The document discusses the ethics of stem cell research. It explains that stem cells can become specialized cells and have potential medical uses but obtaining embryonic stem cells requires destroying embryos, raising ethical issues. Potential solutions are debated such as only using induced stem cells, banning research, or limited embryonic stem cell use with preference for induced cells. The author's opinion is that a limited use of embryonic stem cells balanced with induced cell research allows scientific progress while addressing ethical concerns.

1. Stem Cell Research:
How ethical is the use of stem cells for
science?
By (Sam) Harsimranjit Kang

2. What are Stem Cells?
Stem cells are undifferentiated cells.
They have the potential to become specialized as long as the
human or animal is alive.
As they undergo mitosis they can remain as stem cells or
become specialized cells to replace old/dead cells, or to aid in
regrowth (“Stem Cells”).
They can be induced (sometimes in special conditions) to
become tissue or organ-specific cells to aid with
renewing/repairing tissue and organs (“Stem Cells”).
Have been already greatly used for medication, therapeutic
purposes, and help with (understanding) diseases and disorders.

3. What are the Problems?
The way stem cells have been obtained since 1998 causes
controversy. Because the research had only shown that
embryotic stem cells are useful in being specialized
(because when embryos grow the stem cells are
undergoing mitosis to be specific cells for specific
functions), scientists obtained their stem cells for any
laboratory work from human embryos and then
reproduced them in the lab (“Stem Cells”).
The method of obtaining the human embryonic stem cells,
arguably destroys the embryo and prevents it from
becoming a “full” human being.

4. What are the Problems? (cont.)
Continuing from the previous slide, humans are
forced to make a huge decision that is not only
present in stem cell research, but abortions as well:
When is an embryo considered a human and when does it
gain the rights and respect as a human being?
These questions veer off to even more ethical
concerns. Is conception the start of a human? Is the
destruction of the embryo justified for the possibility
of saving lives (“The Stem Cell”)?

5. What are the Problems? (cont.)
A contradiction to the claim that embryos are
destroyed when they are used for stem cells is that
the embryo has the potential to continue its growth
in the lab (“The Stem Cell”).
This means theoretically that human cloning could be
possible in the laboratory. Is that ethical?
Many governments have already made legislation that says
NO (“The Stem Cell”).

6. Potential human
being embryo or
stem cells?
(“Baby and stem cells”).

7. Solutions
Possible solutions to solving the ethics debate over stem
cell research are:
Completely outlaw the use of human embryonic stem cells
(hES) and use induced pluripotent stem cells (iPS) instead.
Completely stop all forms of stem cell research.
Allow scientists to research at their own discretion.
Decree that human life starts are conception.
OR set a specific phase in embryonic growth as what is considered
a human, and when and what rights are given.
Limited use of hES with a preference to iPS.

8. Completely Outlaw hES and use iPS
Instead
Pros:
Stem cell research would not be under as much scrutiny if
it didn’t destroy any future human beings.
Embryos wouldn’t be destroyed or tempered with for that
matter.
Pro-life people would not have to worry that human beings
are being destroyed for science.

9. Completely Outlaw hES and use iPS
Instead
Cons:
Some research shows that induced pluripotent stem cells
are fewer in number because they must be genetically
modified before being able to have similar properties to
that of human embryonic stem cells and thus being able to
be used to carry out further research.
Research on how humans develop and how
undifferentiated cells become specialized, a key event in
the growth of humans, becomes harder (“What Are”).

10. Stop Stem Cell Research
Pros:
There is no need to worry of the ethics of this research
because it simply does not exist. Ethical issues would be of
a less concern in this field of science.
No problem with the “destruction” of embryos – it’s not
happening!
No worry that cloning is possible as a result of stem cell
reproduction.
Money would be saved by the government and universities
and businesses as this field would be profit/research-less.

11. Stop Stem Cell Research
Cons:
Research is stopped; this means that scientists can’t learn
about human development in its early stages, or what’s going
on in the body with certain diseases and disorders and how to
prevent or cure them.
Possible life-changing discoveries are hindered and prevented.
Many people would lose their jobs and their financial security.
Science would have a lower reputation because of its limits
against social ethics and how it would have completely lost
against it.

12. Allow Scientists to Research at Their
Own Discretion
Pros:
Scientists can easily determine which stem cells (iES or
hES) are more beneficial to the research.
Scientists can freely do research without financial or legal
worries from concerned individuals.
Perhaps there is unbiased research and facts when there
are no worries about possible actions that can be taken
against scientists for their scientific actions.

13. Allow Scientists to Research at Their
Own Discretion
Cons:
Goes totally against the concepts of ethics and bioethics
and why science can be controversial and needs to be to
ensure that scientific practices don’t oppose social values
too greatly!
Scientists could interpret their freedom as permission to
clone human beings, which is banned in many countries.

