Stem Cell Research Proposal

On the hot topic of human embryonic stem cell research and its moral/ethical ground, which side is right? Each side has great and truth bearing arguments. Each party is convinced that their choice is the correct one. Untimely to conclude with the most valid option, you must totally research and exhaust all facts of each argument as well as be open minded to both sides. It抯 important to find your decision based on the facts and not let your personal beliefs cloud your decision.

To recap both arguments I will clearly define the core principles behind each side. The side against human embryonic stem cell research says that a human being is a human being at any rate or stage of maturity it is in. As a society we should always make sure to protect all human life no matter what. The side for human embryonic stem cell research says that there is a clear difference between human embryos and human beings, and that it is important to use the cells in medical research to benefit the human races quality of life.

Human embryonic stem cell research is crucial in the search for curing many of the world抯 medical conditions. A condition like Alzheimer’s disease which has no cure, there is hoping that trough stem cell research it may be one day possible to cure the disease. Stem cell research could also effectively cure other degenerative diseases like Alzheimer抯. As a society we have the opportunity to possibly cure millions of people life deteriorating medical conditions by doing nothing more than harvesting and procuring human embryonic stem cells. We as a society should be compelled to further the research on these cells for the benefits that may come from it.

The ethical and moral controversy about this type of research may never cease because of its nature, this is why it must be federally funded and regulated. Federal oversight would set in place specific procedures and guidelines that must be followed in order to assure that researchers do not cross any moral or ethical boundaries. Doing so would also help to curb the concerns of those who are against this type of research. There is still so much research to be done on stem cells to fully understand and realize the mass amounts of possible benefits and/or consequences we are yet to unveil. The only way this will ever happy is if we let the medical scientists and research to do their jobs and duties.

Bibliography

Thomson J, Itskovitz-Eldor J, Shapiro S, Waknitz M, Swiergiel J, Marshall V, Jones J (1998). “Embryonic stem cell lines derived from human blastocysts”. Science 282 (5391): 1145

Gardner RL (2002). “Stem cells: potency, plasticity and public perception”. Journal of Anatomy 200 (3): 277.

Takahashi K, Yamanaka S (2006). “Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors”. Cell 126 (4): 663.

Mitalipov SM, Zhou Q, Byrne JA, Ji WZ, Norgren RB, Wolf DP (2007). “Reprogramming following somatic cell nuclear transfer in primates is dependent upon nuclear remodeling”. Hum Reprod 22 (8): 2232.

Wade N (2006-08-14). “Some Scientists See Shift in Stem Cell Hopes”. New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/14/washington/14stem.html. Retrieved on 2006-12-28.

Nell Greenfieldboyce (23 August 2006). “Firm creates stem cells without hurting embryos”. National Public Radio. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5696557.

Keirstead HS, Nistor G, Bernal G, et al (May 2005). “Human embryonic stem cell-derived oligodendrocyte progenitor cell transplants remyelinate and restore locomotion after spinal cord injury”. J. Neurosci. 25 (19): 46945.

Evans M, Kaufman M (1981). “Establishment in culture of pluripotential cells from mouse embryos”. Nature 292 (5819): 154

Bjornson CR, Rietze RL, Reynolds BA, Magli MC and Vescovi AL (1999). “Turning brain into blood: a hematopoietic fate adopted by adult neural stem cells in
vivo”. Science 283: 5347.