Stem Cell Research - Coursework Example

Stem Cell Research Stem sell research is a the heart of a great deal of political and medically ethical debates. Let us begin by describing what stem cells are followed by why they are so crucial to groundbreaking medical treatment and disease reversal. Furthermore, it is important to apply sociological principles to the topic of stem cells, in order to gain insight as to the sociological ramifications of this aspect of science. We all begin as a zygote (a fertilized egg with a sperm). Zygotes mature from a single cell into a eukaryotic organism by means of what is known as differentiation. What this means is that the cells of a newly formed zygote are normal cells which require the undergoing of differentiation in order to form a complete organism during gestation. Differentiation is simply a process of assigning cells to a specific function and tasks. Remember in Science, form follows function. Let us assume that a group of cells which have been created through normal cell division (mitosis), are exposed to a specific hormone conducive to kidney function. These new cells will interpret the information from the hormone specific to renal form and function, as a guide to become kidney cells. The very fact that stem cells are able to be influenced by chemical pathways; makes them beyond valuable. What this means, is that cells which are exposed to a specific chemical pathway which influences them to become renal cells; will theoretically do so by synthetic transfer to an individual in renal failure who will simply not make it to the time frame in which a kidney may become available. This is also the case with those who have suffered permanent and debilitating damage (as in the case of Christopher Reeves). Truly, stem cells are a hope for not only the ill but for the human race; in hopes of outliving a general life expectancy conducive to our current time period. Having summarized what stem cells are and what they may be used for, we can begin to approach the controversial topic using first, the principles of structural functionalism. We know structural functionalism to be a theory which dictates that societies very function and stability is maintained by individuals acting in similar manners. In fact, structural functionalism relies on individuals being not so much individuals as different units of the whole (society as the whole) such that the continuation of the human race depends on such non autonomy within the individual. This can be said to support the use of stem cells, as the overall purpose of doing so, promises to promote survival of the human race. Additionally, in the ideology that individuality is non existent and only position or status remain relevant, it is obvious that a microscopic group of cells would be even less entitled to a sense of autonomy or social importance. The negative aspect often brought to light when discussing stem cell research has to do with the origin of stem cells. We usually only find stem cells (undifferentiated cells) within the human fetus. Because of this, a fetus must die in order to yield stem cells. To better understand the role of stem cells; let us consider soldiers in the military. If we begin with 100 soldiers, all in a line, and split them off according to need, we will have 10 different groups of soldiers responsible and trained for different tasks as they were assigned within their respective lines. Understanding how stem cells may benefit modern science is not at all an easy concept. Let us assume that a patient presents with hepatic failure. The only way to save the patient’s life is to give the patient a liver transplant. This is not as easy as it sounds as most liver transplant recipients wait years for a liver which matches their blood type. In many cases, this is too long to wait that the patient dies. Even though a patient may be indeed in hepatic failure and in need of a new liver, if the patient has a history of alcoholism, he or she will be denied a liver until permanent sobriety is proven. Stem cell implantation however, would allow fro the patient to re-grow a new and healthy liver. By exposing stem cells (of course, derived from an aborted fetus) to chemical pathways conducive to the liver, it is almost certain that the patient may in theory; re-grow a new liver. This new liver would be custom made to the patient’s body including tissue type and blood type. The possibilities of stem cell treatment is overwhelming and groundbreaking in Science. To address this aspect of stem cell research from a sociological standpoint, the theory of conflict may be utilized. The conflict theory attempts to explain th social model as being based on competition or Darwin’s ideology of survival of the fittest. Certainly, in the event that a fetus is aborted but is then utilized for its stem cells to treat an individual who has already begun the aging process, the survival of the individual receiving the stem cells has superceded that of the fetus. Therefore the recipient of the stem cells is the fitter of the two organisms or would be organisms. Conversely, the theory of structural functionalism does not allow for deviations from the equilibrium of society and therefore does not allow for change; both in the direction of decay or improvement. Symbolic interactionism is a sociological theory which may very well best serve to argue in favor of stem cell therapy. First of all, symbolic interactionism places humans as being the highest form of organism on earth. It also argues that humans are such in the food chain (so to speak), because of our ability to interrupt processes or create change. If an animal becomes ill due to a tumor or another debilitating disease, that animal is obviously going to die unless a human intervenes and acts upon the illness in a way that the illness is cured. The animal is not capable however, of interrupting the process of its own natural decay or end. Humans on the other hand, have progressed through time and evolved to a point where we can and do interrupt processes of illness, entropy and degradation; all the time through medical means. Stem cells used to therapeutically reverse the damage caused by disease or the natural aging process, can be acted upon, slowed and even reversed by using stem cells. One may the ask, why then do we not go ahead with using stem cells all the time to treat and reverse disease and degradation? President George W. Bush has placed a halt to the legality of any and all stem cell research due to the fact that stem cells again, come from aborted fetuses. Individuals who have survived through childhood and even adolescents have proven themselves to be a robust specimen of a human being. A fetus has not only proven that but is also in some ways considered to be a full and autonomous human being, even at conception. What this means, is that removing life from said fetus is an essential violation of not only medical ethics