Pros and cons of human experimentation?

Answer 1

Pros and Cons of Stem Cell Research What are Stem Cells?

There has been much controversy in the press recently about the pros and cons of stem cell research. What is the controversy all about? "Stem" cells can be contrasted with "differentiated" cells. They offer much hope for medical advancement because of their ability to grow into almost any kind of cell. For instance, neural cells in the brain and spinal cord that have been damaged can be replaced by stem cells. In the treatment of cancer, cells destroyed by radiation or chemotherapy can be replaced with new healthy stem cells that adapt to the affected area, whether it be part of the brain, heart, liver, lungs, or wherever. Dead cells of almost any kind, no matter the type of injury or disease, can be replaced with new healthy cells thanks to the amazing flexibility of stem cells. As a result, billions of dollars are being poured into this new field.

Where Do They Come From?

To understand the pros and cons of stem cell research, one must first understand where stem cells come from. There are three main sources for obtaining stem cells - adult cells, cord cells, and embryonic cells. Adult stem cells can be extracted either from bone marrow or from the peripheral system. Bone marrow is a rich source of stem cells. However, some painful destruction of the bone marrow results from this procedure. Peripheral stem cells can be extracted without damage to bones, but the process takes more time. And with health issues, time is often of the essence. Although difficult to extract, since they are taken from the patient's own body, adult stem cells are superior to both umbilical cord and embryonic stem cells. They are plentiful. There is always an exact DNA match so the body's immune system never rejects them. And as we might expect, results have been both profound and promising.

Stem cells taken from the umbilical cord are a second very rich source of stem cells. Umbilical cells can also offer a perfect match where a family has planned ahead. Cord cells are extracted during pregnancy and stored in cryogenic cell banks as a type of insurance policy for future use on behalf of the newborn. Cord cells can also be used by the mother, the father or others. The more distant the relationship, the more likely it is that the cells will be rejected by the immune system's antibodies. However, there are a number of common cell types just as there are common blood types so matching is always possible especially where there are numerous donors. The donation and storage process is similar to blood banking. Donation of umbilical cells is highly encouraged. Compared to adult cells and embryonic cells, the umbilical cord is by far the richest source of stem cells, and cells can be stored up in advance so they are available when needed. Further, even where there is not an exact DNA match between donor and recipient, scientists have developed methods to increase transferability and reduce risk.

Embryonic Cells

The pros and cons of stem cell research come to the surface when we examine the third source of stem cells - embryonic cells. Embryonic stem cells are extracted directly from an embryo before the embryo's cells begin to differentiate. At this stage the embryo is referred to as a "blastocyst." There are about 100 cells in a blastocyst, a very large percentage of which are stem cells, which can be kept alive indefinitely, grown in cultures, where the stem cells continue to double in number every 2-3 days. A replicating set of stem cells from a single blastocyst is called a "stem cell line" because the genetic material all comes from the same fertilized human egg that started it. President Bush authorized federal funding for research on the 15 stem cell lines available in August 2001. Other stem cell lines are also available for research but without the coveted assistance of federal funding.

So what is the controversy all about? Those who value human life from the point of conception, oppose embryonic stem cell research because the extraction of stem cells from this type of an embryo requires its destruction. In other words, it requires that a human life be killed. Some believe this to be the same as murder. Against this, embryonic research advocates could argue that the tiny blastocyst has no human features. Further, new stem cell lines already exist due to the common practice of in vitro fertilization. Research advocates conclude that many fertilized human cells have already been banked, but are not being made available for research. Advocates of embryonic stem cell research claim new human lives will not be created for the sole purpose of experimentation.

Others argue against such research on medical grounds. Mice treated for Parkinson's with embryonic stem cells have died from brain tumors in as much as 20% of cases.

1 Embryonic stem cells stored over time have been shown to create the type of chromosomal anomalies that create cancer cells.

2 Looking at it from a more pragmatic standpoint, funds devoted to embryonic stem cell research are funds being taken away from the other two more promising and less controversial types of stem cell research mentioned above.

UPDATE

Researchers have announced that embryonic cells are not the only stem cells now available for research. Stem cells can now be taken from living adult humans without harming the donor.

PROS

Some people think stem cell research has the potential to minimize suffering of people with many different diseases.

Some people think that stem cells can teach us about how cells become different from each other.

Some people think we will be able to grow replacement organs and prolong the life of people with disease.

The crux of the argument in bioethics committees (see link for AAAS) is whether excess embryos created for in vitro fertilization should be destroyed or used for research. The death of the excess embryos is inevitable either way. As bioethics committees use the four principles or derivations there of in their debates the principal of beneficence wins over the principal of non-maleficence where the parents' consent is obtained.

Good information about stem cell research is here: See related links

CONS

Some people think of embyos as having the potential for life and that potential should be preserved.

Some people think the embyos have dignity which should be preserved.

Some people think embryos have a soul.

Some people think that stem cell research constitues murder.

