Importance of Utilizing it in Medical Development - Essay Example

Stem Cell Debate Stem Cell Debate Embryonic stem cell research is a sensitive and highly debated topic. There are many advantages from researching this technology since it will beneficial to many people. In this essay, I will explain embryonic stem cells concept, and importance of utilizing it in medical development. Moreover, I will show the flaws in the arguments of those opposing use of stem cell. The county will fall behind that are utilizing this development if there is no logical conclusion to this important issue. The human body has more than 200 different types of cells. Embryonic stem cells- a cluster of cells derive all these types of cells. These exceptional cells originate from blastocyst inner cell mass that is a young embryo about five or four years old (Holland et all, 2001). These cells are pluripotent making them unique. Thus, it is easy to characterize these cells differently into any o f the germ layers existing in the body of humans like mesoderm, ectoderm, and endoderm. The endoderm comprises of lungs, intestines, and stomach. The mesoderm is mostly the bone, muscle, and blood. This leaves ectoderm with nervous system and the skin. These cells can repair any human body part, making the embryonic stem cells special. Another element of these cells is that they are able, in any circumstances, to replicate themselves for an indefinite period. The fact these cells can produce themselves in unlimited numbers, and have characteristics of becoming any types of 220 cells, it easy to use in medicine for medical research and regenerative therapy (Holland et all, 2001). Damaged or lost tissues due to injury or disease are easy to for replacement or repair by new tissues developed from administered embryonic cells. Once there is administration of stem cells into the patient body, they move to the damaged place, multiply and engraft, replace the destroyed cells, and restore the functions of the body in the area. Embryonic stem cells can treat diseases such as genetic diseases, juvenile diabetes, blindness, spinal cord injuries and cancer. The technology can also deal with different conditions. The technology can treat major diseases; therefore, it is necessary to use it. What is the ethical challenge about using and harvesting stem cells? The major controversial issue of this research is the state of human embryo. The embryo dies when its inner cell mass is taken. This is because inner mass cell is responsible for formation of the three human body germ layers. Without these cells, the embryo will not develop. People opposing the use of these unique cells, research and harvesting are ‘pro-life (Holland et all, 2001). Most of them represent religious outfit and believe that a five-day embryo has life and soul, thus, its harvesting is an act of murder. Pro-lifers further believe that researching these stems violates and instrumentalizes life sanctity. They argue that embryo is a possible human being. Human life, according to pro-lifers begins during egg fertilization. This is their argument major flaw. According science, an embryo is not yet a human until it begins doing functions of humans. During harvest, it is only cell clusters not different from any human body cells. It is true that the embryo is a possible human, but scientifically the embryo is not yet human. Harris Sam, a famous philosopher, gives a compelling argument about research in embryonic cell in his article “The case against faith” (Holland et all, 2001) he mentions how former president Bush used his foremost veto to end the research funding. The president believed that life of human begins at conception. Sam indicates that the former head of state believes that every 3-day-old embryo in humans has the soul. Every soul interest, such as, a little girls soul with more than 75 percent of burns on her body, cannot trump another soul interest, even though the soul lives in a Petri dish. In this case, religious dogmatism hinders genuine compassion and wisdom. Harris compares the harvesting of only 150 cells in the embryo and the thousands of cells in a fly’s brain. In a speech at Salk Institute of Biological Studies, Harris criticizes argument by the pro-life on the issue of the embryo human potentiality. He views that every cell in the human body when given the right manipulations, any cell with nucleus is a possible human being. Anytime a person scratches his or her nose, he or she commits holocaust of a possible human being. People need to think what happens to a soul incase the embryo splits making identical twins. This is on the argument of an embryo having a soul (Holland et all, 2001). Does this case show that it is possible for a soul to split into two? Can the embryo merge back to create a chimera? What will happen to the other soul? Sam views that this soul arithmetic is nonsensical. The arguments are illogical and prolong people’s misery in suffering from degenerating and debilitating diseases. He argues that religious meta-physics obscures people’s moral intuitions. This blindness in the name of religious faith is highly subscribed in the societies. According to Holland et all, (2001), almost everyone against stem cell research are religious people abiding by their faith. They repeat the illogical arguments coinciding with their religion and beliefs. It is shocking that the needs of a handful of cells from undeveloped embryo overshadow the needs of a grown, living human being who has no choice. How can a sensible or moral person make such conclusions? People need to ask themselves the most difficult problems, whether to destroy an embryo not yet performing human functions or leaving millions of people to suffer because of religious beliefs. United State will stay behind other nations in the field of medicine since other nations see past the typical beliefs and realize the significance of this medical advancement. Eventually, Americans will have to travel to nations to have processes involving the use of stem cells (Holland et all, 2001). Why should people look for outdated treatment in the United States when they can get more efficient and promising medical processes in other countries? There is need to highlight the pros on the individual groups, that is, the adult stem cells, embryonic stem cells, and the induced pluripotent stem cells. In