Better treatment of these diseases could also give significant social benefits for individuals and economic gains for society. The controversy regarding the method involved was much tenser when researchers used Embryonic Stem Cells as their main method for stem cell research. These points are based on the old debate about the methods of stem cells research, from before 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 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 analysis.
The previously heated debate seems to have lead to new solutions which makes both sides happier. Stem Cell pros and cons had to be valued carefully, for a number of reasons. When 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. You cannot defend a study ethically unless the presumed cost is lower than expected benefits. Why was the debate regarding the stem cell research so intense?
First, it was a matter of life - something impossible to measure. And in this case, researchers had to do exactly that: Both an abortion and someone dying, suffering from a possible curable disease, is a tragedy. Which have the highest value? Does a big breakthrough in the research justify the use of the method in the present?
Would the benefits of studying abortions outweigh the costs? The choice was subjective: Nobody knows all the risks or all the possible outcomes, so we had to value it with our perception of the outcome. Perception is influenced by our individual feelings, morals and knowledge about the issue. Second, at the time we did not know whether the research was necessary and sufficient to give us the mentioned health benefits.
Third, other consequences of the research are uncertain. Could the research be misused in the future or not? We simply do not know. All knowledge acquired, within research or other arenas, may be used for evil causes in the future - it is impossible to know. The Stem cell research-debate is an example on how people value various aspects differently. It is also an example of how critics and debate can lead to significant improvements for both sides.
Check out our quiz-page with tests about:. Retrieved Sep 14, from Explorable. The text in this article is licensed under the Creative Commons-License Attribution 4. You can use it freely with some kind of link , and we're also okay with people reprinting in publications like books, blogs, newsletters, course-material, papers, wikipedia and presentations with clear attribution. Don't have time for it all now?
No problem, save it as a course and come back to it later. Share this page on your website: Pros And Cons in Research The debate of the pros and cons of stem cell research clearly illustrate the difficult ethics evaluations researchers sometimes must do. This article is a part of the guide: It is often claimed by pro-life supporters that the use of adult stem cells from sources such as umbilical cord blood has consistently produced more promising results than the use of embryonic stem cells.
Furthermore, adult stem cell research may be able to make greater advances if less money and resources were channeled into embryonic stem cell research.
Adult stem cells have already produced therapies, while embryonic stem cells have not. Moreover, there have been many advances in adult stem cell research, including a recent study where pluripotent adult stem cells were manufactured from differentiated fibroblast by the addition of specific transcription factors. Newly created stem cells were developed into an embryo and were integrated into newborn mouse tissues, analogous to the properties of embryonic stem cells.
This argument remains hotly debated on both sides. Those critical of embryonic stem cell research point to a current lack of practical treatments, while supporters argue that advances will come with more time and that breakthroughs cannot be predicted.
The use of embryonic stem cell in therapies may be fundamentally flawed. For instance, one study suggests that autologous embryonic stem cells generated for therapeutic cloning may still suffer from immune rejection. The researchers note that: In contrast, there are reports of adult stem cells being successfully reintegrated into an autogenic animal. Another concern with embryonic stem cell treatments is a tendency of stem cells from embryos to create tumors.
Scientists have long promised spectacular results from embryonic stem cell research, and this has not yet occurred. Conspicuously, such criticism has even come from researchers themselves.
Similarly, fertility expert and former president of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, Lord Winston has warned of a public backlash against stem cell research if it fails to deliver on some of the "hype" surrounding potential treatments.
Notably, a fundamental impediment to the widespread acceptance of embryonic stem cell research is the destruction of the embryo. Consequently, some stem cell researchers are working to develop techniques of isolating stem cells that are as potent as embryonic stem cells, but do not require the destruction of a human embryo. Some believe that human somatic cells can be coaxed to "de-differentiate" and revert to an embryonic state.
What are the arguments against stem cell research? Stem Cell Research I strongly oppose human cloning, as do most Americans. We recoil at the idea of growing human beings for spare body parts, or creating life for our convenience.
Mar 15, · This decision comes amidst a heated debate regarding the medical and economic potential of stem cell research as against its ethical pitfalls. The scientific, legal, ethical and philosophical arguments have been discussed extensively (Mieth, ; Colman and Burley, ).
Aug 09, · The Case Against Stem Cell Research. Opponents of research on embryonic cells, including many religious and anti-abortion groups, contend that embryos are human beings with the same rights — and thus entitled to the same protections against abuse — as anyone else. 1) Stem Cell Research - Arguments Regarding the Usage of the Knowledge. As you will most probably notice, the following arguments are not exclusively in use when talking about stem cell research. Pros. Stem cell research can potentially help treat a range of medical problems.
The final arguments against stem cell research deal with the actual cost of such treatments is simply too high to be implemented on a large scale. Stem cell research pros and cons have gained a lot of attention lately due to President Obama lifting a ban on stem cell research. Home > Stem Cells > Arguments Against Embryonic Stem Cell Research: Arguments Against Embryonic Stem Cell Research 1) Embryos are lives. An embryo is actually a human; it should be valued as highly as a human life.