Stem Cells: The Future of Healing
Stem cell therapy has been around for nearly 30 years and has profound uses for the treatment or prevention of many diseases. HSCs circulate around the blood during fetal stage and reside in the bone marrow of adults and one of the most common stem cell therapies currently in use is for bone marrow transplants, but there are many other uses for stem cells which greatly impact the lives of millions of people for the better (Tiwari, 2016). There is no doubt that the discovery of this revolutionary therapy benefits one’s health and their quality of life, however, the debate arises when one considers where these stem cells come from, what rights embryonic donors have, and what that means for ethical medical practices. …show more content…
Those who oppose embryonic stem cell research believe that all embryos, even if they have not been implanted in a uterus, have a moral standing equal to all living persons, regardless of whether they are in a lab, clinical petri dish, or a woman’s body (Hyun, 2010). When these cells are acquired, a human embryo is essentially “killed” and many argue that this is a form of murder on a human life. Religious opposition to stem cell research claims that human embryonic life exists primarily for God’s purpose, not ours (Bevington, 2009). Debates have ensued over this controversial practice and have brought up ethical concerns associated comparing this practice to abortion as well as raising the question of when life starts. Proponents of stem cell research, however, argue that personhood is not yet developed in an embryo that is so young and that acquiring stem cells from what they consider a non-person organism is acceptable and benefits society as well as creating more opportunities for groundbreaking research. It is argued that an individual person is determined by their unique genome, which arises even in an embryo, and means that one should consider an embryo to be a person, not just a clump of cells (Hansen, 2001). However, the fact that in a transnuclear egg cell, the nuclear genome is combined …show more content…
Bush, who identifies with the pro-life movement. In 2001, President Bush eliminated NIH funding for future cell lines deriving from human embryos, but he did allow them to continue research with any pre-existing lines already acquired (Park, 2012). This caused some controversy due to the fact that the NIH did not have enough acceptable lines available for research. At first, the NIH believed that sixty cell lines would be suitable for funding, but by January 2009, they learned that only about twenty-two lines were actually suitable for research which caused a shortage of research opportunities (Lo & Parham, 2009). The remaining thirty-eight cell lines were eventually deemed to be contaminated or were not pluripotent and could not properly be utilized for research. Additionally, as these cell lines got older, they accumulated mutations that caused cancer in the cells and were not safe for human transplantation. Still, President Bush stuck with his personal views while still compromising with the scientific community, stating that since those sixty cell lines had already destroyed human embryos, their destruction may as well be used for something good in this
Stem cell therapy has been around for nearly 30 years and has profound uses for the treatment or prevention of many diseases. HSCs circulate around the blood during fetal stage and reside in the bone marrow of adults and one of the most common stem cell therapies currently in use is for bone marrow transplants, but there are many other uses for stem cells which greatly impact the lives of millions of people for the better (Tiwari, 2016). There is no doubt that the discovery of this revolutionary therapy benefits one’s health and their quality of life, however, the debate arises when one considers where these stem cells come from, what rights embryonic donors have, and what that means for ethical medical practices. …show more content…
Those who oppose embryonic stem cell research believe that all embryos, even if they have not been implanted in a uterus, have a moral standing equal to all living persons, regardless of whether they are in a lab, clinical petri dish, or a woman’s body (Hyun, 2010). When these cells are acquired, a human embryo is essentially “killed” and many argue that this is a form of murder on a human life. Religious opposition to stem cell research claims that human embryonic life exists primarily for God’s purpose, not ours (Bevington, 2009). Debates have ensued over this controversial practice and have brought up ethical concerns associated comparing this practice to abortion as well as raising the question of when life starts. Proponents of stem cell research, however, argue that personhood is not yet developed in an embryo that is so young and that acquiring stem cells from what they consider a non-person organism is acceptable and benefits society as well as creating more opportunities for groundbreaking research. It is argued that an individual person is determined by their unique genome, which arises even in an embryo, and means that one should consider an embryo to be a person, not just a clump of cells (Hansen, 2001). However, the fact that in a transnuclear egg cell, the nuclear genome is combined …show more content…
Bush, who identifies with the pro-life movement. In 2001, President Bush eliminated NIH funding for future cell lines deriving from human embryos, but he did allow them to continue research with any pre-existing lines already acquired (Park, 2012). This caused some controversy due to the fact that the NIH did not have enough acceptable lines available for research. At first, the NIH believed that sixty cell lines would be suitable for funding, but by January 2009, they learned that only about twenty-two lines were actually suitable for research which caused a shortage of research opportunities (Lo & Parham, 2009). The remaining thirty-eight cell lines were eventually deemed to be contaminated or were not pluripotent and could not properly be utilized for research. Additionally, as these cell lines got older, they accumulated mutations that caused cancer in the cells and were not safe for human transplantation. Still, President Bush stuck with his personal views while still compromising with the scientific community, stating that since those sixty cell lines had already destroyed human embryos, their destruction may as well be used for something good in this