So apparently throwing the unborn motherfucker in the trash is a way more moral thing to do than find a way to fix not only ours but all living things's health problems. Do theese fucks think that Jesus gives a shit,if he even exists, about who lives and who dies.
Stem cell research is using aborted fetis for medical purposes this can treat disease there isn't a single good reason it shouldn't be allowed but plenty of reasons it should the fetis are already aborted so why not use them to save and improve lives I mean seriously I'm twelve and yet I obviously know a lot more about this then people who say no all it does is use aborted fetis to save lives
Some people believe that stem Cell research is morally wrong, and I understand that some people believe this because of religious reasons and blah blah blah. I don't judge people for these reasons, I think that is where you should have the freedom to choose What you believe, but where I disagree is when people say it's "not worth it" I think that is ridiculous. Sure they are "children" and whatever but Its not like they can even think at that point of time in their life and what if the child isn't wanted by its mother? Stem cell research could lead to a child having even the smallest cusp of a memory of it's mother that has cancer. I know that a stem cell transplant gave my grandmother another eight years and gave me a real memory of her. So it is obviously not "worthless"
When regarding the other side of the argument, it is understandable why embryonic stem cell research would be seen as a morally wrong thing for people to practice. With the research, moral ethics such as the question of when life starts and the assumed outcome of overpopulation come into play, research like this is then questioned. The idea that being able to cure diseases through stem cell research will lead to overpopulation is highly unlikely. Most of the diseases and complications that scientists are seeking to cure are health issues that don't present themselves as a terminal illness (such as paralysis, etc). If we are given the opportunity to potentially repair nerve damage and restore someone's ability to walk-why should we not be able to take the chance? Also, many question the moral ethics behind killing a potential life. While this thought is completely acceptable, the fact that research is more effective with embryonic stem cells is a very important thing to remember when considering whether it should be completely legalized or not. In addition to this, there are almost over half a million stored, frozen embryos (that parents will most likely never decide on what to do with them) in the U.S. because parents cannot come to terms with donating them to research or other couples, or "disposing" of them. Because these parents can't decide what to do with the embryos, more often than not- the embryos get disposed of and are a waste. If left-over embryos from in-vitro fertilization treatments are wasted by being stored indefinitely until they die..Then what is so terrible about using these embryos for a purpose through stem cell research, in hopes of finding the cures to many devastating illnesses/impairments?
As we dive deeper in to medicine and treatment we happened to come a cross stem cells and now its a debate over how it but there methods are questioned on how they get such stem cells.Stems cells are retrieved from the Human Embryos but there is no harm done and to take even more safety steps they have found a way to get stem cells with out killing off the Embryo they come from.
Yes, stem cell research is a right and good thing. Stem cell research has already lent itself to the creation of many new medical techniques that save lives. With further research, one can merely guess as to how many lives shall be saved. Therefore, stem cell research is a good thing.
The new technology that can come of stem cell research is amazing. People are simply ignorant and close minded to ideas and that is the underlying cause of the issue at hand. Stem cell research can save lives, it can go as far as going people with hair loss a chance to have regrow their own hair. The possibilities are endless.
What are stem cells?
Stem cells are the body's "master cells" because they are the building blocks of organ tissues, blood, and the immune system. Stem cells from bone marrow were first used to regenerate blood and immune cells for patients who had received chemotherapy for cancer. In the late 1980s, doctors started using cord blood stem cells to treat diseases that had previously been treated with bone marrow transplantation.
Today, cord blood stem cells are successfully being used to save lives. They also are being researched in an exciting new area of medicine called regenerative medicine, where scientists are studying the use of cord blood stem cells in experimental treatments for conditions like brain injury and acquired hearing loss.
This primer on stem cells is intended for anyone who wishes to learn more about the biological properties of stem cells, the important questions about stem cells that are the focus of scientific research, and the potential use of stem cells in research and in treating disease. The primer includes information about stem cells derived from embryonic and non-embryonic tissues. Much of the information included here is about stem cells derived from human tissues, but some studies of animal-derived stem cells are also described.
Where do stem cells come from?
There are several sources of stem cells. Pluripotent stem cells can be isolated from human embryos that are a few days old. Cells from these embryos can be used to create pluripotent stem cell "lines" —cell cultures that can be grown indefinitely in the laboratory. Pluripotent stem cell lines have also been developed from fetal tissue (older than 8 weeks of development).
Why do scientists want to use stem cell lines?
Once a stem cell line is established from a cell in the body, it is essentially immortal, no matter how it was derived. That is, the researcher using the line will not have to go through the rigorous procedure necessary to isolate stem cells again. Once established, a cell line can be grown in the laboratory indefinitely and cells may be frozen for storage or distribution to other researchers.
If stem cell could, perhaps, cure cancer, or some other medical miracle they would be come very valuable. Well, the most popular way to get stem cells come from babies that have died in the womb. As a valuable and high profit substance, there would probably become a black market for the cells. People would do almost anything to get money, some may even abortion a perfectly good baby for the stem cell opportunities.
In the case of embryonic stem cell research, it is impossible to respect both moral principles.To obtain embryonic stem cells, the early embryo has to be destroyed. This means destroying a potential human life. But embryonic stem cell research could lead to the discovery of new medical treatments that would alleviate the suffering of many people. So which moral principle should have the upper hand in this situation? The answer hinges on how we view the embryo. Does it have the status of a person?
It is bad to research on babys, because te over populatio will happen and people will die all around the world. We should not mess up with life. In some cases tumors have been found a few years later. It can cause cancer to people and can destroy a human embryo.
I believe an embryo has a status of a person. Whether it is a boy or girl, blue or green. It will breath after it has been born and that is human enough for me. People think that an embryo can not be anything else, but have you realized a caterpillar is just an ordinary worm? A caterpillar blooms into a beautiful butterfly therefore an embryo, when given birth to, can become anything. Whether it is a president, a qualified accountant or a lawyer.
If we keep looking in the interests of old people with diabetes instead of newborn individuals, we will soon have a population explosion with fewer people to carry on our human legacy. People are already living more years that they naturally should. If life expectancy increases any further, it would mean a dire insufficiency of resources.
Where will the embryos be produced? What is to stop a doctor from, once again dehumanizing a post birth child, and encouraging this practice? I believe stem cells can be cultured from our own bodies, doctors are researching how to change the function of a common human skin cell to serve the function of heart cells, liver cells. There are alternative methods, and the moral question of whether we should offer a child as a human sacrifice for the betterment of our own body, would no longer exist, with a quick skin graph doctors could replace a damaged Aorta, or a deep tissue contusion to the brain. It is a matter of looking for alternatives. Why should we treat human life as simply a way to feel better, personally knowing that I was eating someones placenta would be disgusting, ingesting babies or their organs gives me an even worse sickening feeling. Where could this culture go, if I may inquire, when its children are no longer allowed to live for the purposes of giving other people life, if you think this way you ally yourself with all of those who use child soldiers, and whose societies have collapsed because families and their children can no longer survive, flourish, and produce, because they never got the chance.