Adults have stem cells and therefore unborn babies should be left alone and not to be used for research?

Question

do you agreee or disagree ... and why??

feel free to write alot

Answer 1

First, adult stem cells are not the same as embryonic stem cells. They can't be differentiated as well, and they have a very limited lifespan. There are plenty of precursor cells, but almost no totipotent stem cells. True, the precursor cells are important, and lots of promising research is going on in those areas, but other therapies require the use of embryonic stem cells.

Second, at the stage when stem cells are taken, the embryo is not a baby. It is just inflammatory language that the anti-science folks use to turn public opinion. An embryo is only good for stem cells for a very short period. During that period, it is a small sphere of undifferentiated cells. If examined under a microscope, it would be impossible to distinguish a human embryo from a cat embryo from a chicken embryo. There are no nerves, no organs, no blood.

Finally, no one is 'using babies for research.' Stem cells have been obtained through two methods: as a byproduct of abortion, and from excess embryos created through in vitro fertilization. I doubt any woman has ever had an abortion for the sake of stem cell research. The already-aborted embryos were simply used, which should be viewed as making the best of a bad situation. In the case of in vitro fertilization, eggs are fertilized in a petri dish, and many embryos are created, only some of which are implanted. In this case, the embryos used for research would have either been frozen indefinitely or destroyed. Again, if you view a 32-cell ball as a fully formed person, then this should be seen as making the best of a bad situation.

I don't believe embryos should be created for the sole purpose of research, but if they are going to be destroyed, we might as well get some use out of them. Having studied human development, I definitely do not see them as 'babies' and I certainly don't place their value above the living, breathing humans that can benefit from stem cell research.

Answer 2

Granted adults have stem cells, but scientifically speaking the 'pool' of which your taking these stems cells from might possibly be tainted (depending on what the 'adult' has been exposed to) or perhaps due in part to their own genetic background which may revel/introduce problems of their own. i.e. if osteoperosis runs in the individual's family, if you take stem cells from that individual at a certain point, who's say that their stems cells are intact?

The reason why scientists are studying babies so closely is because this a time of rapid growth for the body, and the individual at this point has not been subjected or influenced by their outside envirnoment.

Stem cells are key for scientist who want to understand how and why certain diseases proliferate in the body. ex. like cancer. The better we can understand how the body decides which cells become which, and what if any genetic markers play a role in that decision, the better able we will be to understand and possibly treat the CAUSES of diseases like cancer. (instead of just treating the symptoms)

Answer 3

I thoroughly trust you. i hit upon it exciting additionally which you at the instant are not a Republican. i actually am a Democrat and that i'm thoroughly against embreyonic stem cellular learn. If scientists might basically commit to attempting to make advances with person stem cells or twine blood stem cells, lots of the ailments that they so normally website could actually be cured devoid of destroying human life. it rather is thoroughly unethical to create life just to wreck it. Why could a human toddler could die to save someone that has already enjoyed an entire life. The assertion that an embreyonic cellular isn't human life is preposterous. some day technology will attain the element the place a toddler could have the potential to stay to tell the tale outdoors the womb from even that element. I hate to assert that I help Bush on something, yet I certainly am happy approximately him vetoing the bill. person stem cellular learn could flow forward, yet embreyonic stem cellular learn is thoroughly unethical.

Answer 4

Here's some things for you to look up when you write your own paper.

Adult stem cells are not the same as embryonic stem cells, the cannot be differentiated into as many different types of cells.

Check out the volume of potential stem cells that are destroyed every year, not by abortion clinics, but by fertility clinics. It is common to fertilize many more eggs than are needed, the rest are held on to until the couple no longer needs them, and then they are just destroyed and discarded. Where is the "baby killer" rage against fertility clinics? Simply not there. These cells could be used for good, to cure diseases, instead of thrown out.

Answer 5

I was opposed to stem cell research at one point, but my opinion has changed. For one, the posters above me are right adult stem cells simply do not have as mch potential as embryonic stem cells. However, I am anti-abortion, so I have to reconcile my beliefs with reality. The reality is this: these embryos are sitting in fertility clinics waiting to be discarded. The truth is that, like it or not, in-vitro fertilization produces embryos that will never be carried to term. So, the question is this: do we simply throw them away, or do we use them to ease the suffering of live humans who are suffering from currently incurable diseases?

Answer 6

I don't understand how people can live with themselves knowing that they are doing these kind of things. How on earth can one stomach it?

Answer 7

I disagree with both very strongly.

Answer 8

I agree. Leave babies alone!!!!!!!!