What is your opinion on the topic of Stem Cells?

Question

Please give a yes/no and some details as to why

Answer 1

My opinions on Stem Cells. Definitely, I 'm all for STem Cell Research . I'll go into details later.

.
I totally agree to venture in any research to find the cures for any diseases. Stem cell research has its ethical issues. The Pro life movement is for using adult stem cells from cadavers or other organ donors. They are mostly against using the embryonic fetal stem cells; which has a more promising result. Consequences: one would view it as genetic engineering It's going against nature. Abortion could be rampant so these progenitor embryonic stem cells would be made more readily available.

Future Directions
Ultimately, type 1 diabetes may prove to be especially difficult to cure, because the cells are destroyed when the body's own immune system attacks and destroys them. This autoimmunity must be overcome if researchers hope to use transplanted cells to replace the damaged ones. Many researchers believe that at least initially, immunosuppressive therapy similar to that used in the Edmonton protocol will be beneficial. A potential advantage of embryonic cells is that, in theory, they could be engineered to express the appropriate genes that would allow them to escape or reduce detection by the immune system. Others have suggested that a technology should be developed to encapsulate or embed islet cells derived from islet stem or progenitor cells in a material that would allow small molecules such as insulin to pass through freely, but would not allow interactions between the islet cells and cells of the immune system. Such encapsulated cells could secrete insulin into the blood stream, but remain inaccessible to the immune system.

Before any cell-based therapy to treat diabetes makes it to the clinic, many safety issues must be addressed . A major consideration is whether any precursor or stem-like cells transplanted into the body might revert to a more pluripotent state and induce the formation of tumors. These risks would seemingly be lessened if fully differentiated cells are used in transplantation.

But before any kind of human islet-precursor cells can be used therapeutically, a renewable source of human stem cells must be developed. Although many progenitor cells have been identified in adult tissue, few of these cells can be cultured for multiple generations. Embryonic stem cells show the greatest promise for generating cell lines that will be free of contaminants and that can self renew. However, most researchers agree that until a therapeutically useful source of human islet cells is developed, all avenues of research should be exhaustively investigated, including both adult and embryonic sources of tissue.




Like a blank microchip that can be programmed to perform many different tasks, stem cells are undifferentiated, 'blank' cells that do not yet have a specific physiological function. When the proper conditions occur in the body or in the laboratory, stem cells begin to develop into specialized tissues and organs. Stem cells are also distinguished from other cells by their ability to self-renew-in other words, to divide and give rise to more stem cells

.
Why is stem cell research so important?
Stem cells are the source of all tissues of the body, and understanding their properties is fundamental to our understanding of human biology in health and disease. In particular, stem cells offer the possibility of a renewable source of replacement cells to treat a wide variety of diseases and disabilities, including diabetes, neurological disease such as Parkinson and Alzheimer's. cardiovascular disease, blood disease and many other conditions. Defective stem cells also appear to underlie many forms of cancer, and by understanding their properties it should be possible to develop new types of anti-cancer therapy.



What is the difference between embryonic and adult stem cells?
Some organs contain stem cells that persist throughout adult life and contribute to the maintenance and repair of those organs. Not every organ has been shown to contain stem cells, however, and generally adult stem cells have restricted developmental potential, in that their capacity for proliferation is limited and they can give rise only to a few cell types. Further, islet cell transplant recipients face a lifetime of immunosuppressant therapy, which makes them susceptible to other serious infections and diseases


Embryonic stem cells, by contrast, can divide almost indefinitely and can give rise to every cell type in the body, suggesting that they may be the most versatile source of cells for transplantation therapy.


Why is there so much controversy surrounding embryonic stem cell research?
At present, the only known way to derive embryonic stem cells involves the destruction of a blastocyst-stage embryo. Some people are opposed to this research because they consider the blastocyst to be morally equivalent to a human individual.


What is the source of embryos used for making embryonic stem cells?
The human embryonic stem cell lines that have been created at Harvard are derived from frozen embryos left over after in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment. These early stage embryos were donated, with informed consent, by patients who had completed their treatment. In the future, Harvard researchers also hope to derive embryonic stem cells by somatic cell nuclear transfer.




