I do not understand why there is so much opposition to the use of stem cells. Whether or not it is embryonic stem cell research I am all for it.
But the thing that bothers me about the controversy of the topic is that most people do not even know what they are talking about.
First off, not all stem cell research involves embryos.
Second, scientists do not take a fertilized egg out of a woman's body and kill it.
Third, most of the eggs that are used would have been thrown in the trash anyways.
Fourth, most scientists are not for the idea of cloning humans.
Most of the eggs that are donated for use in stem cell research come from in vitro clinics. Once the woman becomes pregnant, the extra eggs will usually be disposed of. Instead, the woman can chose to donate them. What shall it be, the trash can, or possibly the cure to cancer. But yet you hardly see opposition to these places.
Also, there are new studies that show that skin cells can be used, but somehow people are still opposed to this sort of application of stem cells. the only issue is that skin cells may divide into cancer cells, which is why the use of embryonic cells are the best.
And now, cells can be taken from an embryo without harming it! so why are people still anti stem cells?
Ignorance.
I agree with everything your saying. Many people are unaware of the science behind stem cell research, using only religious beliefs to base their opinions off of. Many do not understand that pluripotent stem cells can form any tissue in the body, and can thus help so many different diseases and ailments throughout the world. It is even worse that the government has restrained the use of stem cells to only the lines found prior to Bush's reign. Now only privately funded sources may research the most promising stem cell lines, which means when they find a cure to something, the government is unable to regulate vitrually any aspect of it's development, marketing, selling, etc. Could someone please tell me how this is benefiting the American people?
I agree that stem cell research is going to be our generations biggest advancement in medicine and it can only be beneficial to our race, but stem cells are such a touchy subject because contrary to prior belief most stem cells are not coming from old in vitro patients but an equal amount come from aborted fetuses. This is the why the Bush administration has stopped gov funded research because Bush is pro-life. Some people want to say that the basic human rights are given to you at the embryotic stage, these are anti-abortion people, and others disagree, pro-choice people. basically what's going on is people who are pro-life won't support stem cell research because they think it is a way for women who have abortions to justify and another reason for them to not take responsibility for their pregnancy. Very touchy political topic, but you are right when you say there is ignorance invovled in their decision making.
Because they get the stem cells from aborted babies. That's enough for me to be against it.
stem research should def be considered. there is a lot of good that may come out of it.
"Fourth, most scientists are not for the idea of cloning humans."
Haha, well, not "most", but no scientists (level-headed ones at least) are for the idea of cloning humans. Human cloning has been banned indefinitely ALL OVER the world. No scientist in their right mind would ever attempt it, be sure. It's still considered a sci-fi topic and not a real topic in science!
Sure, there could always be some lunatic somewhere attempting it, but I really doubt it. It is known that presently we cannot produce a healthy human clone, from what we learned from Dolly. Is there research attempting to correct this? Well, there is research regarding the cellular processes involved, which processes, even if we decipher successfully, still leave us far from applying them to the creation of a human clone.
"Also, there are new studies that show that skin cells can be used, but somehow people are still opposed to this sort of application of stem cells. the only issue is that skin cells may divide into cancer cells, which is why the use of embryonic cells are the best.
And now, cells can be taken from an embryo without harming it! so why are people still anti stem cells?"
Yes, you are right, we can now use skin cells to create stem cells virtually similar to embryonic stem cells (called IPS - induced pluripotent stem cells) . Here's the link for anyone interested:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/21/science/21stem.html?_r=1&ref=washingto...
You are wrong in one aspect:
The majority of reasonable people, including the catholic church and president Bush are NOT against research with IPS cells, and federal funding was recently approved for these in the US. The debate IS over!
Yes ESCs are better than IPS right now, because to revert skin cells back into IPS we introduce 4 genes (retroviruses), out of which one can be c-myc which showed that it is responsible for tumors in mice. However, the American team (Thompson) has created IPS also with the help of 4 retroviruses genes, but two of them are different and he doesn't use the controversial c-myc.
People who are against this don't want viruses introduced in the cells. They also don't agree with immunizations or with introducing a virus in order to accomplish something in your body/cells. This is a minority of closed-minded people. As I've said, most of us who understand the process are not against this! Of course, there must be more research done to test the effects of these four genes before we grow organs from the IPS cells and put them into clinical human trials. But we're on the right path and even Bush and the church is with us!