|stem cell research
Author: shrimp cake PM
this is my approach to stem cell research and why it is not only morally bankrupt, but also counter-productive and dangerous.Rated: Fiction K+ - English - Words: 895 - Reviews: 2 - Published: 08-09-09 - Status: Complete - id: 2707382
|A+ A- Full 3/4 1/2 Expand Tighten|
The issue of stem cell research has been, in recent months, a hot topic. The Obama administration has ignored the ethical qualms of many by passing a bill that would lift the ban on federal funding for stem-cell research, and subsequently use taxpayer dollars to fund it. The government funding is morally unjustified and medically unsafe. Embryonic stem cells are thae most dangerous stem cells, not only to the recipient, but also to the embryos that are sacrificed to provide for more of the same failed methods. I've noticed that most of the people supporting this fully are either (a) liberal politicians who probably have never had a job in the medical feild, or (b) random "progressive" people in coffee houses, neither of which actually have any idea of what they're talking about... I have scientific evidence so I think it;s pretty sound, but I'm always open to debate.
Allowing scientists to have a blank check for their research and to experiment without limit or supervision would create a disaster worthy of a sci-fi channel movie. Aside from unethical experimentation with human embryos, the measures taken to collect embryos are disturbing as well. The women who volunteer to donate eggs are actually paid to do so- up to tens of thousands of dollars each time. Researchers often target young, college aged girls in need of the money. The donor usually agrees and is given hormone drugs to induce ovarian hyperstimulation, producing up to one hundred eggs at a time, which are removed surgically. Many of the drugs used for this have not been approved by the FDA and can cause ovarian cysts, rupturing ovaries, pelvic pain, fertility problems, cancer of the ovaries, stroke, and even death. (DeSolenni). The scientist and doctors involved in this research have an undeniably hypocritical standpoint. They tug on the public's heartstrings, telling them how this research can help so many. They claim they are only interested in ending people's pain and saving lives, yet they will destroy a potential human and put well-intentioned women through meaningless pain. This duplicity calls into question the ethical compass of the ones who are supposed to be helping the people of the world.
However, the argument against embryonic stem cell research is not purely a matter of ethics. There are medical and safety concerns as well. According to Dr. David Prentice, embryonic stem cells have almost nothing to offer when it comes to safely and effectively curing diseases. Their supposed advantage of unlimited growth becomes harmful when they are transplanted into an experimental animal patient. The stem cells continue to grow out of control, eventually forming tumors or cancer.(Prentice) Prentice also recounts failed attempts at curing mice with stem cells. In mice treated for Parkinson's disease, twenty percent were killed by tumors created by embryonic stem cells. In mice treated for diabetes the embryonic stem cells did not form new pancreatic tissue. Instead, they formed tumors. Obviously, all the hype surrounding this type of stem cell is undeserved. Embryonic stem cells are dangerous, risky, and counterproductive when compared to the other types of stem cells.
Unlike the harvesting of embryonic stem cells, the way of obtaining adult or chord blood stem cells does no harm to the individual from which they are obtained. The success of using adult stem cells has been overwhelming. In human patients, the use of these cells has successfully treated multiple sclerosis, sickle-cell anemia, lupus, heart damage, cartilage damage, and Parkinson's disease. They have also been used to grow new corneas for blind patients, grow new blood vessels for patients with gangrene, and also to restore movement to those with spinal cord injuries.( Prentice) another option not being explored enough is stem cells from cord blood. Cord blood comes from the umbilical cord of a baby at birth and is by far the richest source of stem cells. A patient's own cord blood can be saved and used when the patient is older. There is always an exact DNA match, so there is no worry about the body rejecting it. (Sears). The need for embryonic stem cells is unnecessary, and the growing outcry for it is damaging not only to the general public, but also to the unborn children and the women who wish to donate their eggs.
The public has a constant demand for embryonic stem cells without any knowledge of the disadvantages that come with using them. One has to wonder why these stem cells are being heralded as a silver bullet for all diseases and the success of adult stem cells is being ignored. The argument for more of the same failed experiments to make embryonic stem cells work as a cure for any disease is wasting human life. Those in favor of this research claim that morals are outdated and have no place in the world of science. In reality, there is no field, scientific or not, where it is permissible to leave morals behind.
DeSolenni, Pia. Testimony to Massachusetts State Legislature's joint Committee, February 6, 2005. .
Prentice, David A. "The Real Promise of Stem Cell Research" August 25, 2004. and Center for Bioethics and Culture Network. Leadership U. 1995-2009 .
Sears, Robert M.D. " A Serious Option for Pregnant Parents to Consider" CBR Systems 1995-2009 .com/dr_