Stem Cell Research - Argued by Many, Known by Few

The Issue. Stem Cell Research, just like abortion, is a very controversial subject in the political arena. This is an argument that is continually argued by many people but known by few. People are quick to reach a conclusive decision on stem cell research and take a stance on the issue without knowing the scientific significance beforehand. Before I continue I want you to know that I realize this blog post might offend someone and in a way I am thankful. Because if people agreed on everything, there would be no world in which we can learn from and offer new insight. So feel free to respond and give me any rebuttals to my opinions and/or comments.

The Science. In recent years, scientists have discovered that stem cells taken from human embryos have the ability to regenerate tissue and morph into different types of cells within the human body. This type of research can be used to create therapies that can repair traumatic injuries or reverse the symptoms of debilitating diseases including Parkinson's disease, Diabetes, Muscular dystrophy, and Alzheimer's. For more scientific background, please visit this website (http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/basics1.asp), because I am not a scientist and I do not want to relay improper scientific evidence to you.

The Stance of the Government. In 2001, President Bush was the first President who allowed federal funding for human embryonic stem cell research, but he limited his support to only the cell lines that already existed in order to not encourage destruction of embryos. The current process has much limitation as there is rigorous oversight involved and great skepticism due to the belief that this research is "killing a life to save a life." There has been legislation brought about in congress in attempts to expand funding for stem cell research, supported by members of congress that include the upcoming Presidential candidates, but both legislations that were brought up were twice vetoed by President Bush. This brings up another side to the argument. President Bush has vetoed these legislations on the belief that he thinks we should look for alternative methods in which we can obtain these stem cells -- from adult tissue. Now in my opinion, I think this is a reasonable argument because of the hope for the preservation of possible human life. But scientifically, through articles I have read, these adult stem cells are generally limited in the types of cells they can be differentiated into. As opposed to adult stem cells, the embryonic cells are considered 'pluripotent' and can become all cell types within the body. So the debate continues.

My argument. When looking at the current Iraq War or any war the U.S. has been involved in during the past, we notice that our country is readily willing to expend thousands of soldiers' lives to fight in wars for the common good. In the natural course of things, this proves to be understandable, as any powerful and established country should be willing to defend its own. However, these are soldiers who have established lives, families, friends, and naturally, a place within society. We use these fine young men and women at the expense of the rest of us in order for our country to have freedom. This scenario plays out as the sacrifice of a few thousand for the benefit of several million. And coming from a family who has had several generations of soldiers fighting in wars for this country, it is difficult to see what war does to them. Therefore, in comparing our methodology of war with stem cell research, our government should start re-thinking its approach toward this research and focusing more on the vital importance of the issue. I don’t want to undermine the beauty and irreplaceable value of human life by asking for the purposeful destruction of human embryos, but I am asking for the expansion of and re-allocation of funds on the use of the embryos that are inevitably doomed to be "medical waste" regardless. If we use our soldiers' lives to benefit the rest of us - real living individuals - then why can't we see that using these embryos isn't a crime and it will help us protect our living, just as the soldiers have been doing. When your son or daughter wakes up one morning in such agony from their chronic disease a few years down the road, I want you to think of the possibilities that you prohibited, and the opportunities you stripped from them. If only you did not take a stand against supporting the expansion of this scientific phenomenon, they could have had a decent life without enduring such varying degrees of pain.

The Future of Stem Cell Research. Luckily for scientific purposes, and the benefit of humanity, whoever wins the upcoming Presidential race will open up more opportunities for stem cells than the current President. The three leading candidates, Democratic Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, and Republican Senator John McCain, have all taken a stance in which they support the expansion of federal funding of human embryonic stem cell research (according to the CNN election center). This will extend research beyond the limits that President Bush has set, so we as human begins can start protecting our living and fighting for our freedom from disease and debilitation.