but human rights ethics. From a sociological standpoint however, the fetus which has been aborted, is weighing in as the less capable organism which complies with the theory of conflict as earlier stated. Similarly, the question of nature versus nurture comes into play within this argument. In the event that one requires a stem cell transplant, they are proactively using evolution in their favor. This is a survival of the fittest situation as an already born individual may only require a few stem cells to regenerate and prolong life while a fetus facing abortion is doing so due to either serious birth defects, an individual or a couple unable to or not desiring to have a baby or due to sexual assault. All of these scenarios almost guarantee a substandard life for most children therefore making abortion a somewhat means of dually natural yet synthetic selection. One person lives in exchange for the life giving properties of another. From a political and moral standpoint, Stem cell research found itself at a somewhat screeching halt on August 9th, 2001. President George W. Bush makes the pro-life topic a fundamental part of his political platform. He did however devise a rigid set of criteria for the use of stem cells and their acquisition. The following is the criteria currently in motion for legal and ethical acquisition of stem cells as mandated by President George W. Bush: The derivation process (which begins with the destruction of the embryo) was initiated prior to 9:00 P.M. EDT on August 9, 2001. The stem cells must have been derived from an embryo that was created for reproductive purposes and was no longer needed. Informed consent must have been obtained for the donation of the embryo and that donation must not have involved financial inducements. (Stem Cell Information, 2006). The most recent research concerning stem cells indicates that a live embryo can actually be harvested for stem cells without the embryo’s destruction, “For the first time, human embryonic stem cells have been obtained without having to destroy the embryos they came from. The breakthrough sidesteps the primary ethical objection to human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research - that embryos must perish to yield up hESCs” (Coghlan, 2008). In the meantime, we are on the brink of a new presidential regime which promises to abolish laws prohibiting stem cell research as well as promises to assist in funding to do so. Stem sell research many be the very answer to the long, sought after ‘fountain of youth’. In the near future, it is hoped to be able to harvest stem cells for the use of regenerating any type of human body cell. The acception however, is the brain. Scientists have not yet ascertained a means of utilizing stem cells to regenerate the human brain. This further lends enough data for a look at another sociological theory which may be relevant to this topic. Social constructionism is a theory based on the ideology that we as humans, create our own reality or even fate. Social constructional can be said to be in place within the concept behind religions. We decide what is real or believable to us and then we make that concept or ideal a reality to us. The same can be said for morals or ethics as well. We establish such standards based on the general acknowledgement within society, that we are capable of good and of bad. These ethics and moral standards also govern medicine. As it stands, the stem cell debate it continually at the heart of constant moral debate but in reality; it is only a moral issue if we choose to make it a moral issue. It is something which can physically and scientifically better our species and prolong our survival which weighs in more heavily than the decision to not utilize a life saving avenue due to the earlier acceptance of a certain moral or ethical code. When discussing something as Scientifically profound as the area of stem cell research, it is important to discuss its long term impact. Certainly, we have discussed that stem cell research can change the average life span of every man, woman and child. This sounds phonemically appealing; but with this comes the possibility of making humans immortal. For millennia, humans have longed fro such status but once it is in hand, society as we know it will be changed. This is somewhat in line with the implementation of cloning. Science can claim at this point, that cloning is strictly for the use and harvesting of organs. This is in and of itself a lofty aspiration but also one with very strong ethical and even moral connotations. It is as though cloning and stem cell research, will put the power of god in human hands. With all of this in mind, we can employ a combination of the ideologies discussed thus far into the integration theory. Ultimately, making the decision to see stem cell therapy and research as something much bigger than a moral issue or an ethical issue but rather a sociological issue which can alter our propagation as a species. The medical industry as well as society in general; is quite fond of pointing fingers at those who appear to be attempting to ‘play God’. While this may not be the intention of why these things are fervently researched at this present time, it is important to note that society as a whole is simply not ready for such a leap. Constructive Science may be better suited to educate people as to how they can precerve a normal life span by proactively tasking charge of their lives and making a healthy lifestyle. The drive to prolong the human lifespan has occurred to every individual throughout history. It is in our nature to want to live forever or to be forever youthful when the fact of the matter is that there is a delicate balance between the preservation of life in a moral and healthy manner as opposed to actively harvesting human organs or stem cells from live fetuses or from human DNA. Ultimately, a look at both the Biology of the situation as well as the ethical aspect; will allow for a proper balance, especially since the harvesting of stem cells is done in order to cure or to save lives. The argument that it is amoral due to where it comes from is nullified by the outcome which justifies the means. Breaching the code for curing humans of the incurable may extend life without doing so on an astronomical scale. Works Cited: Coghlan, Andy., (2008), “Stem Cell Breakthrough Leaves Embryos Unharmed”, The New Scientist, retrieved from website November 21, 2008 from website at: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13170-stem-cell- breakthrough-leaves-embryos-unharmed.html Stem Cell Information, (2006), “Federal Policy”, The National Institute of Health, retrieved November 21, 2008 from website at: http://stemcells.nih.gov/policy/ The Associated Press, (2008), “Stem Cell Experiment Lets Diabetics forego Insulin“, MSNBC, retrieved November 21, 2008 from website at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18040485/.htm Read More