue ripe for exploitation by Democrats in the race for the White House. In addition, Bush is trying desperately to recast his image as a champion of embryonic stem cell research and the only president to fund it.

Con Analysis: Those opposed to federal funding for stem cell research argue that such funding would pave the way for a future scenario in which embryos would be bred merely for their use as sources of stem cells. Such individuals argue that the taking of human life is not justified by the potential medical promise of stem cells. According to Grigg (2002), the medical ethic underlying stem cell funding and research is one "in which the rights of the individual can be violated in the name of society's greater good" (p. 2). Despite such opposition, embryonic stem cells are often derived from aborted fetuses, after the decision to abort has already been determined by the parent (s). Likewise, In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) often results in surplus embryos that, if not used, are disposed of without any benefit to anyone. Opponents of using stem cells from embryos contend that "there is no scientific justification for using embryonic rather than adult stem cells in medical research" (Grigg, 2002, p. 2).

This is patently untrue. Adult stem cells are fewer in variety than embryonic stem cells. Adult stem cells are also at a stage of development where they are not as capable of developing into different varieties of tissues and organs. In addition, embryonic stem cells are much greater in variety and offer much greater potential to researchers than adult stem cells.

Synthesis: There are a number of benefits from the use of embryonic stem cells. From growing new organs and tissues to helping provide cures for Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and other diseases like diabetes, such cells offer a medical breakthrough that is as significant as any discovery in the history of medical research. Streamlining the drug development process is also a benefit of great promise. Such research also promises to rescue individuals who need organ transplants from having to rely on a compatible organ becoming available or face certain death.

The present situation for such individuals is the prospect of "a completely inadequate supply of suitable donor organs and tissues" (Goldstein, 2000, p. 1). Likewise, children with diseases where only maintenance but no cure is available must live "under the constant shadow of premature death or disability" (Goldstein, 2000, p. 1). While adult stem cell lines do offer some promise for medical advance, they offer much less capability or promise than embryonic stem cells. Further, the notion that individuals will be encouraged to have abortions or conceive children merely for use as sources of stem cells is fear-mongering at best. Human stem cell research unfolds in an ethical manner, with embryos being used for such cultivation only after abortion decisions have been made or from surplus embryos generated from In Vitro Fertilization (IVF).

Prescription: The miraculous promises of stem cell research far outweigh any of the concerns of those opposed to such research. From a ready supply of organs and tissues to new cures for incurable diseases and greater efficacy of the drug development process, stem cell research merits federal funding. President Bush should relax the restrictions that allow federal funding only for research using stem cells harvested before August 9, 2001. If not, such research will continue anyway by private researchers or in countries where such research is not obstructed. Further, providing such funding will ensure that the best and brightest scientists and researchers in the U.S. are involved in the advancement of stem cell research. As a prescription to this problem, I advocate federal funding that will pursue all lines of stem cell research at the same time.

In this manner, if adult stem cells show the same promise as embryonic stem cells, then the use of embryonic stem cell lines can be minimized. If not, then embryonic stem cell research will not suffer from a lack of funding that may result in the deaths of millions of individuals who might otherwise lead healthy and long lives.

Bibliography

Goldstein, L.S.B. (2000).
Human stem cell research is ethical. Ethics, Retrieved Aug 13, 2004, from Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center, 1-4.
Explains the current status of human stem cell research-at the threshold of learning how to coax cells into growing into the many kinds of organs and tissues. Explains the need for continued research in human stem cell. Promulgating the many reasons why federal funding for research is ethical, critical and necessary. Grigg, W.N. (2002).
Embryonic stem cell research could have dangerous consequences. Medicine. Retrieved Aug 13, 2004, from Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center, 1-4.
Discusses the nuances, implications and basis for President Bush's position on harvesting of organs and tissues. Explains President Bush's cautionary approach to stem cell research and the use of federal funding. Confirms that there is no proven, scientific advantage of using embryonic stem cells instead of adult cells. National Institutes of Health (NIH). (2002).
Embryonic stem cell research is beneficial. Human Embryonic Experimentation. Retrieved Aug 13, 2004, from Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center, 1-6.