The crux of the matter for objectors is weither the right to life and dignity of the unborn child is being considered. Many would also object to the destruction of embryos in in vitro fertilisation. The use of adult cloned cells is considered very objectionable as it equates to creating a life(clone) with the express intention of destroying it.(See link to SPUC)

Extra Information being discussed:

Pros:

- Embryonic stem cells are plenty and are not hard to find

- Embryos do not classify as life, but do classify as Potential for life

- Embryonic stem cells do not cost a fortune to get

- Piles of different diseases could be cured by using stem cells, and this would save the NHS and other health services a huge amount of money since there would be less use of drugs

Cons:

- Adult stem cells are rare

- Adult stem cells are in some of the hardest to get to places, such as attached to the bone marrow

- Adult stem cells aren't really stem cells, stem cells are unspecialized cells whereas adult stem cells can only produce a certain type of cell, such as the blood cell

Answer 2

There are many pros and cons to medical research. Some pros are: The more you know the more you can treat, the more you find out the more you provide answers, The more you know you can diagnose, and the more you know the more peoples life you can save. The cons are: The more you find, the more money it takes to provide accurate research with accurate answers, with accurate treatment. Also, the more diagnoses you can make, the more people needing treatment.

Answer 3

One pro for human experimentation is that scientists can observe exactly what will happen when a product is used for it's intended subject. One con of human experimentation is that a lot of people will die due to lack of knowledge about the things being tested.

Answer 4

One of the cons of human testing are the long term side effects. Yes your getting an answer and temporary fix but what are the long term effects? Vioxx Proves that it was great for about 5-6 years and then suddenly taken off the market because it was causing serious cardiovascular issues such as heart attacks and strokes and in a lot of cases was fatal so you do the math.

Answer 5

Pros

• Find New Treatment
• Whoever is was they tested on would be happy because they helped to find the cure and they are helping the future of others so basically a good thing.

That's all I know in Pros...

Cons

• The side effects etc, there could be gentic damage and be passed on to over generations.
• Some companies use human experimentation as part of publicity with in an unethical issue which makes it ethical and plus the company is paying the human subject money to take the treatment.
• Could result with death, disfigure and disability.
• A loss to the victims friends and family.

That's all i know for Cons! Thanks and I yhuuu! =D

Answer 6

"In Defense of Nature, Human and Non-Human"

by francis fukuyama

Francis Fukuyama's essay about the advances of biotechnology and the danger that it carries on the manipulation of the human nature is very polemic and interesting. I have got submerged in this debate which is one of the newest ones worldwide because it affects us all as a whole.

Today's world has gone through a rapid evolutionary and social change constructed by science, technology and the restricting of global capital. Our world has entered into a new biological and social existence that is shaped by computers, mass media, and biotechnology, all driven by the logic of capital and a powerful emergent techno science. At present days, the issues of cloning and biotechnology are being debated in the halls of science, politics, religion, and among the people through the media.

While researching about biotechnology I found a very interesting documentary on YouTube: "The Trans-humanist's Wet Dreams-Post-Humans". On this documentary, many scientists support the use of biotechnology in order to cure diseases, end the world hunger, in-vitro fertilization, transplant of humanized animal organs to humans, and especially to master human nature.

Trans-humanist artist, Natasha Vita More (The Thans-humanist's Wet Dream) says that "in the future we will be able to sculpt our bodies like living-sculptures". Our bodies can be beautiful electronic designs that can change to many forms. "We can make humans super-humans". With the advances of reproductive technology now parents could choose the sex of their child, genetic manipulation opens the doors to an overwhelming number of different possibilities. We can live longer through altering our genetics, and even reach immortality. There is a potential for the creation of a worldwide Caste System: the "haves" and the "have-nots" of families who paid for their children to be the smartest, most beautiful and the most successful, and the families who can not afford those options. Wouldn't it create social chaos? Yes indeed. Our world view could be drastically changed by this. For example, the world economy could be drastically changed, especially through the combination of genetic engineering and cloning.

There are many questions emerging from this controversial issue: Why to hold back to genetic engineering when we can use it in a way that best serves us? Why can we use genetic engineering to manipulate human imperfections? If we are to manipulate human nature by altering our genes in order to create a "perfect" human, then, what do scientists perceive as "perfect"?

The answer to this question spins around one word: Post Humanism. It is an attitude on how to deal with the limitations of the human form. It is a vision of how to move beyond those limits by the radical use of technological and other means. By doing so we are not respecting human rights. We might one day duplicate man; his form, his body, his actions and reactions through cloning. Cloning is a form of asexual reproduction in which the offspring are genetically identical to the parent.

In today's days the race to clone humans is evident in the scientific world. One of the first human cloning advocates was Richard Seed who shocked the world in 1997 by declaring that he was prepared to clone himself. Infertility specialists Secerini Antiori and Panayiotis Zanos openly announce their intent to clone humans, in defiance of any national law if necessary. As we can see, there is enormous desire to alter human genes in order to master the human nature. Then, are we respecting our human nature? I agree with Fukuyama's statement: "A biotechnology that seeks to manipulate human nature not only risks unforeseen consequences, but can undetermined the very basis of equal democratic rights as well"

Let's say a human is cloned. What rights does this individual have? Is he his own person or does he belongs to the cell donor, or the person who manufactured him?

