Would you use....

[SeanM]

Mods, if this topic would be best suited in another discussion area, please move it at will. Danke

This question goes to anybody who is against therapeutic research involving the creation and experimentation of embryos.

Let's assume that the year is 2030, and through therapeutic cloning research we're able to prevent and cure many diseases. If you or somebody you love were to fall ill (terrible thought, but I'm quite curious) with something that could now be cured, would you take advantage of the situation to make yourself better? Basically, would you use something that you believe(d) was/is wrong if it would benefit you now?

Before somebody chimes in, I'm aware of adult stem cell research, but that isn't the issue that I'm trying to bring up. (I believe they compliment eachother, not replace)

Regards,
Sean

 

[ocean]

There's nothing wrong with stem cell reaserch. However, there is something wrong with letting people die.

 

[lucaspa]

Originally posted by SeanM
This question goes to anybody who is against therapeutic research involving the creation and experimentation of embryos.

Let's assume that the year is 2030, and through therapeutic cloning research we're able to prevent and cure many diseases. If you or somebody you love were to fall ill (terrible thought, but I'm quite curious) with something that could now be cured, would you take advantage of the situation to make yourself better? Basically, would you use something that you believe(d) was/is wrong if it would benefit you now?

Before somebody chimes in, I'm aware of adult stem cell research, but that isn't the issue that I'm trying to bring up. (I believe they compliment eachother, not replace)

Regards,
Sean

We've already decided that when the research the Nazis did on the Jews in WWII was suppressed.  We decided we wouldn't use that knowledge to save people because the knowledge was gained in an unethical way.

We've also decided that we will not use people executed for crimes as organ donors. Think of the number of organs we could get from them.  There is even a certain logic in using the organs of convicted murderers to save lives.

And I'm afraid the adult stem cells can't be separated from this.  The logic used by the ES cell proponents is that ES cells are justified because there is no other way to cure people.  They have implicitly conceded that the fertilized embryo is human, but its sacrifice can be justified by saving another human.  If adult stem cells can cure the same disease, then the justification disappears.

 

[David Gould]

Originally posted by lucaspa
We've already decided that when the research the Nazis did on the Jews in WWII was suppressed.  We decided we wouldn't use that knowledge to save people because the knowledge was gained in an unethical way.

We've also decided that we will not use people executed for crimes as organ donors. Think of the number of organs we could get from them.  There is even a certain logic in using the organs of convicted murderers to save lives.

And I'm afraid the adult stem cells can't be separated from this.  The logic used by the ES cell proponents is that ES cells are justified because there is no other way to cure people.  They have implicitly conceded that the fertilized embryo is human, but its sacrifice can be justified by saving another human.  If adult stem cells can cure the same disease, then the justification disappears.

Umm, we did use the research the Nazi's did. The first photographs of fetuses at different stages of development used in medical text books were the black and white photos taken by the Nazis of embryos, embryos which were the result of the rape of Jewish prisoners and which were then aborted specifically for the photographs.

That is one example.

Another is the rocket research - it was done using slave labor, and many of the slaves died in the process. The results were still seized and eagerly used by both the US and Russia.

The Japanese experimentation on Chinese prisoners was used by the US - some of Japans top research scientists who had experimented with biological agents on humans were employed by the US in their weapons program.

And so on.

 

[JohnR7]

I have a friend who does research work with animals and it is getting to be very hard for him to get funding. If you take the march of dimes for example, it is not going to be very popular with the people they are trying to get to donate money, if that money is going to be used to abuse animals.

As they say, don't give up your teaching job, because there is not much of a chance that you will be able to raise enough money to do full time research work if you do things that are controversal.

 

[platzapS]

i believe embryo stem cells should be put up for adoption, but if they are going to be thrown out anyway, there's no point in not doing research on them. Oh--and why don't they use the organs executed criminals? That does seem to be justified in way.

 

[Stormy]

Before somebody chimes in, I'm aware of adult stem cell research, but that isn't the issue that I'm trying to bring up. (I believe they compliment eachother, not replace)

Just chiming in to say, I disagree!

Adult stem cell research should replace the controversial research being conducted on harvested stem cells from human embryos. Adult stem cells may hold sufficient potential to make it unnecessary to use embryonic cells. The research has looked really promising thus far and in some ways the adult stem cells actually perform better than fetal stem cells. Transplanted stem cells make their way to whichever area of the damaged brain needs repair. Fetal stem cells remain in one place when transplanted. Adult transplanted stem cells also appear to boost the production of an important protein that usually increases after a stroke as the brain attempts to heal itself, helping to connect damaged and undamaged parts of the organ.

There is no reason for humans to profit from the misfortune of aborted babies!!