Fetal Stem Cell Question

Never! We have enough stem cell research which uses adult stem cells and is showing to be quite effective. Why mess with the unborn?

 

No... There has been and will be plenty of work that can be done with stem cells that are harvested from other sources. Genetic research is extremely important, and I pray that God uses it to bring healing to millions, but there are ethical questions must be asked and answered.

I did have a question maybe a person can help me with... in the medical procedure are the eggs that have been removed fertilized and then frozen or are they preserved prior to fertilization? If they are fertilized, then frozen, what is done with those embryos?

Blessings

 

I like this answer.

 

Can you support that statement?

 

naturally . . .

It is my opinion.

 

My concern would be that research to develop technology that allows stem cells to be extracted without destroying embryos would likely require things like controls and failed experiments where embryos would likely be destroyed. Another concern after the technology is developed would be the potential for error resulting in the destruction of embryos.

But if we were to magically arrive at this technology without the destruction of embryos and a guarantee that it would be always error free (both of which I believe to be impossible) then I would be supportive of such technology.

 

stem cell lies again

I read about this in the newspaper on Thursday, and then on Friday I saw a "correction" article that stated that ALL of the embryos used in this experimental procedure "had been destroyed". The "correction" article was originally published in the Chicago Tribune (by Jeremy Manier), and I read it in the Spokesman-Review of Spokne, Washington. (Friday, September 1, 2006, page A4).

The article started: "In an effort to correct a misunderstanding about a study that described a way of creating embryonic stem cells while sparing human embryos, officials at the journal Nature said Thursday they plan to change the paper to make it clear that 'all of the embryos used were destroyed". The article goes on to say that the study's main findings are unchallenged.

This still sounds to me like mass murder of human embryos. Is this not just another way to make murder look good?

As stated by siomeone else, ADULT stem cell research seems to have much better results anyway. Why not pursue that, and leave the embryos alone?

Bill :tear:

 

Good point. I did not consider consent and from that perspective I would still have a problem with embryonic stem cell research if it didn't harm the embryo.

 

I thought about this some more.

Our society allows parents to give consent for their children until they are no longer minors (usually 18). So why couldn't they give consent for their children who are still embryos? Given of course this consent cannot result in harm or death to the embryo.

I may be swinging back to my original position. Of course that is moot since it is an impossible scenario.

 

My answer is no.

Animals are for experimentation - not humans.

 

Humans are experimented on all the time. Every medical procedure we go through was experiemented with, either formally or informally, before it became common medical practice.

Parental consent for experimental embryonic stem cell extraction is similar to parental consent for experimental organ donation of a child (ie kidney or bone marrow). The difference is that currently, embryonic stem cell extraction will kill the embryo while surgical organ donation has a risk of killing the child that has been mitigated by years of experimentation and perfecting of the relevant procedures.

 

Perhaps another difference is that with organ donation, a disease is already killing the child. With stem cell research, the experiment itself is the cause of damage and death. If they do nothing, the embryos may be able (at some future date) to be implanted.

peace to youraying:

 

In the hypothetical being discussed, the stem cell extraction does not cause any harm to the embryo and would still be able to be implanted. In both organ donation and stem cell extraction, a disease is not killing the donor but the recipient. However, all donor procedures do carry a calculated risk to the donor. At the current technology, that risk is fatal to the donor in stem cell research, making it an unacceptable risk.

 

One ethical consideration of embryonic stem cell extraction that doesn't result in harm to the embryo is the production of embryos solely for their stem cell extraction with no intention of their being implanted. The cost of freezing and storage normally associated with in-vitro fertilizations that are not immediately implanted may be prohibitive of this potential abuse but I'm not sure and other measures may be required to prevent this scenario.