• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
 
Stem Cell ResearchFor the Benefit of Today and Tomorrow
Stem cells are the building blocks of life. They are unspecialized cells with abilities that havemade them a great focus of medical research. These cells are able to divide indefinitely, forminghundreds of copies of themselves. However, that is not a unique property. What makes them soimportant is that within themselves, stem cells hold immense potential. They are categorized as pluripotent, which means that they can develop into any cell of the human body; thus, not only can they build an entire organism from scratch, they can also be used to develop healthy tissues or organs thatcould replace damaged ones. In fact, scientists believe that in the future, technologies derived fromstem cell research might even be able to provide commonplace sources of treatment for some of today'smost deadly and incurable diseases, such as cancer, Alzheimer's and Parkinson's. In 2005, 7.6 million people died just of cancer. Stem cell research has the potential to save millions of lives.However, there is a flip side to this. Stem cell research is still in its infancy, and possible potential is arguable. The technologies associated with stem cells are only being developed, and manyquestions are left unanswered. Just like so many other arising technologies, stem cell research is noexception to controversy. The main debate concerns a branch of stem cells known as embryonic stemcells. These type of stem cells are found solely in young, developing embryos, and they continue to become an entire living being. These embryonic stem cells are also the most attractive to science, asthey are believed to be the more pluripotent and flexible than their counterparts, adult stem cells. In the process of extracting embryonic stem cells using current technologies, the human embryo is destroyed.Thus, a conflict arises between two big human morals- striving to cure pain and disease, and respectinghuman life. Although stem cell research may lead to lifesaving treatments, hence appealing to one of the two morals, it requires the destruction of human embryos, infringing the other moral. Many people,especially those in the pro-life movement, which advocates for the protection of pre-born human life,argue that such practices should be abolished due to them fundamentally devaluing the worth of ahuman being. It is as if science has begun to use the human being as a tool to fulfill its purposes.These arguments might hold position when dismissing the idea of somatic cell nuclear transfer,which is the principle of cloning- such a practice
does
require the intentional destruction of healthyembryos. But due to the still rather primitive position of stem cell research, scientists can benefit byobtaining any embryonic stem cells possible. Scientists should not be portrayed as merciless killers,seeking out prey, but instead as someone trying to salvage any cells possible that otherwise would have been disposed of, and use them for the benefit of the future of medicine.
 
Straight away, it is pointed out by many that there are alternatives to embryonic stem cells, andwhy do scientists not pursue them? There are adult stem cells, which can be obtained without causingany deliberate harm. These adult stem cells reside in many adult tissues and organs in the humanorganism, acting as a repair mechanism if some new cells are needed; however, there are very few of them. It is hard to locate them, and a difficult process to extract them. They are not as potent, or able todifferentiate into various cell types, as embryonic stem cells. Thus, these alternative cells are not aseffective and useful to science as their counterparts. Adult stem cells are difficult to cultivate andmanipulate in laboratories, and current therapies deriving from them do not always provide positiveresults. Taking into account all of these flaws, it is clear that embryonic stem cells are the more viableoption to consider.So the main issue that must be addressed is the controversy surrounding embryonic stem cells.At the heart of this conflict lies one central question: when does life begin? Does an embryo the size of a period at the end of a sentence represent human life? Should they have the same rights as fullydeveloped human beings? There are so many uncertain factors associated with these questions, thatthere is no one true, absolute answer. Is there anyone with the authority to decide? Due to suchuncertainties in the fundamental question to the debate, it is a shaky topic, and it is left to the individualto choose sides. To do that, you must judge both the benefits and harms associated with stem cellresearch.Starting with the more difficult one, the harms concern mainly the moral and ethical issuesassociated with destroying a human embryo. But the human embryos used for stem cell research arenot taken by purpose. Instead, most of them are donated as spare embryos from fertility clinics. Theyare created by in vitro fertilization, meaning that they have been fertilized outside of the human body.However, many embryos that have been created that way do not end up being implanted; this leavesmany spare embryos, which either are frozen and preserved, or donated for the sake of science,depending on the consent of the client. In this manner, if the donor agrees to donate the embryo, doesn'tit, in accord with all the potential benefits associated with the research, provide enough reason todisregard the moral issues mentioned previously? A frozen embryo might remain in a fertility clinicuntil its viability expires, and be discarded; isn't it a better idea, then, to instead donate an embryo for research that, as an indirect cause, might save millions of lives in the future? It is the same as choosingto throw a bottle into the trash, or recycling it- just with vastly larger potential benefits.Furthermore, research on embryonic stem cells might lead to technologies that allow for scientists to obtain more of those cells by using less destructive methods. Currently, scientists areinvestigating several possible methods. These include extracting embryonic stem cells from
 
organismically dead embryos, bioengineering embryo-like artifacts, expanding the potency of adultstem cells, and performing non-harmful biopsy to extract stem cells from living embryos.Judging the benefits of stem cell research is a much more clear-cut path. Just the donation of several hundred embryos and sufficient funding from governments or private enterprises have a greatchance of leading to a future in which almost any disease would be curable. Just in 2008, Spanishdoctors, in collaboration with British scientists, had managed to grow an entire section of a patient's,Claudia Castillo's, windpipe (or trachea) from her own stem cells. In November, a successful operationin Barcelona managed to replace Claudia's damaged windpipe with the healthy, artificially grown one.She is now able to resume her usual active life, and stands as a living proof to the statements thatscientists have long been making- that entire organs can be grown from stem cells. Stem cell researchhas already created a new dawn in transplant surgery, and has revolutionized its future. If that was notsufficient, scientists are strongly asserting that in the near future, stem cell research will lead to curesfor diseases such as cancer, Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases, spinal cord injuries and muscledamage. This might alleviate millions of people from suffering, and many from a life-long disability.Is it not worth a few undeveloped embryos that people have willingly donated to saveexponentially larger numbers of people in the near future? Are cures for diseases like Parkinson's andcancer not something that humans have been intensively searching for in the past half century? Sowhen a possibility finally arises, why should we give up and try to pursue another path, if this one islaid out just before us? Many useful technologies require compromises, in the form of energy, money,or support. In this case, a compromise should not be spared. We must be willing to make a smallsacrifice for the benefit of the generations to come. We are one species. We must work together both for the present, and for the future.By Justas Medeišis, Grade 10
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...