Stem Cell Research example essay topic

Science is moving at such a rapid speed these days, between cloning, gene therapy, miracle drugs, exotic therapies, etc. One of the most significant breakthroughs came in November 1998, when two separate researchers successfully isolated stem cells from human embryos and aborted fetuses. Stem cells are primordial cells of a human organism, which are capable of becoming all or most of the 210 different kinds of tissues in the human body. Stem cells have been defined as not fully differentiated yet to be any particular type of tissue or cell. They range from ", i.e. (the early stages of the human embryo up to about 4 days after conception.) To i.e. (a bit older and therefore only capable of being some cells or tissues in the body.) As in the 5-7 day blastocyst stage of the early embryo, with decreasing capacity in later stages of fetal development and in human beings. The impassioned hopes are that these stem cells can be used to great advantages.

The cautious fears are that innocent and vulnerable human beings are destroyed, and needlessly so, in the process. The debates are raging. Many people are confused about what stem cell research really is, and wonder why all the fuss. There are several well documented and well-articulated sources of information available on this issue already, so the following is a brief overview of some of the major scientific, ethical, pros and cons. For centuries humanity has been plagued with numerous diseases, such as the black plague, Cancer, AIDS, and other diseases.

These horrific, dreaded diseases have killed millions of people due to doctors or scientists not having a cure, but thanks to a scientific and medical breakthrough these diseases can and will be a thing of the past. With this new research scientists are hoping to gain important scientific knowledge about embryonic development and its application to related fields; curing debilitating diseases, e. g., Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, diabetes, stroke, spinal cord injuries, bone diseases, etc. ; and screening drugs for pharmaceutical companies, instead of having to rely on animal models. In order to continue with these medical and scientific breakthroughs " you have to accept the right-to-life argument in its most extreme form. I'm talking about newly formed embryos. These are not fetuses with tiny little waving hands and feet. These are microscopic groupings of a few differentiated cells.

There is nothing human about them, except potential, and only if you choose to believe it, a soul. However, Bush is blocking, stem cell research would not actually take the life of a single embryo. Researchers would only use embryos that are being discarded anyway". 1 I understand that some people and "pro lifers" say that stem cell research is " murder". But I strongly fell that it is ethically acceptable - even morally required - to destroy a few human beings in order to possibly benefit millions of patients. Besides, these cells do not cause the same immune-incompatibility problems after transplantation as do adult stem cells from different patients.

Further, these early cells from human embryos and fetuses are MORE ' and ' than adult stem cells, and therefore they can be 'coaxed' to become more different kinds of tissues, and can last longer in culture awaiting use. Besides, these fetuses and left-over IVF-produced human embryos are going to die anyway, so we might as well get some good use out of them". 1 "Researchers believe that stem cells can mimic the actions and activities of nearly every other cell in the body. Eventually, scientists hope to use them to repair damaged hearts after heart attacks, regenerate livers devastated by cirrhosis or viral disease, reconstruct damaged joints, or seed the brain with fresh neurons to reverse the effects of Parkinson " sand Lou Gehrig's disease, according to the November issue of Technology Review, a research magazine published by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, or MIT". 2 Now for every good there is a bad, and with all this technology there has to be a negative side, after all everything with medication and medical research has it's side effects, and thousands of people in the world feel that stem cell research is morally and ethically wrong regardless of what stem cell research promises, as well as all the side effects that come along with stem cell research. Here are just some of the side effects or things that are wrong or "unethical".

First, one minor complication is that use of human embryonic stem cells requires lifelong use of drugs to prevent rejection of the tissue. Second, another more serious disadvantage is that using embryonic stem cells can produce tumors from rapid growth when injected into adult patients. A third disadvantage: the March 8, 2001 New England Journal of Medicine reported tragic side effects from an experiment involving the insertion of fetal brain cells into the brains of Parkinson's disease patients. Results included uncontrollable movements: writhing twisting head jerking, arm-flailing and constant chewing. One man can no longer eat and now requires a feeding tube. Fourth, a recent report in the Journal Science reported that mice cloned from ESC were genetically defective.

This is particularly relevant. If human ESC are also genetically unstable, that could materially compromise efforts to transform cells extracted from embryos into successful medical therapies. Fifth and finally, the research may be hampered because many of the existing stem cell lines were grown with the help of mouse cells. These mouse cells were needed to enhance their growth. If any of this research is to turn into treatments, it will need approval from the FDA, which requires special safeguards to prevent transmission of animal diseases to people. It is unclear how many of these cell lines were developed with the safeguards in place.

This of course leads to a whole host of problems related to transgenic issues. Upon receiving this assignment I was asked to form my own opinion, and I will admit I did not know much about this subject, but after doing all the research and finding the Pros and the Cons, and my decision is a difficult one to make. I am definitely against human cloning (most cloning in fact) because of the serious ethical concerns. For one thing, I don't advocate striking Stem Cell research because we simply don't know enough about it. We need that research to help answer some questions. If it is going to create ethical problems or revolutionize medicine then we " ve got to know one way or the other, and the only way to do that is by researching more.

The federal government is the key to answering this question by providing funding for research -- if the US doesn't go ahead with it, other nations will. We do know that stem cells are the cluster of cells formed within days after conception. After a few days, they go from being blank slates to growing into various organs. Some of them become skin cells and others the brain and others still the heart, etc.

With mice and Chimps, we have taken their stem cells and injected them into dying organs. Amazing things have happened: dying hearts have become brand new, brain damage has been repaired and more. Then in 1998 this same thing was done in humans. Experts predict that it will be used to cure parkinson's, Alzheimers, brain disease, skin cancer, huntington's disease... in other words it could change everything for the better. I'm not sure what kind of ethical problems would arise. I mean, the only issue is whether you are killing an unborn baby; the whole abortion thing, and I don't think that it applies.

These stem cells come from embryos that are either discarded by the parents already or are grown in the lab specifically to do research on without the potential for full life. Furthermore, these are blank slate cells, its not like you can grow organs or humans out of them. What they do in the lab is they inject them into dying organs and the cells replace the dying ones in that given organ. You cannot grow organs with stem cells from scratch, John Hopkins tried and failed six months ago. That would be cloning and this is not cloning.

Given all of the benefits involved and the real unknowns I think the federal government must fund it. Maybe it will fail, maybe it will be successful, but how can we ever know if we don't try researching it? 1.