What is your opinion on adult stem cell research and embryonic stem cell research?

Question

I'm doing a survey on this topic and how stem cell research influences people, so answers would be excellent. Adult stem cells involve the use of tissues from grown adults, whether they be from the skin or bone marrow, whereas embryonic stem cells involve the use of 4-5 day old human embryos to repair systems of the body, replenish specialised cells and maintain organs in the human body (to name some of the functions of stem cell research). Do you agree with allowing adult and embryonic stem cell research? Is it morally and ethically correct? Are you affected economically or socially by this research? How do you think technology has impacted the development of stem cell research?

Thanks for taking the time to answer my survey!

Answer 1

> " Do you agree with allowing adult and embryonic stem cell research?"

Yes - I agree with both.

> "Is it morally and ethically correct?"

Obviously, Adult Stem Cell research has few ethical difficulties (no more than organ donation).

ES Cell research DOES neccessarily involve destroying the embryo - but the embryos used are "excess" embryos leftover after a successful IVF treatment, and they would have to be destroyed anyway; and the permission of the parents is always sought before any research is performed. No-one actually *makes* human embryos for ES cell research purposes. IMO, the situation here is analogous to parents whose child has tragically died, and they are asked if they wish the child's organs to be used for transplantation purposes.

> "Are you affected economically or socially by this research?"

I work in adult stem cell research - so I am affected by it.

> "How do you think technology has impacted the development of stem cell research?"

One obvious recent change is the development of IPSC creation (Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell). This is where you take an adult cell and treat it with a "cocktail" ot factors, and induce it to become pluripotent (as ESCs are). This might hold the key to dispensing with ESC research altogether - but not yet. for one thing, we need to understand more about how ESCs work before we can be sure we are properly inducing pluripotence. Also - the "cocktail" currently includes things like cancer-causing viruses, which are obviously not compatible with clinical studies; more research on ESCs might allow us to design a better "cocktail".

Answer 2

I support both types of stem cell research.  As a leukemia patient, my life was saved by the use of cord blood in a stem cell transplant.  

There are virtually no moral issues when using cord blood or adult stem cells because it is a completley voluntary proceedure.  

The exceptions would be the whole savior child thing (having another child for the only purpose of using that childs cord blood, bone marrow, stem cells or whatever else for someone who is already sick before conception.  Or a minor being forced to donate against their wishes.  Most of the people I have ran into that dont support adult stem cells either didnt understand what it was, or do not support Western medicine at all.

I support embryonic stem cells as well.  My personal reasons are two fold.  First, it is my belief that all dead being should be made available to scientific research.  I have arranged for my body to be donated as a cadavar to a medical school.  The research is being done on embryos that are going to die whether the research happens or not.  Even if stem cell research never existed, these embryos would still be dieing.  I think it is important that we make these poor lives that no one wanted mean something rather than throwing them into the biowaste.

Ofcouse technology has impacted stem cells.  Without the technology to actually do any of this, we wouldnt have it.  The technology that allowed us to first identify a stem cell.  The technology that allowed us to start doing bone marrow transplants.  The technology that allowed us to understand there were different stem cells that could be used in bone marrow transplant (bone marrow, peripheral blood stem cells and cord blood currently).  The technology that allowed us to freeze embryos and study them under microscopes.

Without technology we would never have known what a stem cell was.

Answer 3

I believe that embryonic stem cells (ESCs) are unethical to use (though for a different reason than most people) and that ASCs are the way to go!

Here's why:

There are two kinds of stem cells: embryonic stem cells (ESC) and adult stem cells (ASC). Both have their advantages and disadvantages. ESCs, for example, can become any needed cell very easily, while ASCs can't become the needed cells unless you get the stem cells from a specific site in the body.

However, ACSs, once they have adapted, take very easily, because the human body accepts it much easier. ESCs take very badly. In fact, at one point, in China, some ESCs were placed in the spine of a woman with Parkinsons. The ESCs exploded into a tumor sporting hair, bone and human flesh that killed her.

Even more: ASCs have cured more than seventy different diseases and conditions. ESCs have cured NOTHING so far. They have not gotten past the lab rats.

It is cruel and unethical to waste so much time on a research that is getting us nowhere. There are people who are suffering and dying when we could be helping them live and alleviate their suffering so much quicker if we shifted our focus to adult stem cells, because a) they work, b) there is no controversy around them (ESCs compromise human life) and c) people are suffering when we COULD help them if we just pulled our heads out of the sand and faced the reality that ESCs do NOTHING good!

Answer 4

I think that it is really great. It can cure a lot of disease and save millions of people!