The Instigator
teddy64
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
MrInefable8
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Embryonic Stem cell research is beneficial to society and should continue.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/30/2013 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,113 times Debate No: 41432
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)

 

teddy64

Pro

I would like to take the side of supporting embryonic stem cell research, due to the fact that it has the potential to cure or help people with degenerative diseases, should new discoveries arise as a result of the research. It should not be restricted based on the notion that conducting embryonic stem cell research equates to the killing of a child.
MrInefable8

Con

As the side of the con I accept the challenge,
Definition: Embryonic Stem cell - This pluripotent stem cells derived early stage embryo.
I respect any of your opinions
To think about it embryonic stem cell treatments has its popularity growing as time goes by apparently this kind of treatment has not been fully understood for the treatment has side effects that might encounter in the future that we haven't realized. Second in embryonic stem cell treatments, we have to kill the embryo, making it like a form of abortion. In our society there are religions that do not accept this proving this to be not beneficial in the society, imagine that a small living cell would have genes like Einstein and we killed it, you wouldn't like that either would you. A number of studies have found the injection of embryonic stem cells to result in minor miscalculations resulting in the growth of strange objects such as teeth, bones and hair in areas where they were not intended, often resembling tumors. With embryonic cells, these growths continue for the remainder of the patient"s life. Making it an actual disadvantage to the society.
source:chem445stemcell.webs.com/risksanddisadvantages.htm
it would be an honor to hear your side.
Debate Round No. 1
teddy64

Pro

Thank you for accepting my challenge- it should be exciting, as this is my first debate.

Let me first start by addressing your first point (and your last point), being that embryonic stem cell treatments have not been fully understood, and may result in unwanted consequences. As with any new treatment, the full implications are never initially understood, but it is clear that it has the potential to provide great benefits to people suffering from Type 1 diabetes, parkinson's, arthritis, or cardiovascular diseases, to name a few. Through additional research, scientists will be able to better understand the possible implications and hopefully be able to make stem cell treatments that minimize risk to the patient.
Source: http://www.explorestemcells.co.uk...

In your second point, you bring up the idea of killing the embryo, and compared it to abortion. Now, this would be implying that life begins at conception. While there are many who take to this idea, there are also many who believe life doesn't begin directly at conception, but in time afterwards when brain activity develops. It would be wrong to compare it to abortion, as there is much more evidence to suggest that the fetus in abortion is alive, rather than a collection of cells (the embryo). Additionally, the fetus in an abortion is on its way to become life, and is situated in an environment (the womb) that allows it to develop. The majority of the embryos used in stem cell research, on the other hand, come from IVF facilities, or, in vitro fertilization facilities. These are facilities that treat couples who cannot conceive a child normally. The process involves taking eggs from the female and sperm from the male, fertilizing them externally in a petri dish, and then a few days later implanting a fertilized egg into the female. Keep in mind, this is currently a widely-accepted practice, and has successfully been used to treat many couples for their infertility. However, because of the nature of this process, there are leftover embryos that would otherwise be frozen or preserved indefinitely, or destroyed. Though they have the potential to become life, they will never actually become life, as they are the excess embryos produced in the process. Why not put them to good use to benefit those already alive and suffering from degenerative diseases?

Source: http://health.howstuffworks.com...

This is also what the orange part of the map means in the link you posted (i.e. it is legal to perform research on the excess embryos from IVF). The U.S. would currently also be put in orange, as Obama has issued an executive order lifting multiple restrictions on embryonic stem cell research since the time that your page was made.

Source: http://www.cbsnews.com...

Religiously, while it is true that many branches of Christianity are against embryonic stem cell research, it does not apply to all religions. Some religions, such as Judaism and Islam, are not against the use of embryos for research, as it is not believed the "soul" has entered the person at that time. Note that these same religions are also against abortion, signifying a person's stance on abortion does not necessarily have to correlate with their position on stem cell research (i.e. one who is pro-life on abortion is not necessarily against stem cell research).

Source: http://www.pewforum.org...
Source: http://www.islam101.com...
MrInefable8

Con

MrInefable8 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
teddy64

Pro

It is unfortunate that my opponent chose to forfeit the last round.
But, I will state my main points again:

1) There is great potential to be had with researching embryonic stem cells, with potentially millions of people being able to benefit from treatments. Even if some treatments aren't fully understood now, further funding and time put into understanding stem cells should greatly improve treatment options and effectiveness.

2) The majority of embryos used in the research come from in vitro fertilization facilities. These embryos were not created to be used for stem cell research, but rather are excess embryos from the external fertilization process. As they are out of the womb, and would not go on to become life anyway, it would be a waste to not make use of this resource.
MrInefable8

Con

MrInefable8 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
teddy64

Pro

Again, my opponent has forfeited the last round, and has not argued against any of my points. Thus I urge the voters to vote pro.
MrInefable8

Con

MrInefable8 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by teddy64 3 years ago
teddy64
@CynicalDiogenes I am open to hearing your side of the issue. I have recently addressed the argument of "potential life" in my debate. The embryo would not normally become a life if left alone, as it is the result of excess embryos being produced from in vitro fertilization. The use of embryos already inside the female for stem cell research is very restricted in terms of federal funding, and the majority of research facilities use embryos left over from the in vitro fertilization process.
Posted by BaconLover 3 years ago
BaconLover
I agree with Pro...

This research has proven to be extremely helpful. Yes, it is from a dead fetus. But if you can't change the past, wouldn't you like to use that for good? I am personally against abortion. But I think if we can do something with these fetuses that are otherwise mixed with formaldehyde and discarded to help others, we should.
Posted by MrInefable8 3 years ago
MrInefable8
well it is beneficial for scientific progress but its about social benefit.
though i respect your opinion
Posted by CynicalDiogenes 3 years ago
CynicalDiogenes
I have never heard anyone say that embryonic Stem Cell research is not good for scientific progress.

Come to think about it, having a group of people sell themselves as slaves will greatly benefit medical and scientific progress as human testing and organ harvesting will become possible.

But this course of action is not morally advisable.Likewise, Stem cell research takes something that could have become a human being if left alone, and then disects and cuts it up in the name of research.

I will be willing to argue against this only if i am allowed to provide moral justifications for my stand.
No votes have been placed for this debate.