adult stem cells, there are possibilities of reprogramming and Trans differentiation of these cells, even though not well- studied. The probability of its rejection in transplant is low and there are several successes in different clinical use. Concerning embryonic stem cells, it can grow and maintain for over a year in culture. There is the establishment of rules for management in culture. ESCs are pluripotent cell, which can grow most types of cells (Holland et all, 2001). By researching ESCs, there can be a lot of learning about development process. In induced pluripotent stem cells, it can use many donor somatic cells. It is possible to avoid histocompatibility issues with recipients or donor transplants. The research is useful in development studies and the development of drugs. Information gained from the process of reprogramming is easy to transfer for in vivo therapies for diseased or damaged cells reprogramming. Research on stem cells; show that they have great abilities of regenerating in all body areas. Thus, repairing diseased or damaged tissues and curing degenerative illness like Alzheimer (Holland et all, 2001). Stem cells hold the success to reversing ageing effects and prolonging people’s lives. There are many treatments from the research that help to reduce the ageing process and it can cure ageing altogether. This marvelous research is a breakthrough in the field of medicine. People should not let this advancement go to waste. In contrast to the pro-life, possible it is the wish of God that such research is possible. The support of stem cells revolves around neural stem cells, cord blood stem cells, and adult stem cells. Using and researching stem cells leads to advancements in medical and will help to live healthier and longer lives. Infinite abilities to cure disease are crucial in stem cell research. They can change into any cell type in an adult body. Embryonic stem cells have low incidence rejection. For treatment, they are the youngest cells available. Earlier debate on stem cells gave the research some pros. This was before scientist began using some ethical approach to the research like IP’s (Holland et all, 2001). They include the advantages of stem cell having a huge outcome overshadowing ethical issues. This is mainly on cost benefit. Another thought was that is someone wants to have an abortion, it would be better to make use of it than go into destruction. Stems cells from adults are not interesting since they do not have same characteristics as fetus stem cells. The research gives more insight on body basics. There are studies showing that the person’s own stem decreases rejection chances. The use of stem cell research lowers the dependencies on donor organs and makes auto transplantation tissues abundant (Holland et all, 2001). It is possible to save them in cyrobanks in case of any future use. Stem cell research is important in reducing risks brought by direct testing of stem cell treatment process on the patient. However, it is important to note that the use of stem cells of the embryo in research requires the destruction of blastocysts made from fertilized human eggs in the laboratory. For the pro-life, blastocyst represents human life and destroying it is immoral and unacceptable. This is the only controversial issue in the way of stem cell research in America. For the supporters of the research, it is easy to admit such ethical challenges, however scientific research give a varying opinion (Holland et all, 2001). Despite these varying groups, the advantages and benefits of the topic should determine the course of action. People need to put aside their personal and group beliefs and focus on the challenges facing humans. Challenge goes to the funding of the research by the federal government. Without funding, it is difficult for medical institution to continue researching embryonic stem cells. Nearly all elected officials are religious, but not all of them deny the research (Holland et all, 2001). Conservative politicians do not support the research, while liberal politicians favor the research. For instance, former president Bush cut the funding o stem cell research, but when president Obama took over, he resumed the funding. Nonetheless, in August 2009, there was declaration that funding for the stem cell research was off the limit by a federal judge. This was largely due to the violation of the 1996 Wicker amendment by president Obama. The amendment prohibits funding where processes involve creation, destruction, discarding or purposely subjecting an embryo to death or injury. Rabb Harriet, a department of human and health service counsel, made determinations that embryonic stem cells of humans are not similar to embryos, thus immune to cuts of federal funding. According to a federal court, the deciding problem is whether there was destruction of an embryo during the process. After many years’ controversy and debate with ESCs, there have been views of ethical issues and rapid redevelopment path is open. Ethical issues will exist, but such issues normally arise when bringing new development out of the laboratories to clinical use and research. Varying perceptions of morality in early embryo are still and will be important, however, they do not seem a major obstacle. People must be optimistic that the long-awaited and earlier payoffs of ESC development may happen. Separation of state and church is a significant ideology in United States. Amendment number one states that the congress cannot make laws respecting a religious establishment or prohibiting its freedom. This means that religious values and religion must remain separate from government and politics. Debate on embryonic stem cell research is a classical example why the constitution has this concept. Politicians need to honor the constitution and make logical conclusions to fund the research making sure many citizens get quality treatment. The arguments in the paper clearly show that the pros are stronger than the cons. The pros utilize scientific approach and evidence whereas the cons think of ethical and religious issues. United States continue to lag behind other nations in the field of medicine yet there is a lot of potential. References Holland, S & Lebacqz, K, & Zoloth, L. (2001). The Human embryonic stem cell debate: Science, Ethics, and Public Policy. Michigan: MIT Press Read More