Arguments Against Stem Cell Research

445 Words2 Pages

Stem cells are very important to human development. Stem cells are nonspecialized cells and they have the potential to create other specific cells, as in blood, brain, tissue or muscles cells. Stem cells are everywhere in our body and lives. Sometypes are able to create new cells in the body, others can repair or repair or replace damaged tissues or cells. Stem cells are called the building blocks of human life and since they were discovered. In the 1800’s the potential for using them was very unique. The most unique thing about stem cells is the way it can replicate other cells. From 1978-1997 there have been people researching stem cells and there abilities. In 1998, Thompson, from University of Wisconsin spreated and isolated cells from …show more content…

Some people who argue for stem cell research believe it can help for a variety of medical purposes and is likely to bring us closer to wring presently incurable diseases and conditions.
Proponents argue that here are some diseases that could benefit from further stem cell researcher; these include, Parkinson’s Disease, Alzheimer’s Disease and also reduces transplantation risk. In order to realize the potential for treatment and therapy, stem-cell researchers needs to continue.
Many arguments against stem cell research began because embryonic cells were used in the research, but more and more research is being done using adult stem cells differentiating them into human pluripotent cell lines. This research has led researchers to rethink about the use of stem cell research because of the new technology which focuses on pluripotent stem cell research. People are for stem cell research because it can help the cells can be reprogramed and are less likely to get rejected when used in any transplants. However while the argument for using adult stem cells is strong, opponents of stem cell research argue that adult stem cells are not as easily manipulated for differentiation are extremely hard to grow and