So I've been working on a policy proposal paper for one of my courses, and I have finished the first section and thought I would share with you fine folks. It is a bit of a read, but it is a fascinating topic to be sure.
To begin, what exactly does embryonic stem cell research entail?
[spoiler] My policy proposal is the repeal the section of the 2009 Omnibus Appropriations Act which bans federal funding for embryonic stem cell research in which the embryo is destroyed, discarded, or knowingly subjected to risk of injury or death.
Embryonic stem cells are collected from the inner mass of a blastocyst, which for humans occur 3 to 5 days post fertilization and consist of 50 to 150 cells. These stem cells are pluripotent, which means they can become any of the cells in our body. This unique property of embryonic stem cells, as opposed to the more limited and difficult to obtain adult stem cells, has the possibility to achieve breakthroughs in stem cell based therapies and biomedical research. [/spoiler]
So now that we have a basic knowledge of what embryonic stem cells are, what is the purpose of pursuing this topic?
[spoiler] Because of the nature of embryonic stem cells, they could have the ability to remedy a multitude of currently incurable diseases and injuries, such as Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, and other neurological disorders, diabetes, organ damage, and spinal cord injuries. In the future stem cells could even be used to grow entirely new organs to be implanted in patients who require them.
They also provide an opportunity for biomedical research. Observing how stem cells specialize into specific bodily cells could provide a better understanding of early human development and how tissues are maintained throughout life. Additionally, they can be used to study the effects of diseases, develop new drugs, and test drugs for harmful side effects, which would eliminate the need to expose people to possibly damaging experimental drugs. While the application of embryonic stem cells remain predominately experimental, they have been used to repair damaged cells from a heart attack victim and to repair vision in a patient who was legally blind.[/spoiler]
Though the possible benefits of stem cell research are awe-inspiring, the topic goes hand-in-hand with controversy and issue rhetoric.
[spoiler] The difficult aspect of my proposal is to convince an audience that the benefits of stem cell research outweigh the costs. Most forms of embryonic stem cell research destroy the blastocyst when the inner stem cells are harvested, negating the ability for continued development and eventual creation of a new life.
This, unsurprisingly, leads to heavy resistance, both morally and ethically, to the subject of government funded stem cell research. Admittedly, it challenges my own ethical standard as well because it is removing the possibility of the blastocyst to become a developed human being. My challenge is to convince my audience of the benefits the research could provide for people who are already alive today. Blastocysts do not have a nervous system, brain, or any of the traits that make us a sentient, human being. The issue boils down to two choices; either support embryonic stem cell research and accept the destruction of the blastocyst, or oppose the research and forgo the previously stated benefits the research could provide. [/spoiler]
While I have my own reservations, it is my ethical belief that preventing avoidable suffering and premature death is an obligation, and one that may only be able to be achieved through researching stem cells. The mastery of stem cells has the ability to change humanity forever, and that is why I propose that federal funding of embryonic stem cell research should be reinstated.
Thank you to those who took the time to read. This is a subject that has intrigued me for years and I can only hope that it is a subject that is increasingly explored in the years to come.
Let me know what you think. Do you support or oppose the research? Thoughts?
-
1 ReplyBreed and donate cells for science
-
4 RepliesThis is really awesome! I never understood why those ads in tv asked for stemcell donations. At least now I understand it a bit more
-
2 RepliesThe govt funds planned parenthood. They fund partial birth abortions. So how can they argue not funding this? Religion should have no say in what the scientific community can and cannot do. They have the potential to cure diseases that have caused suffering and death of millions of people. Once again its about politics and money. But no a woman can develope a fetus and then say nah im aborting. That's ok. But a bunch of frozen cells can't be destroyed to possibly save millions. The hypocrisy is unbelieveable. You have a better chance getting funding to help boy hamsters become girl hamsters because they have an identity crisis. Sad crazy messed up world we are in. Goodluck on your cause.
-
1 Reply2 types of embyros, protostones and duederestones, protostones is where the mouth forms first, then the anus, duderestones is where the anus forms first then the mouth, now what does this all mean?[spoiler]at someone point in our lives, everyone was just an asshole.[/spoiler]
-
1 ReplyPerhaps miscarriages could be used for this purpose? Gives the cells a second chance, hypothetically.
-
3 RepliesVery intuitive. Many good points were made, but you are missing one key aspect that can make or break this paper. That is the fact that [spoiler]Fusion rifles need a nerf. [/spoiler]
-
Aka Sp00ky science [spoiler]wort[/spoiler]
-
4 RepliesSo like..... Baby recycling?
-
3 RepliesIt is absolutely disgusting that stem cell research was hamstring by religious nutjobs and the republican party. They need every ban on them lifted
-
1 ReplySo when you aren't making religious bait you actually are an intelligent guy. Who would have thought?
-
2 RepliesI want to see stem cell research become federally funded. Also, thanks for making OT a little bit more smarterer with an actual post that isn't political.
-
Stem cells, hgh, steroids are all proven to literally work miracles. Pro-lifers neeed to get over themselves.
-
1 ReplyYou have my approval OP.
-
3 RepliesThis and genetic manipulation have good potential, but run the risk of drawing the ire of the more religious members of society. Genetic manipulation could destroy things like sickle cell disease, but run the risk of creating an age of designer babies. Stem cells could easily fix problems that have persisted for years, but they require abortions to work best.
-
Glad to read about people who value the lives of loved ones more than tiny clumps of organic material.
-
15 RepliesEdited by Ghost4201990: 10/25/2016 12:37:09 AMDo some more research you get more stem cells from embryonic fluid and the placenta than you do from the embryo meaning you don't have to murder babies to do it. There's a program now where you can have your babies placenta frozen and saved in case it's needed to treat a desease. I like this alot more than terminating a life
-
8 Replies[quote]While I have my own reservations, it is my ethical belief that preventing avoidable suffering and premature death is an obligation, and one that may only be able to be achieved through researching stem cells. The mastery of stem cells has the ability to change humanity forever, and that is why I propose that federal funding of embryonic stem cell research should be reinstated.[/quote] Your initial resolution is misleading then. You aren't arguing, "Stem cell research is important and we should support it." You're arguing, "Stem cell research is important, so we should confiscate other people's wealth in order to fund its research."
-
2 RepliesVery good post. I don't personally see this as unethical, but I understand that others possibly could based on views concerning abortion or when life truly begins. May I ask how stem cells in adults and fetuses are harvested?
-
2 RepliesYeah, but there's a book out there that says it's bad so... Oh well... good try.
-
1 Reply
Sabre013Guardian - old
I support the idea of stem cell research. While it destroys the embryo, the stem cells themselves become more useful than most understand in the field of medicine. As you mentioned, we could cure currently uncurable diseases, and even regrow organs. That is well worth it. -
6 RepliesBe careful. This much science will get you labeled as a witch.
-
Calmly the Archangel Michael stated "As you can see from a base concept studying clearly as any understanding construct does because of understanding of base concept is studied, you can tell with out creating it because I understand potential, I can understand basis conceptual construction of a body growth from a as created stages of construction prior to their happening on a total control value. Let me tell you the solution to our problem: Grow where is body making unto body movement of simultaneous growth both parts make all better."
-
1 ReplyI fully support stem cell research.
-
3 RepliesIf I remember my anatomy and hematology class right you could use the stem cells from the babies cord after the baby is born for the same thing right? [spoiler]anatomy was a long time ago and hematology was a massive complicated beast so I may be wrong.[/spoiler]
-
5 Replies[b] [/b]
-
1 ReplyIt might be a good idea, but it is crossing a moral boundary for me to use embryonic cells.