Stem cell ethical dilemma Essays

Stem cell ethical dilemma Essays Stem cell ethical dilemma Essay Stem cell ethical dilemma Essay Essay Topic: Emma Rebuttal The employment of cloning and human embryonic stem cells is of the most significant innovations in medicine (Wobus and Boheler, 2005).   The discovery of the ability to manipulate embryonic stem cells has created the fields of regenerative medicine and cellular therapy, which aim to treat debilitating and/or fatal conditions that were earlier acknowledged to be incurable (Taupin, 1996).   Unfortunately, this breakthrough has brought forth issues regarding the value of life.   Technically, cloning of embryonic stem cells involve collection of embryos that are ethically regarded at the earliest stages of human life (Brown, 2006).   Ethical arguments have arisen, questioning whether it is right to improve life by destroying another human life in the form of an embryo.   This paper will describe the technique of therapeutic cloning as well as enumerate ethical arguments that renounce the use of the cloning technology and the use of spare embryos for biom edical research and therapeutics.One major ethical issue regarding the use of â€Å"spare† embryos is the lack of respect for the embryo.   The concern is associated to the possible future demand for embryos once this cellular technology is determined to be successfully therapeutic.   Embryos might later be treated as therapeutic materials or commodities instead of living beings at their initial stages.   There is also a risk for a devaluation of embryos, wherein the loss of human life may later in time be tolerated instead of prevented (Bobrow, 2005).   In addition, the acceptance of destruction of embryos may serve as a precedent for implementation of other controversial biomedical acts such as creation of embryo â€Å"factories†, cloned babies and mass production of â€Å"spare parts† from fetuses (Hug, 2005, 2006).   There is claim for the scientific community that employment of spare embryos may not automatically mean any disrespect towards embryo s because the destruction of embryos in order to collect stem cells results in the provision of new therapeutics for specific medical disorders.   Certain scientists have actually claimed that it is more immoral to destroy embryos during in vitro fertilization because those embryos are not implanted or donated for further use but are actually discarded, unlike embryos that are destroyed for stem cell research which are cautiously propagated and ultimately designed to replace defective tissues and cells for medical therapeutics.   Such rebuttal from the scientific community is not good enough because they actually approach the issue of choosing between the lesser evil option.Another major issue that is being publicly scrutinized is whether the creation of embryos for research purposes is morally worse than using â€Å"spare† embryos from IVF cases for experiments.   Such issue reflects the intention of each act, and the idea of using leftover embryos from in vitro fertil ization protocols is much more tolerable to society than the simple creation of research-oriented embryos because there is less guilt involved in using extra or spare embryos from IVF cases than creating embryos that could have been another human being but their chance to live has been taken away.   The scientific community has tried to explain that production and destruction of spare embryos is a normal physiological event during pregnancy, which enables a sibling embryo to complete the entire gestational range (Borge and Evers, 2003).   They claim that this kind of sacrifice is also necessary to promote life for the sibling embryo.The controversy regarding the ethical issues of embryonic stem cell research impacts the entire human population.   Each individual in the society has a susceptibility to contract a disease that might possibly need the use of stem cells that can replace defective ones in the body.   We have heard of a number of public figures that have suffered f rom diseases that could have been resolved through the use of embryonic stem cells.   The late former President Ronal Reagan suffered from Alzheimer’s disease and the late actor Christopher Reeve experienced spinal cord injury.   Both of these individuals are prime examples of people who could have benefited from the results of embryonic stem cell research.   Stem cells may be cultured and manipulated to differentiate into specific types of cells such as astrocytes or brain cells for Alzheimer’s patients, and neural cells for patients with spinal cord injury (Snow, 2003).   However, nothing has been done since 2001 because the federal government has put a hold on any research activities that involves stem cell manipulation and experimentation.A solution to current debate on the ethical issues associated with embryonic stem cell research is the comprehensive explanation of the definition of embryonic stem cells.   It is imperative that the non-scientific publi c understand the principles and techniques behind the generation of embryonic stem cells.   It is also important that the public know that harvesting embryonic stem cells is not much different from abortion.   It is also essential to understand that the body of a human female biologically destroys or discards hundred of eggs cells through the natural course.   The scientific group, in turn, should be patient enough to explain the area of embryonic stem cell research.   I think that the ethical debate on the use of embryonic stem cells for research originates mainly from the miscommunication, misunderstanding and misrepresentation of the concept of embryonic stem cells.   In addition, the public only relies on the information that is released by senators and stem cell research activists, who have actually distorted the concept of stem cell research.   Should the scientific world be humble enough to example the basics of stem cell research, including the misnomers and bene fits of the research, the ethical debate on this issue would decrease and might even vanish.The debate on the ethical issues of stem cell research is just one of several topics that have been under intense scrutiny by the public eye.   Other issues of human concern include the employment of genetically modified organisms (GMO), organic foods, genetic engineering and biotechnology.   It should be known that these technological innovations were basically created to improve the quality of life and not to destroy existing life forms.   Everything that interacts with human beings has its benefits and disadvantages, yet these biomedical breakthroughs are the usual focus of attention of the public.   However, if we weigh the benefits and risks of stem cell research, we will realize that the benefits of stem cell research far outweighs the disadvantages that may result from the use of this technology.   We should always remember that decades ago, so many lives were lost from bacte rial infection because antibiotics were not discovered yet.   Today, antibiotics are a common treatment regime for bacterial infections, which is a huge benefit to human health, but it also has resulting in the creation of drug-resistant strains of bacteria.   The same setting may also be observed in terms of stem cell research, but we should intelligently consider both sides of the technology.After describing the pros and cons of two major ethical issues, I personally believe that the utilization of cloning techniques is unacceptable.   I think that the ethical questions raised against the technique shows that there is an urgent need to review and prevent the employment of such revolutionary technology, as well as promote the importance of human life and respect.   More effort should be given by both scientific and legislative communities to understand and disseminate any human rights that are violated by this technology, so that they would give more respect to life as all the rest of the society has shown over the last centuries.