Stem Cell Research

The Persnickety Platypus · Thu Sep 08, 2005 7:40 pm

Is it possible that such a common topic has not yet been debated here?

I don't recall ever comming across any such debate, and my search of the forums wielded no results. Therefore, I assume this is a fresh subject.

Should the government fund stem cell research? Is it ethical to use unborn embryos as a cure for various human diseases?

Chimp · Post by **Chimp** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 5:25 pm

My understanding of the issue is the destruction vs. harvesting of
the blastocysts used for invitro fertilization. Those against the harvesting
argue that it is ending a life, but the alternative is also ending a life.

I would say from a technical standpoint...the harvested cells do not die,
but in effect, become immortal.

Scrot's nationalistic pride is admirable, but I think South Korea is the
current front runner in the stem cell arena. I think the US and Monaco
are neck and neck for last place

Jose · Post by **Jose** » Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:21 pm

Chimp wrote:My understanding of the issue is the destruction vs. harvesting of the blastocysts used for invitro fertilization. Those against the harvesting argue that it is ending a life, but the alternative is also ending a life.

I would say from a technical standpoint...the harvested cells do not die,
but in effect, become immortal.

At present, this is true. Regrettably, the discussion hasn't progressed much beyond that. It's odd, though, that the "excess" blastocysts will be killed if they aren't immortalized as cell lines, but somehow that's preferable.

The immortality is a bit of an issue, though, its own way. Although the cell lines can be maintained for a long time, they acquire chromosomal abnormalities--a common event in cell lines. Therefore, it will be necessary to create new cell lines moderately frequently until we learn how to manipulate cells differently.

Aximili23 · Post by **Aximili23** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 3:26 pm

Hmm, I don't know if anybody is still interested in this thread, but I'll put in my own two bits anyway.

Regarding HESC (human embryonic stem cell) research, I'm perfectly fine with it if the stem cells used for research are derived from spare IVF blastocysts. Those embryos are going to be destroyed anyway, or forgotten forever in some freezer. But I would object to the creation of new human embryos (via egg + sperm, not nuclear transfer) for the specific purpose of being destroyed for research. That seems callous; I would hold that human embryos are still human life, no matter how small and disorganized a mass of cells they might be.

Scrotum wrote:I would use living babies, adults or whatever to find cures. There is nothing "ethical wrong" to be able to save lifes.

I'm a little shocked that anyone in an enlightened society would say such a thing. Are you saying that it's okay to do scientific research that would necessitate the destruction of live human babies? Surely there's some sort of misunderstanding here..

keltzkroz · Post by **keltzkroz** » Wed Oct 12, 2005 5:18 pm

Aximili23 wrote: Regarding HESC (human embryonic stem cell) research, I'm perfectly fine with it if the stem cells used for research are derived from spare IVF blastocysts. Those embryos are going to be destroyed anyway, or forgotten forever in some freezer.

Using a similar line of thinking, would you be in favor of mandatory organ donation in case of a fatal accident? Those bodies would be discarded anyway.

Aximili23 · Post by **Aximili23** » Thu Oct 13, 2005 1:34 pm

Using a similar line of thinking, would you be in favor of mandatory organ donation in case of a fatal accident? Those bodies would be discarded anyway.

Maybe not mandatory. There are certain moral and religious considerations to be made regarding how people think of dead bodies (theirs and their loved ones', particularly). But I would be very much in favor of polices that strongly encouraged and promoted voluntary organ donation. I would like to be an organ donor myself.

keltzkroz · Post by **keltzkroz** » Thu Oct 13, 2005 4:26 pm

Maybe not mandatory. There are certain moral and religious considerations to be made regarding how people think of dead bodies (theirs and their loved ones', particularly). But I would be very much in favor of polices that strongly encouraged and promoted voluntary organ donation. I would like to be an organ donor myself.

Regarding what I mentioned in my previous post, would you agree then that 'they are going to be discarded anyway' is not such a good reason for embryonic stem cell research?

