The question that many scientists who are involved in embryonic stem cell research are facing is, which is more valuable? The life of a human suffering from a potentially deadly disease, or the life of human at one week of growth? Let first define what an embryonic stem cell is. Embryonic stem cells, they are resulting from “blastocyst stage embryos that develop in culture and are capable to indefinite expansion in vitro”. Now that you know the definition of embryonic stem cells, let look at why doing this research is an issue. Because many argue that embryonic stem cell research hold promise of producing cures for many diseases, nevertheless, doing this will cost a loss of a life. Thus, should perform …show more content…
There is no evidence that embryos have lived or not, so they should not be destroyed. Embryonic stem cell research takes away the chance of an embryo to become a human being. The utilization of embryonic stem cells had not so far been shown to be successful. For those who are for embryonic stem cell research, argue that there is a flaw in saying that embryonic stem cell are good candidates for organ transplantation because sometimes organ transplantation reject the recipients. The ultimate argument that those who oppose embryonic stem cell research are saying that they do not want embryo to be demolished because it is a life of a …show more content…
However, it is impressive even with little search there some evidence that shows how promising these researches is. Seeing how progressive this research is, this only should give hope to people that we would be able to cure more diseases that we couldn’t before. And if new diseases are arise, we can cure them because we will now have the understanding of how cell function. Therefore, a defense mechanism to prevent them is there already. Reason prevention is better than a