What is somatic cell nuclear transfer?
Somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT), sometimes known as 'therapeutic cloning', involves transferring a nucleus from a donor cell, such as a skin cell, into an unfertilized egg. The injected egg is then induced to divide, and when it reaches a few hundred cells, the so-called blastocyst stage, it can be used to derive embryonic stem cells that are genetically identical to the original donor. No sperm is involved, and therefore no fertilization occurs, in this procedure


There are currently hundreds of thousands of surplus embryos in storage. One source estimated that there were 400,000 stored embryos by mid-2003. 4 However, a minority of pro-lifers and a majority of pro-life organizations object to the use of embryos in research. They feel that a few-days-old embryo is a human person. Extracting its stem cells kills the embryo -- an act that they consider to be murder. Stem cells can now be grown in the laboratory, so (in a pinch) some research can be done using existing stem cells. No further harvesting needs to be made from embryos. However, existing stem cell lines are gradually degrading and will soon be useless for research.

Stem cells can also be extracted from adult tissue, without harm to the subject. Unfortunately, they are difficult to remove and are severely limited in quantity. There has been a consensus among researchers that adult stem cells are limited in usefulness -- that they can be used to produce only a few of the 220 types of cells in the human body. However, some evidence is emerging that indicates that adult cells may be more flexible than has previously been believed.



Research continues in U.S. private labs and in both government and private labs in the UK, Japan, France, Australia, and other countries. On 2002-SEP, Governor Davis of California signed bill SB 253 into law. It is the first law in the U.S. that permits stem cell research. Davis simultaneously signed a bill that permanently bans all human cloning in the state for reproduction purposes -- i.e. any effort to create a cloned individual.

Following former president Ronald Reagan's death due to Alzheimer's in 2004-JUN -- a slow, lingering disease that took a decade to kill him -- Nancy Reagan and all of her family, except for Michael Reagan, mounted a campaign to encourage President Bush to relax restrictions on embryo stem cell research. Fifty-eight senators, almost all Democrats, sent a letter to President Bush, urging the same action.

A federal bill passed the House on 2005-MAY-24 to allow government funded research on embryonic stem cells extracted from surplus embryos in fertility clinics. It was later passed by the Senate. President Bush vetoed it -- his first veto

Answer 2

The answer I do not think can be simply yes or no. Here is why. Stem cell research can be a very good thing, but stem cell research using an aborted fetus is morally wrong in my opinion because no one has the right to kill a child. I am pro life for several reasons, specifically because it is against GOD's will and everyone that I know who is pro choice had a mother who thought life was more precious that their "right" to kill a child. But that is another subject.

#1. Stem cell research can be done using the teeth of adult humans with just as much success as with the stems cells of an aborted fetus.

#2. The stems cells that are in the umbilical cord of a child that has not been aborted can be used for stem cell research.

#3. There has not been one single disease cured using the stems cells of any aborted fetus's. Let me say it again. NOT ONE!

#4. By allowing the use of aborted fetus stem cells it would literally create a market for more women to go out and have an abortion simply to be paid to provide companies with those stem cells.

Lastly, if you want to seriously study and research the subject and want a very good read on the subject then I would strongly suggest reading an article put out in a magazine called "THINK". Their website is "focuspress.org" and they put out a fabulous article last year. I am sure you can research the website and find it.

Good luck!

Answer 3

I think we should go for it and do as much research as possible
Why not?

By the way - the US and other countries are actively doing stem cell research, the discussionm is we have the ability to do much more if we use fetus cells, some folks are against that

Answer 4

Forget anything you have ever been told about Diabetes.

And get this - it has nothing to do with insulin, exercise, diet or anything else you've heard in the past. It's all based on latest breakthrough research that Big Pharma is going Stir Crazy to hide from you.

Visit here : https://tr.im/ZPtKr to find out what all the fuss is about.

Answer 5

Absolutely. It's a lot more productive than flying to space so that a few people can have fun.. Probably cheaper than space flight, and stands a better chance of curing cancer.