The Development Of Embryonic Stem Cell

The world of today is blessed by being within the grasp of ending cellular deficiencies. From replacing neurons damaged by Alzheimer's disease or even allowing those who have diabetes to properly produce insulin. A world where the quality of life of individuals can significantly improve and will hopefully be changing for the best. But the question arises; how are we going to cure these diseases and fix these deficiencies? That answer is embryonic stem cell research. Embryonic stem cells have the ability to turn themselves into specific cells that could help destroy, and repair damaged cells that would otherwise kill or harm whoever has the issue. This paper will discuss how stem cells work, their pros and cons, and ethical implications associated with the use of stem cells. Most importantly this paper will give enough evidence on why the pros of embryonic stem cell research. Greatly outnumber the cons

Cells are one of the most complex aspects of any living thing. Their incredibly small size doesn’t make studying them and figuring out how they work any easier. Part of what’s known about stem cells is that they’re essentially a blank canvas of a cell. Almost all cells have a specific purpose and are specifically used as things such as blood cells, skin cells, etc. With stem cells, they have the ability to turn their “blank canvas” into one of these specific functioning types of cells. The process begins with the retrieval process called “in vitro fertilization. In this process a couple’s sperm and eggs are fertilized in a culture dish, the eggs then develop into embryos,” then “At three to five days, the embryo develops into a ball of cells called a blastocyst” (Watson & Freudenrich, 2004). Finally, the process ends with “scientists removing the cells from the blastocyst, and culture them in a petri dish in the laboratory. The stem cells divide several times and the scientists divide the population into other dishes. After several months, there are millions of stem cells” (Watson & Freudenrich, 2004). Once this process is complete the stem cells are finally ready to be put to use. However, the use of stem cells is a much foggier topic compared to the retrieval process. As Watson and Freudenrich state, the first step for using them “is to establish stem cell lines, which researchers have accomplished. Next, scientists must be able to turn on specific genes within the stem cells, so that the stem cells will differentiate into any cells that they wish. But scientists have not learned how to do this yet.” This is a huge reason that stem cell research needs to be continued. While certain ideas exist to make the process work, “For example, it might be possible to replace lost neurons or glial cells by transplantation of stem cell-derived cells that have been pre differentiated in vitro to various stages of maturation, e.g., into neuroblasts (i.e., immature neurons). Cell replacement might also be achieved by inducing endogenous stem cells in the adult CNS to form new neurons and glial cells” (Lindvall & Kokaia, 2010). The problem is, these are merely ideas and have yet to be truly proven as a method that effectively works. Once scientists learn how to overcome this obstacle and can turn these ideas into something that really works, the potential for embryonic stem cells is huge, and could tremendously improve society today.

One of the benefits of stem cells is that they allow researchers to test new drugs for safety and effectiveness. Using stem cells to test drugs, researchers can “recapitulate the development of the human brain and measure concrete changes of chemicals to drugs” (the Chu, 2012). This is a much more effective method of measuring the effects that a new drug would have on someone. As the current method involves testing on animals. One of the problems that tend to be found with testing on animals is that some of the compounds that tend to be found safe in rodents, prove to be toxic to animals (the Chu, 2012). With testing on the stem cells, you’re eliminating the threat that humans will react differently than animals. Animals have different genetic makeups so not everything is guaranteed to work the same on an animal that would work on a human being So by directly testing on stem cells, which have the same makeup the rest of a human being have, the results of the test are much more likely to be the same between tests, and actual dosages on humans. Not only does it make tests more reliable, but it also makes things more ethically correct. Testing on animals is a topic many people would argue is ethically wrong. You’re taking an innocent animal, and performing tests that may or may not alter its quality of life. In some cases, the animal may even die. So ethically if one is a firm believer in the aspects that one shouldn’t kill no matter what, and one that believes that one shouldn’t alter someone if it could ruin their quality of life, then using stem cell research to test drugs, is a topic that you would be in support of.

Stem cells have many benefits, the biggest of which is their ability to replace diseased cells. Stem cells have an ability to “transform” into any specific cell type that someone may need, they have the ability to help people with “spinal cord injuries, type 1 diabetes, Parkinson's disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, Alzheimer's disease, heart disease, stroke, burns, cancer, and osteoarthritis.” (Mayo Clinic, 2018). The stem cells would be put in the body to replace these “ailing or destroyed tissues, which over time would take out all of the bad cells and restore the area to new functioning cells.” (NYSTEM, n.d.). This is just the beginning of what stem cells could do. With future technological advances, there are so many more possibilities that stem cells could benefit from. We could even make it to the point where they could regenerate missing limbs for all we know. So, with all this potential benefit for the public, it’s hard to say that there should be problems with stem cells. They have the potential to save all of these people from their suffering from these diseases, and even save their lives. Ethically most people would argue that one should do whatever it takes to save someone’s life. So when solely focusing on the fact that this will could save someone’s life, most people should be in favor of promoting stem cell research. However, there are always two sides to every argument.

