It goes without saying that one must know the definition of stem cells prior to giving an opinion on stem cell research. According to the Google definition, stem cells are cells that can change into many different cellular types depending on bodily responses to internal and external stimuli. Upon further review, one must ask a very important question: Where do we obtain these stem cells? The answer to this question is quite simple; scientists can retrieve stem cells from two sources: adults and embryos.
The main controversy behind stem cell research deals with embryonic stem cells. These cells are very beneficial as they change into any kind of cell that is needed for a given situation. This is because embryonic cells haven't been given a bodily assignment yet due to the development inside the womb. To make things less controversial, scientists have delivered a scientific breakthrough in which adult stem cells can be used when researching. However, adult stem cells aren't as beneficial as embryonic stem cells because adult cells already have a "bodily niche". An adult liver cell will always remain a liver cell whereas an embryonic cell could manipulate several cellular types.
Why is obtaining embryonic stem cells considered a controversy? This answer parallels with the controversy behind abortion. Several people consider embryos as living human beings. So, if scientists obtain embryonic stem cells, this could be seen as promoting the killing of babies. In fact, scientists used to get embryonic stem cells from aborted embryos, but that is currently illegal. Instead, embryonic stem cells can be retrieved during a woman's pregnancy through amniocentesis and through certain animals. However, this process can still be considered putting babies at risk.
This issue of embryonic stem cells is controversial mainly for the fact that people have different definitions of what is living and what is not. Embryos can possibly be considered living because they turn into fetuses and later on, they become babies. Other than that, there is no clear evidence that could prove embryos are living. The heart and lungs are just beginning to develop, but scientists can not determine if these organs are functioning at the embryonic phase. Also, the nervous system is extremely premature, so a reaction to an outside stimulus is very minimal. In fact, it is possible not to have a response at all because the threshold has not been met.
With the analysis of the embryonic development, I feel that an embryo has a potential of becoming a living thing, but I don't believe it is living. However, people have different views, which leads to my question for the audience: What is your definition of living?
7 comments:
I agree with you. Personally, I dont believe that embryos are living nor fetuses. It can evolve into something that will live but in the state I dont think that it is actually living. In order to live I feel like the organism has to breathe and eat but in the stage that it is in when the stem cells are taken from it it is not alive yet.
This response is to hotshot:
I'm glad you agree me. I'm actually researching about the controversy behind whether or whether not an embryo is living. Guess where this led me? The answer is quite simple: A ton of articles that were biased and even misleading. As of right now, we don't have scientific evidence to determine whether an embryo lives or not. People just have their own opinions and interpretations. I define living as eating and giving off waste, and that's something an embryo cannot do.
I also agree; I do not believe that embryo's are living creatures. It has not yet developed into humanistic qualities, nor is living or breathing. I personally have been researching the ethical issue of using embryonic stem cells for research and have also come across numerous biased and opinionated articles. Every person out there has their own opinion on what living is and this is why the issue is so controversial. How is a society supposed to choose which are the right steps to take when no one can agree on one position? So many factors contribute to a person’s belief such as religion, personal experiences, family history etc. There will never be a decision made that will satisfy everyone’s belief so should America keep debating the question and going back and forth on the choice of whether to continue with this research or just make a decision and follow though with it?
This response is to trailrunner89:
There was one word that popped up in my mind after reading your comment: Absolutely. I think right now we're having an issue in which everything is being derived from prejudgments. We need to stop arguing and say, "hey, there's no evidence to prove anything." After having this mentality, people can start realizing the important things behind stem cell research, such as attempting to find cures to diseases rather than concentrating on such a pointless argument. Don't get me wrong, embryos should serve as judgment calls in the case of abortion, but not in stem cell research. Embryonic stem cells don't require fertilization nor an implant into a woman's womb. This time requires advancement, not constant bickering.
I appreciate your input.
Wow, this piece of writing is fastidious, my sister is analyzing
these things, thus I am going to let know her.
Here is my web page :: green coffee beans
It's not my first time to pay a quick visit this site, i am visiting this website dailly and obtain pleasant facts from here everyday.
my website; nice clothing
Usually I do not read post on blogs, but I would like to
say that this write-up very compelled me to check out and do it!
Your writing taste has been surprised me. Thank you, very
nice article.
my site; women dress
Post a Comment