Morality of Stem Cell Research

[yougene]

I think a bigger question should be whether or not we NEED to be extending the life expectancy of humans beyond what it already is. The planet is overpopulated enough as it is, and old people don't do much for society other than sit on prime real estate whilst sucking away Medicare funds and social security. So why make us all live longer? What is the point?

you wouldn't neccasarily get old either, if technology permits(which it probably will).

 

[Jimmy the Gun]

posted by acid fiend "I think a bigger question should be whether or not we NEED to be extending the life expectancy of humans beyond what it already is."

i would say the bigger question beyond this is should we be RESTRICTING such research? i say no

 

[happiness]

Tell someone with a life threatening illness who is counting on stem cell research that they are selfish for wanting to live longer. Embryos are not people and we must refrain from anthropomorphing them into tiny people. They are a primitive batch of cells that will eventually turn into a living, breathing, thinking, feeling, remembering person. It is nothing more. And as youngene said, a scientific gate, due to inquisitive scientific minds, no matter how restricted, will be breached.

The conservative argument that killing an embryo is killing a person is reeking in tradition and religious philosophy. It is their thought that an embryo is an embryo for a purpose, that it was placed there in order to become a human being. They do not believe in accidents. But life is just as easily an accident as it is a plan and we have to come to terms with the fact we possess the ability to manipulate our biochemical, genetic processes for our own good.

 

[Cpt. Pink Pants]

"For example, people who eat meat are going to inherently be less compassionate than vegetarians because, despite best efforts, the mere fact that you cause animals to suffer and die makes you less compassionate towards life. It's sort of a "guilt-avoidance" mechanism."

So, the people who attack people wearing fur coats are inherently MORE compassionate than anyone who eats meat?

 

[Psychonaut777]

Acidfiend makes the best point out of anything said here. We don't have to be using fetuses in the first place, we can use baby teeth or other sources of stem cells, so this whole argument on morality is pretty pointless. Lets just not use fetuses/embryos and use the other sources and avoid the issue.

 

[yougene]

Acidfiend makes the best point out of anything said here. We don't have to be using fetuses in the first place, we can use baby teeth or other sources of stem cells, so this whole argument on morality is pretty pointless. Lets just not use fetuses/embryos and use the other sources and avoid the issue.

Yeah but how viable are these sources. We can use fat cells too, but I think it's more in theory. There is probably a reason researchers prefer embryonic stem cells at the moment, but that shouldn't be for too long.

 

[deroxor]

If it gives hope to those without any... then whats the problem??

 

[everythinginside]

I think intent is the prime factor here...

both intentions are the same... to save life...

however... many sperm and many eggs are spilled to the ground, or down the toilet... or in a trashcan...

how many times have you jacked off and took a cloth, through it away, and forgot about it.

how many periods does a woman have.. how many babies?

i think we need to sacrifice one part to save the other...

if lives already living can be bettered by a life-to-be....

then give that life-to-(maybe/possibly)-be to a life in suffering.....


perhaps in the near future we will be able to come to a better descision

 

[zorn]

I don't know why anyone is talking about life expectancy and so forth. We're talking about stem cell therapy, not the Fountain of Youth. Stem cells are promising avenues of treatment for a lot of diseases and conditions... Parkinson's disease, for example, or the provision of replacement organs for people who need them. These don't strike only old people, they strike everyone from children on up.

A few of the posters here seem to completely lack compassion... if your parents, or brother, or sister, or gf/bf/wife/husband were the ones sick and dying -- or just losing control of their bodies as in Parkinson's -- and something could help them, would you really say "oh, stop clinging to life" or "you're not much use to society anymore, anyways." Sheesh.

---

I don't think there's a "slippery slope." What would you worry it could lead to? The only thing I can think of are grisly "organ-harvesting-from-children" scenarios. But those are completely different... they're clearly wrong; you'll not find anyone who doesn't think farming humans is messed up. Stem cells and embryos, well, you can't even tell they're human, or embryos, or not like one of the trillions of cells in your body w/o a shitload of scientific analysis.

Embryos are uniquely useful for producing stem cells, and the whole point is they can be coaxed into reproducing into whatever, so you don't gain anything from huge numbers of them. There are many suitable embryos now, from abortion or fertility treatments, which are simply destroyed. Seems to me if using some of them to develop stem cells could do a great deal of good, it's wrong not to try.

Acidfiend makes the best point out of anything said here. We don't have to be using fetuses in the first place, we can use baby teeth or other sources of stem cells, so this whole argument on morality is pretty pointless. Lets just not use fetuses/embryos and use the other sources and avoid the issue.

That's just not true though. I mean, it's not like research biologists are clamoring for embryonic stem cell lines for shits and giggles. It's not like they don't know about these other types of cells. But the cells you get from teeth, etc, are quite different... they've partly differentiated and specialized already. They can't turn into the tissue types embryonic-derived cells can; they're just not the same. It's possible some new breakthrough will make embryonic stem cell lines unnecessary, sure... it's also possible a breakthrough will make all stem cells unnecessary. Right now, tho...

 

[sexyanon]

zorn beat me to it. Actually learned about this exactly in Bio class.

However, remember Dolly, the cloned sheep? Normally you'd need an embryonic egg to clone animals. However, a matured cell from an adult was used here, a somatic cell from a sheep's mammary glands, and a live clone was produced.

Anyways, the possibility that a breakthrough will happen is quite high, just it won't happen all that soon. Cells and the DNA from the cells are just simply amazing.

We don't have the technology yet to make this issue less heated; but, why millions suffer because hardcore religious figures and pro-lifers feel that doing this is unresonable.

But, scientifically, are we even killing/taking anything from humans? I mean, they're technically not humans yet, or are they?

Dead fetuses due to whatever reason should be used in stem cell research. I'd like to hear an argument against that, though.

Edit: Ya, zorn actually covered everything I was going to say. Everything +1 with his elegant replies.