Stem Cell Research: Yes or No?
Mood:
on fire
Topic: Real Issues
We live in a world where science has become a leading force in our society. Even though we have come far in the way doctors and scientists treat patients (the invention of the artificial heart, hearing aids, and surgical procedures) you wouldn’t think we’d have a problem moving forward concerning a possible cure for almost every disease and hereditary condition known to man. This cure that I am speaking of is the use of Stem Cells to regenerate viable organs for transplants, Parkinson's disease, diabetes, heart disease, multiple sclerosis, burns and spinal cord injuries. Some people believe that allowing this research to continue is immoral and advocates the murder of unborn children. Even though I don’t hold a viewpoint on abortion, I feel that by not allowing the continuation of stem cell research, we are allowing personal values to hold us back from scientific progress.
On one hand, in August of last year, Harvard Scientists did find a way to conduct stem cell research by fusing blank embryonic stem cells to human skin rather than using a fertilized egg. -“Pro’s and Cons to Embryonic Stem Cell Research” - http://usliberals.about.com/od/stemcellresearch/i/StemCell1.htm . So technically we shouldn’t have to debate the morality of this research considering that it is possible to bypass the use of fertilized embryos. Though this particular process is promising, the researchers have also cautioned that it could take up to ten years for positive results to show up. The problem I have is why wait ten years for this process to become perfected if we already have the abundance of stem cells from aborted fetus. Isn’t it worse to allow the opportunity of fixing an ailment to go to waste than the abortion itself? Why are we allowing a person to die while we’re debating the rights of something that has no life? Women who are either not ready to be mothers or are unwed or even worse, victims of rape, are going to have abortions regardless. This is a fact of life and is going to be a constant so why allow this resource to be wasted? Of course some would question whether or not a woman would willingly become pregnant in order to harvest the stem cells for future use.
Therefore I would like to discuss the reason why a woman will not willingly become pregnant in order to harvest stem cells for future use. Abortion, which is the medical termination of a pregnancy, is not a very comfortable procedure. In fact, some studies have shown that after two or more abortions in a row can cause serious complications. “A Boston study by a group who has aggressively done abortions denied any increase after one abortion, but, after two or more abortions, they did find a "two-to three-fold increase in risk of first trimester spontaneous abortions [miscarriages]," as well as "losses up to 28 weeks gestation." Levin et al., "Association of Induced Abortion with Subsequent Pregnancy Loss," JAMA, vol. 243, no. 24, June 27, 1980, pp. 2495-2499 (http://www.abortionfacts.com/online_books/love_them_both/why_cant_we_love_them_both_20.asp). Also some studies have shown that repetitive abortion supposedly causes cancer and eventually causes the female to become barren. Therefore I believe that it is silly to even consider that a woman would willingly become pregnant purely to harvest DNA.
So in conclusion we’ve found that not only is not allowing researchers to use stem cells from unborn fetuses or embryos not being used a waste of scientific and medical resource, but to argue that women would go through a painful procedure in order to harvest DNA ridiculous as well. We need to move forward in scientific progress or stay in the dark ages. I’d rather we move forward.
Posted by evescloset.com
at 10:13 PM EDT
Updated: Thursday, 31 August 2006 1:51 PM EDT