Should stem cell research be legal

New to old created: old to newlikes: most to leastlikes: least to mostreplies: most to leastreplies: least to most87% say d: new to old created: old to newlikes: most to leastlikes: least to mostreplies: most to leastreplies: least to mostjudging this research is playing god - let god decide if this is wrong or right, and let the doctors and scientists find hope. This will scar them forever, and if we are, as a society, okay with this, then i think we need to re-examine our is a huge debate about "playing god" with stem cell research, but judging this research is also "playing god". Let god judge, and let the doctors and scientists work to create a cure for those individuals who currently have no world countries are creating more hopeful potential cures via stem cells than the usa thanks to the ban on stem cell research. If we were to legalize stem cell research, i believe we could truly create cures never before thought you have never been affected by a disease that has no cure, then it is easy to have a negative opinion. Just realize that every vote against stem cell research is condemning more innocent people to an awful death, and more families to horrible pain - young children who are losing their mother or father - parents watching their beloved child wither away with nothing but a feeling of helplessness and loslundbrickbreaker2251haneuljung31(maximum 900 words)submitstem cell research is the future. Stem cells hold so much potential that we should be offering incentives for companies who do such research to advance medical understanding of our 00(maximum 900 words)submitcures for the chronic patients nobody thinks having a problem is a big deal until they have experienced it or know someone who has. I think stem cells are the next step to trying to find many cures for things the human race can find. Stem cells are expensive but if it happens and we can use them and we find cures i think we should ask ourselves is it worth 00(maximum 900 words)submityes, stem cell research should remain legal and become government-funded. If the embryos are not used for stem cell research, they are simply burned or disposed of (it's legal to flush them down the sink).

Obama did a good job a setting his issues up and sticking to his guns from that point 00(maximum 900 words)submityes, stem cell research should be legal. Stem cell based technologies have too much potential to be banned over some out of date 00(maximum 900 words)submitthere are countless unused embryos, might as well use them. The stem cell is technically the origin cell of which serves as the figurative 'direction booklet' for the construction of organs and tissues. Stem cells have been shown to reverse paralysis in quadriplegics and furthermore have been used to recreate organic tissue like hearts and the like. Those in opposition to this likely will claim that researching stem cell research will kill a fertilized egg, but my key point refutes this since whatever embryos are not utilized will be terminated. My contention would be that stem cell research not only be legalized but also supported. The stem cell cannot feel pain since it has no neural system nor does it contain chemicals to process emotion. Furthermore, with every day that stem cell research is being kept under, more and more people are left in misery due to genetic abnormalities and prenatal deficiencies that are simply beyond their control. Stem cell research needs to be legalized and loslund10(maximum 900 words)submitit's worth the risk stem cell research can open doors to many opportunities.

Tl:drwe should not be held to moral standards if the topic could severely benefit the entire 00(maximum 900 words)submitfetuses are people and organ donors. A woman deciding to kill a fetus or medical researchers putting someone's life that could have been to use? Stem cell research is nothing more than medical research on an organ donor that never had the chance to grow up and decide to become an organ donor or to devote their life to scientific 00(maximum 900 words)submitthe question is misleading. The actual debate is whether government or private entities should fund the research, and whether it should become illegal to do research on embryonic stem cells. Since all positive medical advances in this field come from adult and umbilical cord stem cells, and the results on lab animals using embryonic stem cells have been vastly negative, (brain tumors, cancer cells), many are opposed on a purely medical stance. At the very least it should make one curious as to why there is such a strong push for embryonic stem cell research when it is by far the least promising medical solution of the three. Maximum 900 words)submitit is inconsistent and it is very expensive as we know stem cells come from embryos. People say stem cells can cure sicknesses or even recreate organs but the real question is: is that worth a life? This baby that we are killing for ineffective research could be born and grow up to find a cure without having to kill unborn cell research also costs a lot of money.

That is 10s of billions of lives that will be stolen from these kids that should be alive. Now knowing that using stem cell research would put at least another 3 trillion dollars in our national debt and cost billions of lives do you still think it is a good idea? Maximum 900 words)submitit should not be illegalised this is because the embryonic cells produced are living. In my opinion it is immoral to do 01(maximum 900 words)submitno it should not i think this because i believe that it is essentially killing a baby before it can are taking a baby and preventing it from being are then taking it in to a lab and growing it like a is not moral and no life form should be treated that way or killed that legalizing it you are legalizing killing in a 00(maximum 900 words)d opinionsshould the u. Funding for embryonic stem cell research: should the us government fund embryonic stem cell research? Funding for embryonic stem cell research: does embryonic stem cell research have substantial promise for advancing public health? Funding for embryonic stem cell research: are the embryonic stem cell lines currently approved for federal funding inadequate for substantial progress in research? Funding for embryonic stem cell research: does embryonic stem cell research greater potential than adult stem cell research? Funding for embryonic stem cell research: should frozen embryos in in vitro fertilization be opened to research and funding?

Maximum 900 words)no comments y policy | terms of usesitemap | view desktop ng: trump administration tax reform courts affordable care act : a life science crucible: stem cell research and innovation done responsibly and ctive timeline: a brief history of stem cell : jonathan moreno on lifting restrictions on stem cell ent barack obama takes a first step today toward bringing the united states back to the scientific cutting edge by issuing an executive order that lifts the existing restriction on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. This will allow the national institutes of health to award competitive, merit-based grant funding to scientists who wish to conduct research with any ethically derived human embryonic stem cells, not just those deemed acceptable by the bush administration. It also paves the way for congress to pass legislation that will lay out important ethical guidelines to ensure that all stem cell research is conducted responsibly and safely. A recent report from the center for american progress, “a life sciences crucible,” outlines how to construct these l funding for embryonic stem cell research will have far-reaching effects; here are eight of the most important:1. The federal government will be able to set ethical guidelines that will allow research to progress cautiously and responsibly. An executive order paves the way for congress to pass legislation that outlines policy guidelines to ensure that all stem cell research—embryonic and otherwise—is carried out with the highest ethical standards. The legislation should provide broad, principled ethical standards so that the science itself can evolve in the direction that experimentation and serendipity takes it—alongside easily adapted regulations governing the research, based on the broad ethical standards approved by congress. Specifically, the legislation should charge the national institutes of health and the department of health and human services with the duty to update at regular intervals its regulations for embryonic stem cell research in light of new science. This can involve cultivating a small sample of a patient’s own cells, reprogramming them, and using them to heal—without the risk of rejection or severe side effects that usually result from introducing foreign therapeutic materials.

The potential therapies range from transforming the pancreatic cells of diabetics so they can produce insulin to reconnecting the nerves in severed spinal cords. It will be a vital component of cutting edge life sciences in the 21st century, but for medical researchers to participate competitively and responsibly, the federal government must reform its stem cell research policy in order to fund embryonic stem cell research. Opponents of human embryonic stem cell research often champion human adult stem cells, umbilical cord blood stem cells, and induced pluripotent stem cells as suitable alternatives to embryonic stem cells. The new york state stem cell foundation reported in july 2008 that its chief scientific officer, kevin eggan, produced adult stem cell lines from patients with lou gehrig’s disease. Yet eggan said he will still continue his work on human embryonic stem cell research because, “we couldn’t possibly be where we are now without first doing extensive work with human embryonic stem cells … they remain the stem cell gold standard” against which all cells brought forth as alternatives must be measured. Nothing is more valuable than the lives that will be saved and improved with the therapies and cures that may arise from embryonic stem cells. And the federal government, state governments, universities, and private industry all need to work together to get stem cells from bench to bedside in an efficient, equitable, and safe manner. The bayh-dole act, which allows universities to patent the results of federally funded research and then license to corporations the right to develop products from those results, will speed translation of basic research into cures. Scientists can differentiate cells into specific cell types upon which they can quickly test whether a drug has a desired effect.

For instance, researchers could test drug toxicity with a group of differentiated liver cells rather than in a living person’s system. It is a longstanding research paradigm to study failures of development by determining when, where, and how genes malfunction. But they can only do this by tracing the development of human cells from the very beginning. Therefore scientists need to conduct research on embryonic stem cells so that they can discover how these all-purpose cells can change into any one of the more than 200 different cell types in the human body. The patchwork of state initiatives and regulations introduced wasteful legal and bureaucratic complexity into the overall enterprise of stem cell research. For instance, until november 2008, when voters amended the state constitution, it was illegal in michigan to derive embryonic stem cells because the state constitution banned the destruction of embryos for research. As a result, researchers at michigan’s large and prestigious state universities had to import cells from out of state. A report from last year estimated that lowering the barriers to stem cell research in that state could generate almost 800 jobs. Healthy stem cell research requires interstate collaboration among various institutions, including private industry and academia.

Some states have adopted laws that either explicitly or implicitly ban or inhibit human embryonic stem cell research. Hopefully, with a robust and comprehensive federal policy, states will repeal or revise these laws in order to take full advantage of federal research dollars. Thus, the states would allow talented research scientists in academia and industry throughout the nation to maximize their : a life science crucible: stem cell research and innovation done responsibly and ctive timeline: a brief history of stem cell ibe to day nov 29, 2017 09:30 a bad tax deal means for communities of colormore eventspress e: cap report shows greater reproductive health access creates economic opportunity for e: erin cohan named chief of staff and vice e: new data obtained by cap show higher rates of sexual harassment charges in industries with large numbers of low-wage criminal justicedemocracy and governmentdisabilityearly childhoodeconomyeducation, k-12education, postsecondaryenergy and environmentforeign policy and securityguns and crimehealth careimmigrationlgbtpovertyrace and ethnicityreligion and searchmethods experiments design statistics reasoning philosophy ethics history academicpsychology biology physics medicine anthropology write paperwriting outline research question parts of a paper formatting academic journals tips for kidshow to conduct experiments experiments with food science experiments historic experiments self-helpself-esteem worry social anxiety arachnophobia anxiety sitequiz about faq terms privacy policy contact sitemap search codeloginsign and cons in explorable? Take it with you wherever you research council of ibe to our rss blakstad on this page on your website:Pros and cons in debate of the pros and cons of stem cell research clearly illustrate the difficult ethics evaluations researchers sometimes must article is a part of the guide:Select from one of the other courses available:Experimental ty and ical tion and psychology e projects for ophy of sance & tics beginners tical bution in er 17 more articles on this 't miss these related articles:2tuskegee syphilis study. Scientists must consider whether the positive effects from their research are likely to be significantly higher than the negative cells are crucial to develop organisms. They are nonspecialized cells which have the potential to create other types of specific cells, such as blood-, brain-, tissue- or cells are in all of our body and lives, but are far more potent in a fetus (also spelled foetus, fœtus, faetus, or fætus) than in an adult types of stem cells may be able to create all other cells in the body. Others have the potential to repair or replace damaged tissue or nic stem cells are developed from a female egg after it is fertilized by sperm. The cells are grown in laboratories where tests are carried out to investigate fundamental properties of the d fetuses are not the only source of stem cellsthere are stem cells in the both placenta and blood contained in the placenta. These are fertilized human eggs that were not implanted into a controversy surrounding stem cell research led to an intense debate about ethics.

Up until the recent years, the research method mainly focused on embryonic stem cells, which involves taking tissue from an aborted embryo to get proper material to study. This is typically done just days after conception or between the 5th and 9th then, researchers have moved on to more ethical study methods, such as induced pluripotent stem cells (ips). Ips are artificially derived from a non-pluripotent cell, such as adult somatic is probably an important advancement in stem cell research, since it allows researchers to obtain pluripotent stem cells, which are important in research, without the controversial use of were two main issues concerning stem cell research with both pros and cons:How the knowledge will be ns about the first issue is really not just about stem cell research, as it may be applied to most research about human 2007, the second point, concerns about the methods involved, has been less debated, because of scientific developments such as ips. Stem cell research - arguments regarding the usage of the you will most probably notice, the following arguments are not exclusively in use when talking about stem cell cell research can potentially help treat a range of medical problems. Or repair damaged d risk of transplantation (you could possibly get a copy of your own heart in a heart-transplantation in the cells may play a major role in treatment of these diseases could also give significant social benefits for individuals and economic gains for society. Argue that stem cell research in the far future can lead to knowledge on how to clone humans. It is hard to say whether this is true, but we have seen devastating consequences of other research-programs, even with good intentions, such as nuclear research. Stem cell research - pros and cons about the methods controversy regarding the method involved was much tenser when researchers used embryonic stem cells as their main method for stem cell imer:these points are based on the old debate about the methods of stem cells research, from before 2007. Since then, scientists have moved on to use more ethical methods for stem cell research, such as ips.

