A Question About Stem Cells?
What's so wrong with using a dead embryo? It's only going to be handy, and it's not serving any further purposes, so why not use it to cure so many diseases and change lives?
Protesting against this can only slow down humanity's progress, am I right?
Answers:
There's a lot of people out there who still suggest embryos should be considered human life and should be protected. Naturally, there's going to be some controversy.
They also believe the use of discarded embryos is immoral because it exploits human life; "the ends don't prove the means." It may be used to give justification to the destruction of embryos (as mentioned surrounded by other answers).
I guess they believe that embryonic stem cell research, along with abortion, etc. are degenerative movements of modern society so they protest.
Personally, I think it all boils down to what we mark out as human life that should or should not be protected.
First we need to clear up some terminology. An embryo is much different than a stem cell. An embryo is a fertilized cell. Stem cell can be either embryonic or adult. The defining factor of a stem cell is its ability to differentiate into various different types of cells. People who are protesting against embryonic stem cell research have a belief you are destroying life by doing research on these cell.
The short answer to your question is, as long as adult stem cells are used, you are not destroying this vivacity and the majority of protesters claims are invalid. Therefore, research can and should be done. Using taxpayer's money to fund it is another issue entirely.
It's irrelevant. The issue have been too closely linked with abortion and abortion is an extremely emotionally charged issue. Thus, it is nearly impossible to tuning someone's mind who is anti-embrionic stem cell research.
There are arguments that embrionic stem cells aren't needed and all that... but what it comes down to is more or less what you said. Protesters want to convince nation that somehow the research is going to cause more abortions or that using the embryo is justifying the abortions. It's meaningless rhetoric; the lack of real, shrewd rhetoric can be seen by the use of intentionally gruesome images. The pictures are used to trigger strong emotional responses because the logic fail to convince very many who do not already agree.
Whether or not it will slow down humanity is questionable at this point. Using adult stem cell has it's benefits for sure. But for raw research embryo's are easier to use and could speed things up in the short occupancy. In the long run it could also slow advancements in adult stem cell research so it's difficult to influence that the overall result is negative scientifically. In my opinion, however, I think it's most logical to use ebrionic cell for at least some current research.
Related Questions:
What's the best opening to overrun a marijuana question paper? How long after you smoke does a drug oral exam pick it up?
Why do I own such a glorious resistance to any medication?
What over-the-counter pills should I steal to abet beside my compulsive drinking disorder?
Protesting against this can only slow down humanity's progress, am I right?
Answers:
There's a lot of people out there who still suggest embryos should be considered human life and should be protected. Naturally, there's going to be some controversy.
They also believe the use of discarded embryos is immoral because it exploits human life; "the ends don't prove the means." It may be used to give justification to the destruction of embryos (as mentioned surrounded by other answers).
I guess they believe that embryonic stem cell research, along with abortion, etc. are degenerative movements of modern society so they protest.
Personally, I think it all boils down to what we mark out as human life that should or should not be protected.
First we need to clear up some terminology. An embryo is much different than a stem cell. An embryo is a fertilized cell. Stem cell can be either embryonic or adult. The defining factor of a stem cell is its ability to differentiate into various different types of cells. People who are protesting against embryonic stem cell research have a belief you are destroying life by doing research on these cell.
The short answer to your question is, as long as adult stem cells are used, you are not destroying this vivacity and the majority of protesters claims are invalid. Therefore, research can and should be done. Using taxpayer's money to fund it is another issue entirely.
It's irrelevant. The issue have been too closely linked with abortion and abortion is an extremely emotionally charged issue. Thus, it is nearly impossible to tuning someone's mind who is anti-embrionic stem cell research.
There are arguments that embrionic stem cells aren't needed and all that... but what it comes down to is more or less what you said. Protesters want to convince nation that somehow the research is going to cause more abortions or that using the embryo is justifying the abortions. It's meaningless rhetoric; the lack of real, shrewd rhetoric can be seen by the use of intentionally gruesome images. The pictures are used to trigger strong emotional responses because the logic fail to convince very many who do not already agree.
Whether or not it will slow down humanity is questionable at this point. Using adult stem cell has it's benefits for sure. But for raw research embryo's are easier to use and could speed things up in the short occupancy. In the long run it could also slow advancements in adult stem cell research so it's difficult to influence that the overall result is negative scientifically. In my opinion, however, I think it's most logical to use ebrionic cell for at least some current research.
Related Questions: