|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
RebelliousOne
GutFeel Senior
Joined: 11 Jul 2004
Posts: 64
Location: Arkansas
|
 Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2004 11:09 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Editor wrote: | RO:
I believe that stem cell research has a vast potential. Though I understand your sentiments, but would like to clarify that there is a controversy on whether the initial embryonic mass of cells can be called a human being.
Another point is regarding the value of an existing life versus the embryonic cells. I will value the life of a four year old suffering from a birth defect more than the mass of cells, which can be used to cure him. I have heard of cases where couples conceive again just for the sake of their first child so that the second child’s bone marrow can be used to cure the first one.
So can you ignore the sufferings of a human being with whom you have spent a part of your life for the sake of a mass of cells. I don’t think it is ethical…
And yes these cells MAY help in curing diseases but my gutfeel is that at least this ‘may’ has a ray of hope. |
Editor:
No, the "initial embryonic mass of cells" cannot be called a 'human being', per se, but they can be called a human life because that is precisely what they are: Life destined to become a human being. Whether that mass of cells looks human is not the issue, at least not for me; rather, I argue that regardless of how it looks, it is still a human life and, as such, must be respected and allowed to achieve it full potential as a human being.
This issue may be moot, however, considering the article that Matt posted. I had forgotten that there is a viable alternative to embryonic stem-cell research, and that is adult stem-cell research, which promises all the same fantastic cures as embryonic stem-cell research, but without all the murdering of unborn children.
Considering Matt's contribution to the debate, Editor, would you favor suspending research on embryonic stem cells if adult stem-cell research may achieve the same results?
RO |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Editor
Site Admin
Joined: 09 Apr 2004
Posts: 337
Location: India
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2004 5:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | RO: Considering Matt's contribution to the debate, Editor, would you favor suspending research on embryonic stem cells if adult stem-cell research may achieve the same results? |
The article posted by Matt is indeed comprehensive and highlights an alternative to the culling of embryonic stem cells i.e. using adult stem cells. But having said that, i would like to point out that the article misses out on the significant differences between the embryonic and adult stem cells.
The embryonic stem cell is pluripotent, i. e. It has the ability to develop into many different cell types of the body. Adult stem cells are generally limited to differentiating into different cell types of their tissue of origin. Mind you, if they had the same potential, we would not be debating it here as the scientists would have readily used the adult stem cells leaving the embryonic cells behind.
Secondly, large numbers of embryonic stem cells can be relatively easily grown in culture, while adult stem cells are rare in mature tissues and methods for expanding their numbers in cell culture have not yet been worked out. This is an important distinction, as large numbers of cells are needed for stem cell replacement therapies.
Therefore, keeping the above two factors in mind, i would never favour suspending research on the embryonic stem cells because they clearly cannot achieve the same results. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RebelliousOne
GutFeel Senior
Joined: 11 Jul 2004
Posts: 64
Location: Arkansas
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 07, 2004 9:56 am Post subject: Let Us Agree To Disagree |
|
|
| Editor wrote: | | Quote: | | RO: Considering Matt's contribution to the debate, Editor, would you favor suspending research on embryonic stem cells if adult stem-cell research may achieve the same results? |
The article posted by Matt is indeed comprehensive and highlights an alternative to the culling of embryonic stem cells i.e. using adult stem cells. But having said that, i would like to point out that the article misses out on the significant differences between the embryonic and adult stem cells.
The embryonic stem cell is pluripotent, i. e. It has the ability to develop into many different cell types of the body. Adult stem cells are generally limited to differentiating into different cell types of their tissue of origin. Mind you, if they had the same potential, we would not be debating it here as the scientists would have readily used the adult stem cells leaving the embryonic cells behind.
Secondly, large numbers of embryonic stem cells can be relatively easily grown in culture, while adult stem cells are rare in mature tissues and methods for expanding their numbers in cell culture have not yet been worked out. This is an important distinction, as large numbers of cells are needed for stem cell replacement therapies.
Therefore, keeping the above two factors in mind, i would never favour suspending research on the embryonic stem cells because they clearly cannot achieve the same results. |
Editor:
I understand the distinction between the embryonic and the adult stem cells, and I appreciate the ease with which large numbers of embryonic stem cells can be grown in culture; however, I again must point out that by limiting research to the use of adult stem cells, no lives are lost in the process; and that is what we are talking about here: human life, regardless of the forum it may take or the age it may be; a human life remains a human life, and we have no business treating it as though it were merchanise, or something less than human.
Also, I must emphasize that the scientific uses of stem cells are speculative at best. No one knows if these "magic cells" will cure the plethora of diseases and afflictions which plague humankind. At best, by allowing embryonic stem cell research, we are agreeing to murder our progeny based on a hunch, an expectation that amounts to a gambler willing to bet his last dollar on the turn of one card -- except in this case, his last card is a human life.
I truly do understand the "human condition," and the misery that accompanies it; and I wish I could do something to minimize humanity's pain and suffering; however, I could not, with clear conscious, murder one innocent human life in order to preserve another human life, even if that preserved life were my own; the price would be too high, and the guilt too great.
We must find a alternative to embryonic stem cell research, even if it means we put 'all our eggs in one basket' and limit research to adult stem cells. The very idea that the preservation of life requires the taking of life is too Orwellian for me to contemplate; too repugnant; too narissistic for my moral palate. I could no more live a life that required the killing of a zygot than I could if it required the killing of a full-grown person. Murder is murder, and no sophistry will change that fact.
We, obviously, have reached an empasse' at this point within our discussion. We could continue, true enough; but from this point onward, we would become redundant in our remarks. Let us say simply that on this point, we agree to disagree; okay?
RO |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jan
GutFeel Junior
Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 27
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 08, 2004 12:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Before we agree to disagree, I can't help but notice that there is a double standard here, RO.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but in your posts in this thread, your opinion of embryonic cells is that they are human life and that you passionately oppose the taking of said life in order to better the life of another/others.
If we then read the thread titles "The Fate of a Rapist", you have no qualms of ending the life of certain criminals in order to better society. It makes no sense whatsoever to me. You say "Murder is murder, and no sophistry will change that fact." I realy am struggling to understand where the difference lies, not in terms of the reasons for taking the life but in terms of your points similar to the one I have just quoted. You can't have it both ways, RO.
Now, I may be wrong again, but I suspaect that your next post will contain something about me being totally the opposite and equally confusing. Afterall, I would never hang the rapist in a million years. I would however condone embryonic stem cell research. The diference being that I will never see a blastocyst as human life in such an early form. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group • Forum skin by Volize
|
| |
|
|