As with everything, there are often two sides, an argument for, and an argument against whatever it is that you believe in. While stem cell research holds the potential to do so many things, such as cure seemingly incurable diseases, and make drug testing a much safer thing, there are some problems with stem cell research too. One of the bigger issues that people associated with stem cell research are the ethical issues that come with doing this. Stem cells come from two different known sources, one being adult tissue, and the other being in embryos (Brazier, 2018). As Brazier states though, “stem cells (in adult tissue) can be difficult to find”. Therefore, stem cells from embryos are much easier to find. So when discussing the ethical issues around stem cells, issues are in the way in which the embryos are treated. An embryo is defined as “an unborn or unhatched offspring in the process of development, in particular, a human offspring during the period from approximately the second to the eighth week after fertilization” (Google dictionary). So, in other words, it’s the beginning of a fetus, which is what the child will eventually turn into. So this turns into a topic of whether one believes that the embryo is alive or not, as to whether it has the right to be treated humanely, or if it’s something that doesn't matter that much. People that believe that an embryo is alive and should be treated carefully are the people that tend to have ethical issues with the aspect of stem cell research. When embryonic stem cells are created they are created when doctors fertilize several eggs in a test tube (Brazier, 2018). This is one of the leading ethical complaints with this topic already, as many people believe that starting a life like this is wrong. “As U.S. senator Orrin Hatch states ‘I believe that human life begins in the womb, not a Petri dish or refrigerator’” (Lo et al., 2009 ). This is a rather valid concern as to whether this is ethically sound. Starting a life, granted odds are it may never be truly born, outside of how it naturally happens is something many people are against. If one’s a firm believer in not altering the body, or how things are created, embryonic stem cell research is something one would really be against. Yet for some, it’s still a very thin line on what they believe. As U.S. senator Orrin Hatch also stated: “To me, the morality of the situation dictates that these embryos, which are routinely discarded, be used to improve and save lives” (Lo et al., 2009 ). While Hatch is against the use of embryonic stem cells on one hand, on the other hand, he’s for it, knowing the tremendous benefits that their usage could have if they become a norm in today’s society. While some may view embryonic stem cell research as being ethically wrong, to others the benefits cancel out all ethical concerns.

Finally, I’m going to introduce my full views on the topic of embryonic stem cells. The development of embryonic stem cells, in my opinion, has the ability to be one of the biggest medical breakthroughs in history. Assuming they can figure out the final step of the process. Ethically I believe there are arguments each way. For example, I kind of agree when people raise concerns about life being started in test tubes, and these embryos never get to form into a true living thing. I agree that it’s not the real way to start a life, and not the most humane thing to do. Granted, I do believe these aspects of the process are wrong, I believe that the potential benefits from this process greatly outweigh any of these negatives. We live in a world where millions of people are affected by these diseases that are deemed to be incurable. Yet they could be cured if this process of using stem cells becomes a true possibility. That’s millions of people that can be saved to live on, including my own grandpa. In the past year being diagnosed with Parkinson's he’s taken a turn for the worse and is nowhere close to being the same person that he used to be. While there are medicines out there that do help, there’s nothing that will truly cure him, and that’s one of the reasons that I’m starting to become a much firmer believer in the topic of embryonic stem cell research. I’ve always been a firm believer in technologically advancing things for the better and saving someone’s life no matter what it takes. Why am I a believer in this stuff? Well, I couldn’t tell you exactly, yet I know it’s due to experiences growing up that I can’t quite pinpoint exactly. So when discussing the topic of embryonic stem cell research, it has the potential to benefit all of these things that I believe in. While being pro-life, I don’t exactly enjoy taking the life of a potential fetus for the research, I also don’t completely believe it’s alive at this point either. Even if I did believe it to be alive, the exchange of a few lives to save millions of lives seems like one worth taking. And due to my view on the world, I believe that embryonic stem cell research should continue to be pursued, as the potential is too tremendous to not continue to pursue.