Stem Cell Research - Essay Example

Due Since man first began understanding the sciences and discovering the biochemistry of the human body, research has been dedicated to improving the human health condition. Today we live in a time when medicine is making incredible discoveries and one of those major discoveries, which could, in some cases, revolutionize how we treat conditions, diseases, and serious injuries. The discovery capable of doing so much is stem-cells. Despite all of the positive indications that stem-cell research may, likely, lead to, the topic remains one of unending debate and immense controversy. Stem-cell research may change lives, save lives, and ultimately, the positives, by far, outweigh the negatives. However, it is the controversies surrounding the concept that contribute to people not being able to see the greater potentials and are in need of the dispelling of certain misconceptions. In order to understand stem-cell research it is important to look to the core of the issue, the stem-cells themselves. What are stem cells and what do they do? Essentially, stem-cells are shape-shifters. They are a specific type of cell that are free of mutation and have never differentiated into any particular cells in the body, for example, brain cells, heart cells, and liver cells. Bone Marrow transplants are, in effect, stem-cell therapies and an example of “regenerative medicine.” When these raw cells are introduced to existing brain cells the stem-cells become that kind of cell.(Mayo Clinic Staff, 2010) Stem-cells can be found, within adults and children, in bone marrow, umbilical cords, amniotic fluid, and, of course, the most controversial of sources, embryonic tissue. Scientists continue to, optimistically, pursue current research making the best use of the available research potentials to continue to make stem-cell therapy the break-through they hope it to be. There are a lot of supporters of regenerative medicine, including embryonic stem-cell research, there are so many possibilities where the research can be applied. It might benefit people with degenerative diseases, like Parkinson’s and lead to a better understanding of cancer. The research may prove to help those with traumatic injuries, for example spinal damage that has led to paralysis. Stem cell therapies could be able to do more than just treat the sick and injured. Physicians would no longer have to rely on crude, synthetic medical devices and dangerous, invasive, procedures; they could actually cure them.(Weiss, 2012) However, it is not just healing potential that the research may benefit. It will help the health sciences to understand how some diseases develop in the first place. The research can be used to test the safety and effectiveness of new medications being suggested for human use. It has so much to offer, yet if this area of research is not ever explored to its fullest then these amazing, life-saving gains may be postponed, or never be realized at all. Granted, not everyone agrees with the beneficial effects of stem-cell research. Those in opposition, often, make the ultimate argument, “Do the ends justify the means?” They imply that too many ethical and moral aspects are placed in question when it comes to stem-cell research, particularly, embryonic stem-cell research. Opponents claim that it raises too many issues, like, when does human life begin? Is this act technically a sacrifice in the name of science?(Enke, 2012) As stated previously, stem-cells can be obtained from other sources other than embryonic tissue. However, embryonic stem-cells contain the best, purest supply. There are two ways that embryonic stem-cells can be acquired. The first, are from aborted embryos, which in the medical environment are referred to as, “products of conception,” and, the second, is the donated frozen embryos not used in an invetro-fertilization procedure. Opposition believes that this is unethical and could, possibly, lead to women being inadvertently encouraged to have more abortions. The idea that they can donate the embryo after the procedure may make them more comfortable with the decision, and, therefore, abortion procedure statistics would increase. They, also, fear that some women may become pregnant for the sole purpose of donating the embryos they conceive, essentially, in order to provide more stem-cells to research upon. No disrespect intended, but much of the opposition’s viewpoint and stance on the argument is rather morally one-sided, definitely short-sighted, ethically oppressive, and seem to rely heavily on “what ifs,” with no practical proof of the negative side effects that they are proclaiming. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. If you are a patient who is opposed to stem-cell research and/or any sort of regenerative therapy, then it is unlikely that you would ever be forced to participate in the practice. Often, morality and ethical questions end in unwinnable stale-mates, primarily, because the subjects are not exactly universal and can vary from person to person. The opposition assumes that to do research on embryonic tissue is disrespectful and disregards the rights and liberties of the “unborn life.” That said, when an abortion is performed the embryo is destroyed and whatever may be retrieved is then, under normal circumstances, considered the same kind of biological waste as used syringes and specimen containers. They are, in fact, considered to be garbage. How can using the non-living tissues to make medical discoveries that could change the world is less respectful than throwing them in the trash. The same is true of the frozen embryos, when no longer needed or wanted they are discarded. The oppositions last proposed side-effect involves the attribution of stem-cell research to increasing abortions and forcing the rise. That has never been the nature of the research. Stem-cells like any other human medical donation is given, not taken, not bought or sold, like donating one’s body to science after death or donating organs to those who need them. Today, researchers continue to study stem-cells. They are recently discovered that there may be greater potential in the versatility of adult stem-cells, which previously had not been known. There is the possibility that with the use of adult stem-cells and stem-cell-like cells they may be able to learn a great deal. There may come a point in the research where they need for embryonic stem-cells is far less or eliminated completely. It is important not to confuse the issue of stem-cell research and the controversy of embryonic stem-cells. The two are often treated as inseparable. That is not the case, it is just a portion of the larger issue. Every person should take a walk through a hospital one day. Look at all the patients. You will see the injured, the sick, the dying. The numbers of those needing medical treatment fill the overcrowded waiting room. With stem-cell research those number needing extended hospitalization, dangerous surgeries, and, what would then be archaic, procedures would diminish dramatically. That is the kind of world where a lot of people might choose to live. A world with less sickness, less disease, less pain, less suffering, less fear of all these things, and less unnecessary loss. That is a world worth striving to make a reality and supporting stem-cell research may be an essential part of achieving its creation. References Enke, R. C. (2012). American academy of physical medicine and rehabilitation: Opposition to human embryonic stem cell research. Retrieved from http://www.aapmr.org/members/residents/newsletter/Pages/archives/Opposition-to-Human-Embryonic-Stem-Cell-Research.aspx Mayo Clinic Staff. (2010, October 16). Stem cells: What they are and what they do. Retrieved from http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/stem-cells/CA00081/NSECTIONGROUP=2 Weiss, R. (2012). The stem cell divide. National Geographic, 1-9. Retrieved from http://science.nationalgeographic.com/science/health-and-human-body/human-body/stem-cell-divide/ Read More