Embryonic Stem Cell Research

Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research

Embryonic stem cell research is a highly controversial topic in today's society, this kind of stem cell commits to regenerate any type of tissue. Unfortunately, Embryonic Stem Cell Research has a dark side. To obtain these cells will kill the embryo automatically. In other words, the acquirement of the Human Embryonic Stem Cell includes performing an abortion. To obtain these cells, it would kill the embryo. This has created controversy since abortion is such a divisive topic. Politicians are uneasy to take sides. The Human Embryonic Stem Cell issue is today's Pandora's Box due to all the unwittingly chaos that it can bring to our lives. By having this new option available in the medical world, everyone involved with this conflict-ridden topic must make a difficult ethical decision: whether or not saving existing lives and extend life expectancy for all is worth the termination of potential future lives. As in every other controversial topic, there are two sides to the Human Embryonic Stem Cell argument. One side is in favor of their use, and the other side is against it. However, another important part of the argument is the ethical concerns that it brings. Though it is high, the price of Human Embryonic Stem Cells is well worth the lives they can save.

In order to have an opinion on the use of embryonic stem cells, the world has to understand what they are and the impact they can have in people's lives. According to the Guidelines for Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research report, Human embryonic stem cells (hES cells) are primitive (undifferentiated) cells that can self-renew or differentiate into most or all cell types found in the adult human body (Edwards, 2004; Gardner, 2004). In other words, the undifferentiated cells have no true function yet, moreover, the genes that embryonic cells have, could become other types of cells. Scientists and researchers believe that Human Embryonic Stem Cells hold potential cures for numerous diseases in today's society, including multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, diabetes, Lou Gehrig's disease, Hodgkin's disease, hundreds of immune system and genetic disorders, spinal cord injuries, heart disease and just about every type of cancer. In today's world there's over a million Americans who suffer from deadly diseases, not only adults but innocent children that deserve to live a healthy life. These deadly diseases can be cured or treated in a more effective way than they are treated now with the help of the human embryonic stem cells. According to the Poll on "American views on stem cell research in the wake of the death of Ronald Reagan" which was prepared for results of America, shows that a sum of 73% highly supports and somewhat support this controversial process (Results of America, 2004). Even though this topic has brought continuous political attacks and very limited funding, Human Embryonic Stem cell research has made considerable contribution to the battle against disabilities and incurable diseases. A great example of success by using human embryonic stem cells was made by Dr. Hans Keirstead in the Roman Laboratory at UC Irvine; he restored myelin insulation around damaged nerves, returning motion to partially paralyzed rats. (Journal of Neuroscience, 2005) .

After reviewing the facts of human embryonic stem cells, we can make a more accurate conclusion that the use of these valuable cells will eventually cure diseases.

The moral argument in this case is that in order to get embryonic stem cells, an abortion is performed. On the other hand abortion is legal in some states in the United States, they are legal in a woman's first two trimesters without a motive (Supreme Court, 2006), after they perform the abortion they don't save the embryo or fetus, they just throw it away; those are embryos that could save many people's lives, people who are great contributors to the society but are ill.

On August 2001, President George W. Bush stated: "As a result of private research, more than 60 genetically diverse stem cell lines already exist" I have concluded that we should allow federal funds to be used for research on these existing stem cell lines " where the life and death decision has already been made", This allows us to explore the promise and potential of stem cell research" without crossing a fundamental moral line by providing taxpayer funding that would sanction or encourage further destruction of human embryos that have at least the potential for life." (The White House, 2001)

Six years later, the United States House of Representatives, with its vote on the embryonic stem cell bill, chose to discard existing protections on human life (The White House, 2007). People might wonder why this looks unfair to both sides of the argument, and puts scientific research and ethical principle into conflict, rather than making a balanced decision that advances scientific and medical frontiers without violating any type of moral principles. According to the White House press release in June, 2007, George W. Bush explains his conviction that stem cell science can progress in ethical ways, without harming life. The president stated: "If this