The main controversy is whewn stem cells are harvested from aborted fetuses, or when an egg is fertilized in a laboratory for the sole purpose of harvesting stem cells.
Stem cells can also be gotten from umbilical cord blood after a baby is born.
There might be ways to extract embryonic stem cells without damaging the embryo.
<><><><><>
That might solve the problem of "killing" the embryo, but it would not solve the problem of "creating new life".
I don't know I think its with religion
The question is how the stem cells are obtained. When the stem cells are acquired from killing babies, many would object. Especially since stem cells can be obtained in other ways, and embryonic cells really offer no advantages.
The main ethical issue which has arisen with respect to the use of stem cells for medical purposes is that the best source of stem cells is the human embryo, but only if the embryo is aborted. The question then arises, was that embryo going to be aborted anyway, or was the decision to abort influenced by the need for stem cells. So then, we can argue that if an embryo was aborted specifically because of the wish to use its stem cells, it is not fair to kill that embryo, which otherwise could have become a human being. We might be in the position of killing one patient (if an embryo can be considered a patient) in order to save another, and that is not good ethics. There are, of course, also people who oppose abortion under any circumstances, whether stem cells are harvested or not, and these people will also have a problem with any use of embryonic stem cells, even when the abortion was going to happen anyway.
I think it is unethical to take from babies but it would be okay if you take from adults.
Stem cells do not have the conciousness to have ethical or moral issues.
People may hold them due mainly to their lack of knowledge over the functions of stem cells.
hkjnhj
embryonic stem cells can differentiate into more types of cells
Stem cell research is at the center of a raging controversy due to its ethical implications. Although few debate the potential marvels that mastering stem cells could provide by way of medical advancements in the treatment and prevention of life threatening diseases, many object strenuously to the measures being taken to reach that goal. The study of adult and cord blood stem cells is not disputed, since harvesting them causes no harm. However, the harvesting of embryonic stem cells is another matter altogether, since it requires the destruction of early-stage embryos, known as blastocycts. Proponents of embryonic research argue that a blastocyst is only a cluster of 150 cells, and does not possess even the nervous system required to biologically qualify as a human being. Further, they maintain that blastocysts are surpluses obtained from in vitro fertilization clinics with the consent of the patients. However, for the people whose moral beliefs state that human life begins at the moment of conception, embryonic research is simply unacceptable, especially since adult stem cell therapy has already proven to have potential in treating diseases such as diabetes, acute renal failure, sickle cell anemia, and Parkinson's. By: Nathan Rules
Researchers could use embryonic stem cells to find the cure to many different disorders and illnesses.
One major difference between adult and embryonic stem cells is their different abilities in the number and type of differentiated cell types they can become. Embryonic stem cell can become all cell types of the body because they are pluripotent. Adult stem cells are thought to be limited to differentiating into different cell types of their tissue of origin.
Embryonic stem cells that are pluripotent can develop into any type of cell.
ko
Human embryonic stem cell research is controversial because the arguments for it andsagainst it both involve ethical issues of life and death.
Katharina Phillips has written: 'Human embryonic stem cell research' -- subject(s): Embryonic stem cells, Research
they found a way to obtain stem cells without destroying an embryo - this removed all ethical concerns that were present for the use of embryonic stem cells
Great Britain, Japan, and Israel
embryonic stem cell research
embryonic stem cells can differentiate into more types of cells
Why including the ethical question is important.... contrary to the above reply research into this subject is very important, as with all ethical and scientific issues where large amounts of public and private funds are being used. as I'm sure you are aware the ethics of stem cell research are a key part of the debate (e.g. women's rights, ownership of DNA material, ethics of paying for donations, possible scientific uses of stem cells) - and also an area where education about the differences between adult and embryonic stem cell sources is key - to make an argument supporting adult stem cell research without getting acknowledging the key ethical issues would suggest that you are uniformed about the subject matter. to provide a convincing argument the ethics should be covered and an argument put forward, including how ethics can be considered and integrated into the research process, and why ultimately you feel that the benefits of this research outweigh ethical concerns. there are actually no ethical issues abwt adult (somatic) stem cells. They are a completely different type of stem cell to the embryonic stem cells you are refering to. embryonic stem cells are derived from embryos and that's where all the ethics are but somatic stem cells are derived from anywhere on the human body that has stem cells e.g bone marrow, brain cells etc. and humans are not killed by taking them. so don't worry to much about the ethical issues accept for the possible ability of splicing genes, designer babies and cloning but that's a long way off.
Yes, Barack Obama has expressed his support for embryonic stem cell research. During his presidency, he issued an executive order in 2009, lifting the restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research that had been imposed by his predecessor, President George W. Bush. Obama believed that this research held the potential for important medical breakthroughs.
Using embryonic stem cells is unethical for many people, especially if they were only created for stem cell research.
Stem cell research is at the center of a raging controversy due to its ethical implications. Although few debate the potential marvels that mastering stem cells could provide by way of medical advancements in the treatment and prevention of life threatening diseases, many object strenuously to the measures being taken to reach that goal. The study of adult and cord blood stem cells is not disputed, since harvesting them causes no harm. However, the harvesting of embryonic stem cells is another matter altogether, since it requires the destruction of early-stage embryos, known as blastocycts. Proponents of embryonic research argue that a blastocyst is only a cluster of 150 cells, and does not possess even the nervous system required to biologically qualify as a human being. Further, they maintain that blastocysts are surpluses obtained from in vitro fertilization clinics with the consent of the patients. However, for the people whose moral beliefs state that human life begins at the moment of conception, embryonic research is simply unacceptable, especially since adult stem cell therapy has already proven to have potential in treating diseases such as diabetes, acute renal failure, sickle cell anemia, and Parkinson's. By: Nathan Rules
Embryonic stem cells are totipotent, meaning they have the potential to become any type of body cell because the genome hasn't been differentiated yet; however, to obtain embryonic stem cells the fetus must die.