Stem Cell Research: The Ethics of Necessity

If you aren't too keen on Embryonic Stem Cell Research but don't beat a bible, or if you feel that Owen's "embryo farm" fantasy won't hold up in arguments with your friends, I think you'll find that there's a much easier way to dispute the raging debate over a very misunderstood subject that currently finds itself in the limelight.

The fact is, there are more unknowns about Embryonic Stem Cell Research than there are knowns. What we do know is these cells are undifferentiated so that with manipulation they may be grown into any type of human cell. In that fact alone lies their strength.

Nevertheless, given all of the misgivings about embryonic research, I think it's better to stick to what we know -- in this case: Adult Stem Cell Research.

Adult stem cells live in every human body. In the past, it was believed that these cells were little in number, difficult to locate and already specialized, which poses a big problem. If the cells are specialized, it basically means that they can only regrow into one type of cell, whereas embryonic stem cells can grow into anything, thus making the latter type of research sound more promising and making it the stronger candidate for funding.

Recent research on adult stem cells has proven nearly all of the above false, or has given reason to believe in a not too distant otherwise. While adult stem cells are little in number, methods of locating them have improved and the likelihood of cloning the lines is high. Furthermore, adult stems cells have proven to be much more variable than previously thought, and new research gives hope that they have the capability of being returned to their original, undifferentiated state.

Additionally, the biggest hurdle with embryonic research is that the very likely possibility of rejection remains. So, even if embryonic stem cells can regrow an arm or cure diabetes, the patient is not guaranteed that his or her body will even accept the treatment.

In order to overcome that obstacle, embryonic stem cells for every kind of genetic makeup will have to be available. As a result, far more embryonic stem cells will be needed in order to conduct all the research, and the testing, and then to find the right kind of makeups for each person. Effectively this means that somewhere down the line more embryos will have to be destroyed.

Not one of these concerns arise when dealing with adult stem cells because only cells from the patient's body are used in the process, and the body has not shown a tendency to reject its own cells.

Lastly adult stem cell therapy has been in practice for the last 30 years. While embryonic stem cell therapy has yet to show a single success, adult stem cell therapy has numerous cases that show the treatment is effective.

In summation, it is my opinion that federal funding should be directed to the side of this business that has shown the most promise with the fewest ethical objections. If adult stem cells can achieve the same results as embryonic stem cells, then the need for the latter is eliminated.