Is stem cell research on unborn feotuses wrong ?

Question

Do you think its morally right to use unborn babies to help cure sicknesses in adults when cures for most modern illnesses already exist ? If someone has heart disease this can be cured by taking a healthy diet low in salt and saturated fat and high in vitamins and minerals. Many physical illnesses are diet related and in most cases we would not need vaccinations if we ate good foods and a lot less sugar, meat and dairy. A lot of illnesses can also be brought on by stress and an unhealthy mind but nowadays most people are aware a healthy diet and a healthy mind can prevent most non-inherited forms of illness, so why is stem cell research necessary. Is it for the few people who have severe illnesses that cannot be cured by any other means or is it simply an interesting and new way to experiement with the human body ? I understand that most people are against stem cell research on unborn babies for moral reasons but I want to know what the benefits of such research would be ?

Answer 1

Not all diseases can be cured by other methods. My computer science teacher, a very inspirational person, who I am inclined to believe does not have an unhealthy lifestyle/diet, was diagnosed with mantle cell lymphoma earlier this year and is going to get stem cell transplantation for her bone marrow. In fact this is actually a remission and she just got chemotherapy the first time, which missed a handful of cancer cells. So, non-stem-cell methods are not necessarily infallible (of course, the use of stem cells is not infallible either.)

I cannot fathom the motives of people who want to do stem-cell research - whether it is for the benefit of the human race (positive), for curiosity's sake (neutral), or for evil (negative). Whether or not you consider it wrong depends on your specific ethical/moral tenets (I personally believe that human beings do not receive human rights until the first moment that they are conscious, so that stem cell research is not "wrong"). As for benefits - we could finally eradicate untold numbers of inherited diseases (which are worse than the non-inherited ones, aren't they?) What more could you ask for?

Answer 2

Behavior that produces unborn fetuses is wrong.

Answer 3

if you want to make an omelet, you gotta break some eggs.

Answer 4

Your argument shows a misunderstanding both of what stem cell research is intended to cure, and the source of the stem cells.

Stem cells are not intended to solve diseases like heart disease or stress related illnesses. It is intended to grow tissue that the body does not otherwise grow for itself. One possibility is that we can grow nerve tissue to fix a damaged nerve, and possibly cure paralysis. Modern medicine currently has no cure for a spinal injury paralysis. No matter how healthy you are, anyone can accidentally break their back. Stem cells could also be used to cure diseases of the brain, like Parkinson's and Alzheimer's, both of which have no cure. They could even be used to grow new organs for someone so that they don't have to wait for an organ donor.

Now, the source of embryonic stem cells isn't from fetuses, it is from discarded embryos. When someone goes through the  process of in vitro fertilization, they create several embryos. They pick a few of the best embryos for implantation. The rest are frozen for future use, or discarded, depending on the couple's wishes. When the embryos are discarded, these are the ones that could be used for stem cell research. In other words, they are using embryos that were going to die anyway. They are at a stage where they are a mass of cells, with no organs, heart beat, etc. If you have a problem with stem cell research, you really should be going after IVF clinics.