This section serves as an illustration of the difficult evaluations researchers may have to analyze. The benefits of stem cell research have such a great outcome that they outweigh the ethical issues. Stem cells would not be that interesting because they do not have the same properties as stem cells from a research would give great insights about the basics of the s against stem cell research argued that the ethical issues of scientific work on aborted fetuses did not justify the possible benefits. A fertilized egg should be valued as a human life even if it is in its very first weeks. Should (and will) develop more ethical methods (such as using adult stem cells) which will enable us to research ethically. We should wait until those methods are scientific value has been overstated or has flaws. We do not know for sure that we can use stem cells to clone transplantable stem cell-research is an example of the, sometimes difficult, cost-benefit analysis in ethics which scientists need to do. Even though many issues regarding the ethics of stem cell research have now been solved, it serves as a valuable example of ethical cost-benefit previously heated debate seems to have lead to new solutions which makes both sides cell pros and cons had to be valued carefully, for a number of you are planning a research project, ethics must always be considered. If you cannot defend a study ethically, you should not and will not be allowed to conduct it.

The analysis needs to include human/animal discomfort/risks, environmental issues, material costs/benefits, economy was the debate regarding the stem cell research so intense? And in this case, researchers had to do exactly that: measure life against an abortion and someone dying, suffering from a possible curable disease, is a tragedy. Does a big breakthrough in the research justify the use of the method in the present? Perception is influenced by our individual feelings, morals and knowledge about the , at the time we did not know whether the research was necessary and sufficient to give us the mentioned health , other consequences of the research are uncertain. All knowledge acquired, within research or other arenas, may be used for evil causes in the future - it is impossible to stem cell research-debate is an example on how people value various aspects differently. Stems cells - nobel prize medicine over 500 articles on psychology, science, and this field blank:. Are free to copy, share and adapt any text in the article, as long as you give appropriate credit and provide a link/reference to this thics in research - how morals and ethics affect researchdifferent research methods - how to choose an appropriate design? Method - research, science, ch regulations and the helsinki searchmethods experiments design statistics reasoning philosophy ethics history academicpsychology biology physics medicine anthropology write paperwriting outline research question parts of a paper formatting academic journals tips for kidshow to conduct experiments experiments with food science experiments historic experiments self-helpself-esteem worry social anxiety arachnophobia anxiety sitequiz about faq terms privacy policy contact sitemap search codeloginsign and cons in explorable? Prentice, founding member, do no harm -- the coalition of americans for research ethics:Federal funding for human embryonic stem cell research is illegal,Unethical, and l: current federal law enacted by congress is clear iting "research in which a human embryo or embryos are destroyed,Discarded, or knowingly subjected to risk of injury or death.

Even president clinton's ics advisory commission (nbac) called it a "mistaken notion" that there can be any meaningful separation between destroying , and research that relies on this destruction. The nih argue that federal funds can be used for research made possible destroying human embryos, so long as private dollars fund the act,Does not clarify the law but only circumvents cal: destroying living human embryos for research violates tenet of the healing arts: "first do no harm. If the president approves federal funding for such research,It will mark the first time in our nation's history that our endorsed the deliberate destruction of human life to obtain will such research be limited to so-called "excess" embryos . In congressional testimony, representatives of the ry have been clear that such "excess" embryos will not ient for the research envisioned. Essential" to approve the even more disturbing prospect of g for creation of embryos for the sole purpose of destroying their genetically matched ssary: nbac was clear that use of "excess embryos" is sfully in humans to repair heart damage, treat cartilage defects in children, restore vision to legally blind patients, and in treatments for systemic lupus, multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, immunodeficiencies, and e the often-extravagant claims made about them, embryonic stem cells have no such track record of success. They have never helped a single human patient and have a poor record in animal research. Even those who work with embryonic stem cells note that they are difficult to grow, hard to control, and have a potential to form all the recent advances in adult stem cell research, more researchers now say that embryonic stem cells may not be needed after all for medical progress. Instead, we should increase funding for adult stem cell research, which protects the inviolability of individuals, rejects harming some for the potential benefit of others, and -- unlike embryonic stem cell research -- y helping real human patients.