Embryonic vs. Adult Stem Cells: Relative Effectiveness
This is an excerpt from the paper...
Somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT), also known as therapeutic cloning, is a form of scientific research that has the potential to lead to cures and treatments for serious, chronic diseases; SCNT involves the removal of the nucleus of an unfertilized egg cell, replacing it with the material from the nucleus of a "somatic cell" (a skin, heart, or nerve cell, for example), and stimulating this cell to begin dividing. As differentiated from reproductive cloning, SCNT does not aim to create human beings by cloning human embryos; human "Dollies" are not the goal of SCNT, which focuses instead on generating new cellular tissue that can replaces diseased or damaged human tissues and foster improvements in the quality and even the length of human life (Korobkin & Munzer, 2007). SCNT is controversial, however, because it involves the use of human embryonic tissue. At issue in this analysis is the question of whether embryonic stem cells (ESCs) are a better medium than adult stem cells (ASCs) for scientific research leading ideally to major medical breakthroughs in terms of the prevention and treatment of disease, trauma, and even birth defects. Debate over this issue is quite intense and often emotionally charged (Korobkin & Munzer, 2007). It is all but impossible, according to Fischbach (2003), to consider this debate without reference to ethical concerns centered on whether or not scientific researchers will overtly or covertly obtain illegal ESCs by destroying embryos, or
. . .
2001) makes the case that SCNT research is a fact of life in the scientific community. It is already well underway in many different places. Once science begins to pursue such research - particularly when there are likely to be significant benefits generated by the research - it is all but impossible to "turn back the clock." In essence, it is irrational to believe that this kind of research can be eliminated.
Finally, in arguing in favor of expanding stem cell lines available for SCNT, Elfstrom (2001) suggests that we are continually called upon to make distinctions between ethical and unethical acts. In medicine and in scientific research, Elfstrom (2001, p. 196) also refers to the principles guiding medical practice. Basically, one must do no harm, do good, respect life, and respect individual patients as well as members of the profession. In his view, the use of embryonic stem cells obtained legally and ethically does not present a major challenge. That is his position, but again, it does not in any way obviate against the use of ASCs.
There are many other analysts who counter Elfstrom's (2001) call for a focus on ESCs. For example, Zimmet and Krum (2008), in a study of the sue of ASCs in treating heart f
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Korobkin Munzer, Forest University, Gerard Elfstrom, Rice Scolding, Zimmet Krum, ESCs ASCs, Secondly Elfstrom, ASCs ESCs, , Third Elfstrom, stem cells, stem cell, adult stem, adult stem cells, elfstrom 2001, nih 2008, korobkin munzer, munzer 2007, korobkin munzer 2007, cell lines, stem cell lines, atala 2002, embryonic stem cells, embryonic stem, rice scolding 2004,
Approximate Word count = 3385
Approximate Pages = 14 (250 words per page)
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
