It doesn't make sense. Stem cell research could lead to a plathoera of scientific breakthroughs. Many terminal diseases - Parkinson's among the many - could potentially be neutralized. People with previously no other hope would be given an extra chance. This is clearly the future of our species.
The main argument against seems to be fear of cloning. This isn't going to happen. Brave new world type scenarios will never exist, besides, this is not even the main goal of stem cell research.
Anyone who actually knows anything at all about biology/chemical research supports stem cell research. Hollywood actors and politicians who have failed us before - and who don't know the facts - are against.
If we don't amend the laws now and begin stem cell research, other countries will, and we will lose 100s of brilliant cutting edge scientists who will usher in the new era of the world.
2006-10-25 11:18:46 · 5 answers · asked by bendermarcus 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Are you talking about embryonic or adult? If you are talking adult stem cell research then I say go for it. You are not hurting anyone that hasn't said that it's ok. If you are talking embryonic that is a different matter. It's just as bad as abortion only in this case you are creating a human life just to cut it into pieces.
2006-10-25 11:47:42 · answer #1 · answered by lover_of_paints_&_quarter_horses 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's not stem cell research or even cloning that's really objectionable in the Missouri proposed amendment.
It's the mandated no-questions-asked funding for cloning.
If that amendment passes, the Missouri legislature will not have the power to deny funding requests, whether the research actually does anyone any good or not.
This is a lot like the amendments proposed in various states from time to time to allow gambling. They say they are to allow gambling, but the text basically says the precise location of the property where it can be allowed, which means the current owner is suddenly a multimillionaire because he has a constitutionally protected monopoly.
That kind of thing doesn't belong in a constitution.
You don't need a constitutional amendment to allow such research, only to guarantee someone gets rich from it.
2006-10-25 18:31:39 · answer #2 · answered by open4one 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The plain fact is that embryonic stem cell research is proving to be a bust. There are currently 72 therapies showing human benefits using adult stem cells and zero using embryonic stem cells.
The fact is that adult stem cells have already produced remarkable cures, whereas embryonic stem cells have failed. This should come as no great surprise to anyone with a background in high school biology. When an embryo is created by the union of the sperm and egg, the cells begin to divide, creating embryonic stem cells from which all future tissues and organs are derived. Within days, the embryonic cells differentiate into three cell layers - ectoderm, mesoderm and endoderm. Cells in these layers continue to differentiate into tissues and organs. As the embryo matures into a fetus, child, and adult, some undifferentiated cells of the three types remain in various tissues such as bone marrow, fat, skin and olfactory tissue.
These adult stem cells are multipotent: they have the ability to turn into a variety of types of tissues. Successful stem cell therapies cause the DNA in the adult stem cells to further differentiate into more specific types of cells. There is no point in getting the adult stem cell to turn into a less differentiated type of cell, or using the more primitive embryonic stem cells. This would be going backward, in the opposite direction of providing a clinically useful therapy. Difficulties abound with proposed embryonic stem cell therapies. The growth of the more primitive embryonic stem cells is more difficult to control and leads to tumor formation. Recent research suggests brain tumors may result. Additionally, the use of embryonic tissue foreign to the patient can potentially lead to problems with immune rejection of tissue, a problem not encountered in using a patient's own adult stem cells.
America is the most formidable medical research center in the world, but it is far from alone in pursuing the potential of adult stem cells. The worldwide effort is impressive and growing. For non-adult stem cell research, a morally unquestionable alternative source exists: stem cells drawn from umbilical cord blood. Already a bank exists in Dubai collecting cord blood stem cells.
2006-10-25 18:28:44 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
You must distinguish between ADULT stem cells and EMBRYONIC stem cells. If you don't understand THAT distinction, you do NOT understand the debate at all.
2006-10-25 18:21:33 · answer #4 · answered by C = JD 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Because...they don't have any problems with it, or they dont know anybody who needs help with it!!!
2006-10-25 18:23:07 · answer #5 · answered by Romy 4 · 0⤊ 3⤋