Embryonic Stem Cells Research

Embryonic stem cells are, first and foremost, cells with the ability to live. The “embryonic” component sparks a slew of arguments coming from a lack of agreement on the meaning, boundaries, and purpose of life. “When does life begin and end?” and “Does an embryonic stem cell implicate life or not?” are difficult to explain clearly.

Those who are against it think that these cells are likewise alive. Others, on the other hand, believe that embryonic stem cells do not represent life, but rather a potential for life. Another factor that relates to the above is the lack of agreement on how to classify humans.

Embryonic stem cells act in the same manner that normal embryonic cells do in the development of a human foetus. As a result, despite their in vitro origin, opponents might view embryonic stem cells as potential human beings. If this type of study continues, the essence of human existence may be polluted in the near future, especially from the perspective of religious and social organisations.

Finally, techniques involving the storage and destruction of embryonic stem cells for research are considered unethical. Storing embryonic stem cells appears to be a denial of the right to human life. The proponents, on the other hand, use the “nothing is lost” argument to justify their position.

They believe that because there is an excess of in vitro embryos, these embryos must be saved for future research purposes. What else can be done with these embryos is to put them to good use, such as in research that might lead to important discoveries that could save lives.

There is a surplus of 400,000 human embryos generated through in vitro fertilisation in the United States, which are frozen and maintained to this day. Nonetheless, pro-life groups continue to oppose the initiative since studies involving these embryos ultimately result in the killing of the embryo, labelling the technique “murder.”

Because of the ethical issues involved, embryonic stem cell research is a contentious topic. It just goes to demonstrate that what is generally good does not always imply that it is also ethically correct.