How about the following reason: Embryos for embryonic stem cell research donated by couples are ok. What is you opinion on this?

steen · Post by **steen** » Thu Oct 13, 2005 6:11 pm

keltzkroz wrote:How about the following reason: Embryos for embryonic stem cell research donated by couples are ok. What is you opinion on this?

Sounds good

keltzkroz · Post by **keltzkroz** » Fri Oct 14, 2005 9:07 am

steen wrote:
keltzkroz wrote:How about the following reason: Embryos for embryonic stem cell research donated by couples are ok. What is you opinion on this?
Sounds good

And it sounds good because?

Aximili23 · Post by **Aximili23** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 1:12 pm

keltzkroz wrote:Regarding what I mentioned in my previous post, would you agree then that 'they are going to be discarded anyway' is not such a good reason for embryonic stem cell research?

The difference between organ donation and stem cell research is that people can actually choose whether or not they are willing to have their organs donated. Unborn embryos can't actively choose whether or not they are willing to have their tissues donated to research that could help save lives. Because of the ongoing controversy of stem cell research, somebody has to make that choice for them. It's my contention that to use the embryos for research is the better choice.

keltzkroz wrote:How about the following reason: Embryos for embryonic stem cell research donated by couples are ok. What is you opinion on this?

It depends. If a couple went to an IVF clinic, and spare embryos were created from their egg and sperm, it seems perfectly reasonable for the parents to permit or endorse the use of those embryos for stem cell research. Likewise, if a different couple went to an IVF clinic and insisted that the spare embryos are not to be used for research, it also seems perfectly fair that their wish should be upheld by law.

But if you're talking about a couple that specifically donated their egg and sperm, or maybe even an actual embryo growing in the wife's womb, for stem cell research, I'm not so sure. That seems incredibly callous, don't you think? I don't know any couple who would want such a thing. Maybe nobody would ever want to do this, so it's a non-issue. Maybe there should be a law against this sort of thing (or maybe there already is?). At this point, I don't think I would mind if this sort of thing were illegal.

keltzkroz · Post by **keltzkroz** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 2:10 pm

Aximili23 wrote:
The difference between organ donation and stem cell research is that people can actually choose whether or not they are willing to have their organs donated. Unborn embryos can't actively choose whether or not they are willing to have their tissues donated to research that could help save lives. Because of the ongoing controversy of stem cell research, somebody has to make that choice for them.

Perhaps I should clarify my organ donation example. Lets say that someone (who's intentions regarding donating his organs were unknown) was involved in an accident and they suffer fatal injuries (or end up in a persistent vegetative state), but some of their organs are still viable as transplants. Compare that with the embryo. They are both going to be discarded anyway. They both can't actively choose. Choosing for both of them can save lives. If someone has to choose for the embryo, why not the full grown body from the accident? I may be willing to donate my organs in case something like that happens to me, but I would not make that decision for someone else, even if they are very close to me.

It's my contention that to use the embryos for research is the better choice.

Somehow, that sounds a little selfish to me because we are not the one losing an eye.

It depends. If a couple went to an IVF clinic, and spare embryos were created from their egg and sperm, it seems perfectly reasonable for the parents to permit or endorse the use of those embryos for stem cell research. Likewise, if a different couple went to an IVF clinic and insisted that the spare embryos are not to be used for research, it also seems perfectly fair that their wish should be upheld by law.

Yea, but take that same embryo, get it implanted and with enough luck, get a baby and try to donate it for research. I bet you would see tons of protests. The point I'm trying to make in my posts is that while people are using all sorts of reasons why its ok or not ok to use embryos for stem cell research, the important issue (at least for me) is how people see the embryo. Using the reason 'they are going to be discarded anyway' is not a very good reason, in my opinion.

But if you're talking about a couple that specifically donated their egg and sperm, or maybe even an actual embryo growing in the wife's womb, for stem cell research, I'm not so sure. That seems incredibly callous, don't you think? I don't know any couple who would want such a thing. Maybe nobody would ever want to do this, so it's a non-issue. Maybe there should be a law against this sort of thing (or maybe there already is?). At this point, I don't think I would mind if this sort of thing were illegal.

On this I agree that its callous.