What if I told you that researchers could cure diseases like Diabetes, heart disease, Alzheimers or Parkinsons? The chances of you being on board with ending these horrible diseases that millions of people suffer from each year is extremely high. The cures of these diseases are the potential result of embryonic stem cell research. The heated battle over stem cell research is currently a hot button topic along side abortion, gay marriage, and illegal immigration. As ardently as each side defends their stance on a controversial issue, an opposing side fights with equal diligence for the belief they feel should be valued. Much interest and effort has focused on the therapeutic potential of stem cell technology to treat presently intractable diseases. However, this scientific promise has been accompanied by important issues, including ethical hurdles, political policies and dilemmas concerning cell source selection from an embryo. While supporters of stem cells claim the potential they can cure everything from blindness to paralysis to curing diseases, those against stem cell science liken the procedure used by scientists to murder. It is my intention to bring to light the positive benefits of stem cell research as well as counter the claims used by many pro-life groups and governmental obstacles.
Stem cells are cells that have the potential to form into many different cells in the human body. In essence, these cells are the building blocks within the human body to become an eye, an arm, or even the nervous system.
“If a damaged tissue or organ cannot repair itself, stem cells could be obtained from these different stem cell sources [organs and tissues from individuals after birth; gametes; tissues and organs from aborted fetuses; inner cell mass of early embryos]. Scientists could then culture these stem cell by creating conditions that enable them to replicate many times in a petri dish without differentiating, Such a population of proliferating stem cells originating from a single parent group of stem cells is a stem cell line. Stem cells from this stem cell line could then be coaxed to differentiate into the desired cell type, and be transferred into the patient so that they can repair the damaged tissue or organ” (Devolder 6).
While few can debate the potential miracle cure aspect that seems to be wrapped within stem cell research, the method for obtaining such cells has become the topic for debate.
The use of embryonic stem cells has been highly-publicized and is controversial. Most of the current methods used to harvest embryonic stem cells destroy the embryo. The controversy is that the best stem cells are retrieved from embryos that are then destroyed in the extraction process. Many oppose embryonic stem cell research because it kills a living human embryo in the process, which Pro Life advocates see as murder. There is an unending conflict between those who see as the potential to save lives, and those who see it as murder. There are two main positions on embryonic stem cell research. The main reason the topic is controversial is because Pro life advocates, Christians, and many republicans see the destruction of the human embryo as murder or the ending of a potential human life. Critics argue that this destruction of human life is not worth the benefits because life is destroyed to potentially save another. The argument comes down to the same one as abortion, but at an even smaller scale.