With these new biotechnologies being developed, who controls the power over them? How will they be used and how will they be distributed? The use of biotechnology without limitations and regulation could be dangerous and could create devastating consequences to our future.

If we do not put any limit to this, families throughout the world could, for example, can choose the sex of their children, their aye color, their IQ, their height, or their skin color. Why would this create danger to our future? If, for example, a big number of families in some part of the country want their children to be boys, it could put society in danger of being composed by the predominance of members of a determined sex which would take it to the extreme of even the extinction of the specie by lack of descent (The Myth of the Amazons).

Fukuyama propose that it should be the State the one that controls in a very responsible and proper way the limited use of some advances of the biotechnology instead of giving the freedom of its use to the families. There must be some form of control and regulations over such a tremendous power of changing human genetics.

In conclusion, I consider that biotechnology in general terms is a great help for the human being if it is addressed to resolve his deficiencies, lacks, and other problems; and if allows him the pursuit of happiness which is one of the most famous phases in the Declaration of Independence of the U.S: "Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness".

Consequently, I do not agree with those scientific explorations on the human being directed toward the only purpose of satisfying the novelty, the answer to the unknown (head transplant whose most pathetic example is Frankenstein). In that aspect, is the State that must to establish the rules and regulations.

Answer 7

Advantages of Stem Cell Research

• It provides medical benefits in the fields of therapeutic cloning and regenerative medicine.
• It provides great potential for discovering treatments and cures to a plethora of diseases including Parkinson's disease, schizophrenia, Alzheimer's disease, Cancer, spinal cord injuries, Diabetes and many more.
• Limbs and organs could be grown in a lab from stem cells and then used in transplants or to help treat illnesses.
• It will help scientists to learn about human growth and cell development.
• Scientists and doctors will be able to test millions of potential drugs and medicine, without the use of animals or human testers. This necessitates a process of simulating the effect the drug has on a specific population of cells. This would tell if the drug is useful or has any problems.
• Stem cell research also benefits the study of development stages that cannot be studied directly in a human embryo, which sometimes are linked with major clinical consequences such as birth defects, pregnancy loss and infertility. A more comprehensive understanding of normal development will ultimately allow the prevention or treatment of abnormal human development.
• Another advantage of stem cell research is that it holds the key to reversing the effects of aging and prolonging our lives. Stem cell research has already found many treatments that help slow the aging process, and a bonus of further stem cell research is a possible 'cure' for aging altogether.
• An advantage of the usage of adult stem cells to treat disease is that a patient's own cells could be used to treat a patient. Risks would be quite reduced because patients' bodies would not reject their own cells.
• An advantage of using embryonic stem cells is that they can develop into any cell types of the body, and may then be more versatile than adult stem cells.

Disadvantages of Stem Cell Research

• The use of embryonic stem cells for research involves the destruction of blastocysts formed from laboratory-fertilized human eggs. For those people who believe that life begins at conception, the blastocyst is a human life and to destroy it is immoral and unacceptable.
• Like any other new technology, it is also completely unknown what the long term effects of such an interference with nature could materialize.
• Embryonic stem cells Amy not be the solution for all ailments.
• According to a new research stem cell therapy was used on Heart disease patients. It was found that it can make their coronary arteries become narrower.
• A disadvantage of most adult stem cells is that they are pre-specialized, for instance, blood stem cells make only blood, and brain stem cells make only brain cells.
• A disadvantage of embryonic stem cells is that they are derived from embryos that are not a patient's own and the patient's body may reject them.

Answer 8

The pros are good outcomes of something. The cons are the bad outcomes of something.

Pros:

1. Scientific research has first and foremost, helped in the medical field.

- Cures to disease which long time back were supposed to be uncurable.

- Longer life span. (People live longer nowadays)

2. It is helpful in the cosmetic field. Not only does it make people feel more beautiful and hence get more self-confidence but also, it can help to improve people's lives. After an accident where the victim has been defaced or from birth itself, someone got 'facial malformations' (eg. hare lips), the latter can be given a new chance or a new life. Scientific research helps to correct the imperfections, the errors of nature.

3. Quite recently, we have started exploring space. Here also, the researches may prove to be very useful. Already, we have discovered atoms of water on Mars. Who knows? We may find new sources of energy. Our exhaustible and highly polluting sources of energy will soon be used up. Space exploration may be the solution to a better life for future generations to come.

Cons:

1. Scientific research is very costly. We are spending a lot of money on a 'project' which results are uncertain while mankind in the third world are suffering from poverty.

2. Animal lovers always argue the fact that animals suffer during scientific experiences (animal testing). Indeed, during animal testing, many of them lose their lives vainly. During the researches, several animals may perish without getting any satisfying results.

3. Scientific research is a way to contradict nature's cycle but generally, 'nature knows best'. By alterating the natural cylce, we are fetching for problems. Already, we have started seeing the negative effects of our deeds...global warmig...

There are lots more...

Answer 9

The majority of scientist and researchers in the field believe that the pros for Human Stem Cell research are that it will help stop a variety of diseases. The biggest con is at what point does it stop and what kind of horrors are being invited in if we continue.