14. Decree an Accepted Social Statement
Before pros of this are discussed, this solution is
many-faced because the social statements could be
something like “Human life starts at conception” or
“humans are a 14-day-old embryo”. The pros and cons
discussed will not be pertaining to any certain
statement, just in general, if the idea were to be
implemented.

15. Decree an Accepted Social Statement
Pros:
A clear cut statement is known and scientists can adjust (or
maybe discontinue) their research.
Society and government doesn’t have to clash over the
accepted statement since it’s already defined.
This would help with the debate on abortion and whether
it should be allowed or not.

16. Decree an Accepted Social Statement
Cons:
Even if scientists have a clear statement to base their
ethical dilemmas on, neither would society as a whole
agree on them nor would scientists, so the problem would
continue.
The ethical arguments are important because they shape
all the different societies of the world and make scientists
and humans question their actions.

17. Preferring iPS but limited hES
Pros:
Both variances of stem cells would be used for research,
allowing both potentials to be unlocked, maybe even
seeing which is more beneficial.
Although limited, the practice of using hES is allowed, so
scientists have some flexibility with expanding their
research.
Best of both worlds kind of, since it’s a compromise.

18. Preferring iPS but limited hES
Cons:
Embryos are still being harmed and “killed”.
Thus there is still concern over how useful human
embryonic stem cells are and whether “killing” a “human
being” is justified by research that has not had huge
amounts of scientific breakthrough.

19. hES vs iPS
(“HES”).

20. My Opinion
I believe that the order of solutions, from best to
worst is:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Preferring iPS but with limited usage of hES.
Completely outlaw hES, but allow iPS.
Leave it at scientists’ discretion.
Decree an accepted social statement.
Completely stop stem cell research.

21. My Opinion - Why
I choose allowing some hES research because it allows
scientists to better understand our human development
and why and how our cells become specialized. This is a
good compromise, and although it does allow embryonic
usage, which can kill potential human beings, if done with
great intention, utmost sincerity and respect, and with as
less damage as possible, it is fine. Induced pluripotent cells
from adults have already aided to production of new
medicines for example. So the potential for great
discoveries in this field is too important to disregard.

22. My Opinion – Why (cont.)
Although not as preferable, stem cell research is continued
and although not all of scientists’ questions will be
answered, we will be able to grow our knowledge of stem
cell use.
Leaving it for scientists to decide is scary as scientists could
abuse their right, but then again stem cell research
continues, and maybe even booms since embryo usage
isn’t necessarily factored in. However this does affect
many embryos that have the potential to become human
beings and so it would be a little savage if gotten out of
control.

23. My Opinion – Why (cont.)
I don’t really like this solution because it’s highly
improbable. It’s always been hard for society to come
to an agreement where all sides are happy. Besides,
whatever decision is made regarding whether or not
embryos are humans, when, and what their rights are,
there is still problems in ethics and hypothetically
things could get out of control. However this solution
is not my last, because I don’t feel like stopping stem
cell research would be wise.

24. My Opinion – Why (cont.)
As mentioned in the last slide, stopping stem cell
research would be unwise because all the possible
scientific achievements that could change human
beings’ lives for good would be prevented. There
would be no chance of improving our lives.

25. My Stance
I feel that stem cell usage is too much of a benefit to
disregard. It truly has huge potential in being able to solve
the numerous problems that humans face today (within
their bodies) and explain how as humans we have come to
develop, even if it’s part of the huge developmental
history.
Personally I would do more research and possibly even join
the stem cell researchers as my career and focus on
making this research more ethical, or at least more
efficient with obtaining more potential from embryos and
using as little embryos as possible.

26. Works Cited
(1) Baby and stem cells. Digital image. The Stem Cell Debate:
Is It Over? The University of Utah, n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2013.
<http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/tech/stemcells/scis
sues/>.
(2) "Embryonic Stem Cell Research: An Ethical
Dilemma." EuroStemCell. EuroStemCell, 23 Mar. 2011. Web.
20 Sept. 2013.
<http://www.eurostemcell.org/factsheet/embryonic-stemcell-research-ethical-dilemma>.
(3) HES vs iPS stem cell. Digital image. Stem Cell Research.
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Company, n.d. Web. 20 Sept.
2013. <http://biologybiozine.com/articles/unit-2cells/stem_cell_research_potential_s-php>.

27. Works Cited (cont.)
(4) "Stem Cell Basics: Introduction." Stem Cell Basics:
Introduction [Stem Cell Information]. U.S. Department of Health
& Human Services, 20 Apr. 2002. Web. 20 Sept. 2013.
<http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/pages/basics1.aspx>.
(5) "The Stem Cell Debate: Is It Over?" The Stem Cell Debate: Is It
Over? The University of Utah, n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2013.
<http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/tech/stemcells/scissues/
>.
(6) "What Are the Potential Uses of Human Stem Cells and the
Obstacles That Must Be Overcome before These Potential Uses
Will Be Realized?" Stem Cell Basics. U.S. Department of Health &
Human Services, n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2013.
<http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/pages/basics6.aspx>.