However, only one type of stem cell promises to regenerate virtually any class of tissue. This is the highly controversial embryonic stem cell. Embryonic stem cell research is a conflicting issue due to the many different views on the legal and moral status of the early embryo. Unfortunately, there is a dark side to the embryonic
Harvey 1 Jeffrey Harvey Mrs. Commons Pre-AP English II 19 March 2014 Outline Stem Cells: Decades of Controversy Thesis: Cloning for research or reproduction is immoral and unnecessary. Adult stem cells have proven to be more effective and do not require the destruction of embryos. I.Human cloning has always been a wild science fiction dream, and a controversy for decades. A. Research cloning would be used mainly to reproduce embryos for their stem cells.
This article discusses many areas of research, but one that stands out is the area of iPS cells. These are artificially made stem cells that seem to be able to do the same job as real stem cells. If this works then there would be no
The debate over embryonic stem cells is that they are cells taken from a fetus, which is between the ages of four to five days old. Religious groups are against embryonic stem cells, catholicplanet.com says, "any method for obtaining embryonic stem cell that results in the death of the prenatal is gravely immoral, regardless of how the embryo's life begins" (Conte, 2004, p.1). Groups like this believe taking a life for science is immoral. Joe Tavares, a student at Kettle Moraine High School says, "I don't believe we should use stem cells from fetuses" (Personal Communication, April 6, 2011). Since these stem cells are taken from a living human being, this is essentially why many disagree with this process.
There is no scientific consensus as to when human life begins. It is much more a matter of philosophic opinion or religious belief. Human life is a continuum; sperm and eggs are also alive, and represent potential human beings, but virtually all sperm and eggs are wasted. In addition, two-thirds of human conceptions are spontaneously aborted by nature. <br>Another extremely disputable Pro-Life argument is that a fetus should have rights under the law.
Brain rejuvenation is a process where you make a replica brain of the one that a person already possesses. My issue with this has to do with the duplication problem. Simply put, the duplication problem states that someone with the ability or technology to duplicate brains would be able to make more than one brain and there could eventually be more than one Nick on earth. This kills the idea of individualism and the concept of there being only one unique Nick on earth, and it is also impossible because there cannot be more than one Nick. Brain rejuvenation is not ethical especially compared to the first medical procedure you performed on Julia North.
They also believe that genetic modification is almost like playing Gods role, which is seen as disrespectful to God. They also believe that there are some faults with the world and people because the world can’t be perfect as only heaven is perfect, so trying to play God role. They also believe that embryo research is just like abortion and because they don’t believe in abortion they will not allow genetic research! Some Muslims also believe that scientists that try to make life from the stem-cells is playing God which is something that is serious and can’t be forgiven for a Muslim to do it
It is the first time that any form of neurodegeneration has been completely halted, so it is a significant landmark. It shows that the process being targeted has serious potential. If this can be successfully developed, which is not guaranteed, the prize would be huge. In Parkinson's the alpha-synuclein protein goes wrong, in Alzheimer's it's amyloid and tau, in Huntington's it's the Huntington protein. But the errant protein is irrelevant here as the researchers are targeting the way a cell deals with any misfolded protein.
Many people do not realize the significance this research can have on a human and society. This research can make paralyzed humans walk again. If this research was legal then who knows how far it can advance many different medical fields. It argued that this research is immoral because a fetus must be used, but this topic falls on all the same lines as abortion. The fetuses that come out of abortion can even be used in stem cell research.
This major debate stems from the opinion on whether or not it is morally sound to extract stem cells from embryos. Dr. Robert P. George of Princeton University and Dr. Patrick Lee of Franciscan University state in the EMBO Reports that the only difference in human life is “in degree of maturation, not in kind, between any of the stages from embryo, to fetus, infant, and so on” (George and Lee 1). Many people believe that even in the embryonic stage, there is life, and this theory can be used to prove that life indeed does begin at the embryonic stage. George and Lee write that: If, as we believe, human embryos are human beings who deserve the same basic respect we accord to human beings at later developmental stages, then research that involves deliberately dismembering embryonic humans in order to use their cells for the benefit of others is inherently wrong. Just as harvesting the organs of a living child for the benefit of others is immoral and illegal, so ‘disaggregating’ embryonic human beings should also be immoral and should be illegal—of course governments should therefore not fund such procedures.