Should Embryonic Stem Cell Research Be Allowed to Advance - Essay Example

Should Embryonic Stem Cell Research Be Allowed to Advance? The evolution of man has dictated that our illnesses also take on different forms and shapes with us. These illnesses can sometimes cause life altering or life threatening repercussions for which normal medical science cannot present a cure. But, the discovery that mans body can heal using transplant surgery of various organs has helped spur a new avenue in medical treatments. Although we find it acceptable to transplant donor organs from other people, it is ethically unacceptable to receive something such as stem cells from cultivated embryos that could have resulted in a new life had it not been aborted for medical means. But that should not be the case for further advancement in stem cell research. The main opponents of stem cell research do so on the basis of religious beliefs. But medical science has proven that there are other possible sources of stem cells (“Stem Cell Research Pros and Cons”), it would be unfair and illogical to ban further research into the field based solely upon religious beliefs. That is why our government policy must allow for the development of stem cell research for incurable illnesses in the future, provided that these studies and experiments are not done on human fetuses but rather on: the placenta or blastocysts that were not implanted into a woman. (“Stem Cell Research Pros and Cons”) Keeping in mind that these two other sources for stem cells in human beings exists, there is no clear barrier towards the further advancement of medical technology using the stem cell method since it is obvious that the other methods respect the dignity of the human life. Advancement in fertility science for human beings has resulted in two things. An increased ability of the human being to create new life and, the abandonment of over 400,000 embryos in fertilization clinics. (Rowley,” Embyronic Stem Cell Research Does Too Much Good to be Evil Say Janet Rowley). These abandoned embryos still have the power to make a marked contribution to our society even if they do not continue to mature into a viable fetus once their use is reassigned for the promotion of human health as a stem cell research source. Since these embryos were never actually stored in the body of a woman, these cannot be considered to be sources of “human stem cell”. That is because these are not embryonic stem cells in the essence of the word but rather, plunpotent stem cells, human cells that have been genetically manipulated to not create life but rather offer the life giving properties of human stem cells instead (Rowley,” Embyronic Stem Cell Research Does Too Much Good to be Evil Say Janet Rowley). In order to calm the fears of those opposed to the advancement of stem cell research based upon the premise that stem cell research is the first step towards human cloning, I propose that the government take on an increased role in the mandating of policies, financing, and over-seeing of stem cell research based upon the placenta and blastocyst properties while allowing private research only to a certain, rigorously reviewed and government observed standard. Thus, by limiting the role of the private sector in the development of stem cells, fears that human cloning will become the end result of stem cell research can be prevented. (FOXNews, “The Case for and Against Stem Cell Research”). This will be the only way that we can further advance the much needed and highly promising results of this study towards the curing of diseases such as cancer and diabetes. The opponents of stem cell research tell the public that the source of the stem cell, regardless of the manipulation of medical science, is still based upon a human cell that is capable of giving human life. Abandoned embryos are not the only source of stem cells. The fact of the matter is that there are now other therapeutic cloning methods by which, according to a breakthrough study by Harvard students in 2005, blank embryonic stem cells can be made to fuse with adult skin cells (White, “Pros and Cons of Embryonic Stem Cell Research”) . Their successful experiment proved that it would be possible to: ... fuse(s) "blank" embryonic stem cells with adult skin cells, rather than with fertilized embryos, to create all-purpose stem cells viable to treat diseases and disabilities. Thus making it possible for stem cell research to further advance into the future without having to worry about the accidental or intended effects of human cloning. There are also certain private sectors that oppose further research into stem cell research because of the lack of approved treatments that use stem cell research as the method of treatment in illnesses such as Parkinsons, spinal cord injuries, and other neurological illnesses where the treatment shows most promise. Such opponents make such claims as the treatment is unsafe, produce tumors, cause transplant rejection, and create the wrong kind of cells. (Moffit, Hollowell, et.al, “Federal Stem Cell Research: What Taxpayers Should Know”). Begging to disagree with these opponents, one might instead ask them if they have ever seen any kind of medical research that did not have a few or numerous bumps in the road towards the discovery of the perfect solution to the medical problem/s on hand. Stem cell research is no different from the discovery of the numerous vaccines that others claimed at the beginning to have adverse effects on human health. In conclusion, I would like to reiterate the need for government policy allowing the advancement of stem cell research based upon strict government oversight and policies meant to further the cause of science in the treatment of incurable illnesses. Stem cell research should not be thought of as Frankenstein technology. This not research meant to create a life for the taking of another. That is an idea of Hollywood fiction that saw itself portrayed in movies like The Island. Stem cell research must be allowed to progress in the future because the future medical and scientific breakthroughs depend upon the successful and proper manipulation of these stem cells for the benefit of mankind. Think of stem cell research as the final frontier of medical science. Once we make significant advances in the development of synthetic stem cells, we will have the power to help the invalid regain use of their legs, or those afflicted with Parkinsons, will finally see a cure that is not temporary. the future of humans as a society depends upon the successful research and development in stem cell use. Stem cells are no different from vaccines which everyone was once opposed to. Once vaccines were proven to be beneficial to the greater good, more and more solid support began to back the studies until it reached the point where it is today, accepted and unquestioned. Stem cell research may also achieve that status in the future. Works Cited Moffitt, Robert, Hollowell, Kelly, et.al. “Federal Stem Cell Research: What Taxpayers Should Know”. Healthcare. The Heritage Foundation. 24 May 2005. Web. 27 Nov. 2011. Rowley, Janet. “Embryonic Stem Cell Research Does Too Much Good to Be Evil, Says Janet Rowley”. Politics. USNews. 23 Mar. 2009. Web. 25 Nov. 2011. “The Cases For and Against Stem Cell Research”. Politics. FOXNews. 9 Aug. 2001. Web. 26 Nov. 2011. “Stem Cell Research- Pros and Cons”. Ethics in Research. experiments-resources.com. 2008. Web. 27 Nov. 2011. White, Deborah. “Pros and Cons of Embryonic Stem Cell Research”. US Liberal Politics. about.com. 2011. Web. 27 Nov. 2011 Read More