Analysis of Pros and Cons of Stem Cell Research

Stem Cell Research has been a debatable topic for several years. There are several pros and cons that should be considered in the medical field. Some pros include curing and treating certain diseases, aiding in the improvement of organ function, and preventing organ rejection for transplant receivers. Some cons include some of the practices being unethical, procedures not working or worsening conditions, and procedures not having enough evidence before being conducted. There are also several examples of successful and unsuccessful stem cell therapy cases. Successful cases include transplanting corneas and treating strokes. Unsuccessful cases have included the insertion of stem cell in patients leading to death and liver conditions worsening or not changing after treatment. Looking into the positives and negatives of stem cell research and therapy can help one decide whether or not to support to cause. It can also help patients decide whether to view stem cell therapy as an option for treatment. Scholarly and peer reviewed research has revealed almost an equal amount of benefits and risks to be considered.

There are several positive aspects and benefits of stem cell research and therapy. These can include the types of diseases or injuries that stem cells help cure, the way they work, what they can replace and more. One example is that of tissue derived stem cells. Li, Guo, Kim, Dong and Vanella (2016) state that stem cells that are derived from tissues can easily fix areas of the body that need repair due to the fact that they are undifferentiated. Some examples of tissue derived stem cells at work include being able to improve lung, heart, and kidney function in those that are damaged (p. 1). Lu et al states that stem cells can come from other areas of the body such as the blood of umbilical cords. These specific stem cells can reconstruct immune systems and treat diseases. (2015, para. 1). Retrieving stem cells from umbilical cords does not hurt the parent or the child during or after the process. Furthermore, Marks, Witten, and Califf claim that stem cells can be retrieved from bone marrow and or peripheral blood (2017, p. 1008). This is another alternative to obtaining stem cells from human embryos, which many have come to oppose. In Julie T. Daniels’s article on different stem cell therapies, she discusses several ways in which stem cells can be used to aid in transplants. One example is that of a cornea transplant with the help of stem cells. She also brings up the fact that during transplants, rejection of the foreign organ or tissue is possible. However, a way to avoid this is by using a person’s own cells, which is already medically possible (2016, p. 309). The rejection of organs due to transplants can be quite common in the medical field. Stem cells however may be the solution. Tiwari, Sharma, Pandey, and Shukla explain some of how stem cells work in their journal article. The authors explain that since stem cells are able to divide and multiple on their own, there is less of a need to use more stem cells than needed. This would decrease the cost of operations for not only the patient but the medical institution as well. The authors also make note that stem cells can change into nerve cells to help repair damaged areas. This is normally much more difficult without the use of these cells (2018, pp. 1530-1534). Finally, stem cell research and therapy can help cure and maintain diseases not limited to nerve cells, but neurological diseases as a whole. This may be otherwise difficult (Alessandrini, 2019, p. 71).

Along with the benefits of stem cell research and therapy, there are several examples of successful cases on the topic. There have been instances of successful transplants, increase in organ function, disease curing, stroke prevention and more. All of these have used stem cells in some way whether it be stem cell engineering, stem cell therapy, or stem cell regeneration. The first example of a successful stem cell case is a type of stem cell therapy that involves corneal transplants. Daniels gives evidence of the success of this case by discussing the fact that the transplants of corneas in rabbits were successful with no negative after-effects. This process was accomplished through stem-cell engineering. There have also been cases of those with chemical burns on their eyes being cured after stem cells were able to take the place of the damaged cells (2016, p. 209). There have also been instances of stem cells treating strokes. Alessandrini states that stem cells can treat strokes through neurogenesis, which is the production of nervous system cells (2019, p. 71). These examples are not the only instances of stem cells being used positively in the medical field however, they all contribute to the positive aspects of stem cell research and its realistic uses.

While there are several positive aspects of stem cell research, there are also several negative ones. These range anywhere from ethical and moral issues, to a lack of evidence in the field. One of the most common refutations or negative aspects of this topic is whether certain methods are ethical or unethical. Jonathan Kimmelman explains in his article that obtaining stem cells from human embryos could be considered unethical. There are other ways of retrieving stem cells such as via egg donation which Kimmelman argues is “invasive and time-consuming'. It can also be assumed that this method is expensive as well. There is also the fact that through stem cell research, scientists are able to edit DNA, which, once again, is considered unethical (2016, pp. 311-313). Scientists and doctors must uphold certain codes of ethics which in these cases, are in question to some. Another example of a question of ethics in stem cell research is animal testing. Bakhuraysah, Siatskas, and Petratos (2016) give several examples of stem cell research efforts that have been made through animal testing (Para. 17). Some stem cell trials can exaggerate their positive claims and end up being fatal. Michael Brooks explains that some sources have been outright incorrect when describing the positive future of stem cell research. He states that some of their claims are impossible in terms of the times that they claim these things will happen by. He also discusses the fact that certain stem cell treatments can become fatal for patients, and that medical facilities may attempt to cover these cases up (2017, pp. 1-3). If medical facilities attempt to cover up their errors, it can leave no room for the improvement of others. One last example is the fact that there have been areas in the scientific method aspect of stem cell research trials. Marls et al. (2017) discuss in the article that some trials were found to be uncontrolled. It was also found that many trials of stem cell research were operating on a lack of evidence, and that there is likely not enough evidence in the field yet at all to conduct tests on patients (pp. 1007-1009). An uncontrolled experiment or one without enough evidence does not meet the correct criteria for the scientific method.

As with the successful cases, there have also been several unsuccessful cases in the area of stem cell research. Michael Brooks once again explains that certain stem cell treatments can lead to death. He gives the example that a university professor inserted stem cell transplants into patients, two of which died as a result (2017, para. 2). According to Iain Dickinson, in multiple stem cell trials with the purpose of increasing liver function, many patients saw no results or change in their condition (2018, para. 1). Lastly, according to Jonathan Kimmelman, discusses the fact that medical institutions have claimed stem cell research can lower the chance of parents passing on mutations to their children. However, the processes involved come with several risks that are not entirely understood yet by doctors (2016, p. 312).

Over the past few years, recent research has found that there are several pros and cons in terms of stem cell research. Stem cell research has saved lives and taken them, has been conducted morally and immorally, and has produced positive results as well as negative or no results. There are ups and downs to each side of the argument. Looking at all of the evidence given, I believe that stem cell research is well worth the effort. It may need more research and evidence first, but I believe it may be the future of medicine. One that can be available to all, and one that can solve and cure many medical issues.