ABSTRACT

1. OBJECTIVE CRITERIA • Number of stem cell lines available for research • The number of citizens afflicted with said diseases and availability of alternative treatments • Stem Cell legislation/rules in other nations • Effectiveness of alternative techniques for producing stem cells as judged by science/public panel • Money spent on alternative treatments v. projected money for stem cells INTRODUCTION In order to understand the debate and controversy behind stem cell research one must fully understand the science of stem cells. Stem cells are cells which are essentially neutral and can transform into different types of cells.(1) This is useful in treating disease because with the addition of specific stem cells the body can repair itself and create more of cells in need. There are four basic types of stem cells, all in different developmental stages, but the type that can replace any cell in the body and thus, the most useful is a totipotent cell. The debate surrounds embryonic stem cell research because the cells are harvested from the blastocyst, which is a 50 to 150 cell embryo (2). While stem cells themselves cannot grow into a fetus, they are needed for further growth of the blastocyst and during the harvesting process the embryo is terminated. Adult stem cells exist as well and are currently used to treat many blood related diseases but embryonic stem cells are more easily manipulated and have been declared the future of stem cell science (3). Similar to the abortion debate, the question is “when does life begin?” If life begins in the embryonic state then stem cell research is killing future people. The pro-life side of this debate generally believes that a fertilized egg is holy and needs to be treated with reverence. The current laws generally consider life to begin after the first trimester or roughly three months of pregnancy. The answer to this question depends upon morality differences and more specifically, religious beliefs (4). Another problem is the exact benefits of stem cell research and the magnitude of its effects will not be known until further research is performed, which may take years. Coming to Terms with Stem CellsZoë LukensChemistry 127: Negotiation February 22, 2006SHOULD STEM CELL RESEARCH BE FEDERALLY FUNDED? "As a result of private research, more than 60 genetically diverse stem cell lines already exist" I have concluded that we should allow federal funds to be used for research on these existing stem cell lines " where the life and death decision has already been made", This allows us to explore the promise and potential of stem cell research" without crossing a fundamental moral line by providing taxpayer funding that would sanction or encourage further destruction of human embryos that have at least the potential for life." (10) -- George W. Bush • INTERESTS • Reducing suffering caused by disease • Being respected by others • Maintaining a reverence for life • Regulating clearly appropriate sources of stem cells • OPTIONS • Ban all embryonic stem cell research • Give all funding to non embryonic stem cell research • Use only donated, left-over embryos from in-vitro fertilization • Perform research on any donated embryo • Give 50% of funding to non embryonic research and 50% to left over embryos from in-vitro fertilization • Increase federal funding for research on new ways to cure diseases • Clarify rules about acceptable sources of stem cells • Define compromise research on donated embryos • PEOPLE • Pro Stem Cell Research • The people involved on the pro side of the stem cell debate are: • research scientists • organizations such as Parkinson’s Disease Foundation, the ALS Association, and the Alzheimer’s Association (5,6,7) • patients with these and other conditions and their families • Some of the options supported by the pro-stem cell campaign are: • increased federal funding for research • research permitted on any donated embryo ABSTRACT Stem Cell research is an issue that is currently at the crossroads of American politics and science. The biggest question today is whether federal funding should be provided for embryonic stem cell research. For the advocates of stem cell research, the prospects of stem cell research are unparalleled as further study could change the face of disease control for many conditions including Parkinson’s, MS, ALS and cancer. For the pro-life advocates, the research presents a problem because the harvesting of stem cells involves the destruction of a human embryo. The goal of this negotiation is to bring the opposing sides together and to come to a conclusion based upon certain objective criteria established by an international panel of experts from both sides. Options to consider are providing funding for adult stem cell research and umbilical cells, using only extra frozen embryos from in-vitro fertilization and an outline of the ethical practice of research. CONCLUSION Both sides have interests in eradicating these diseases and saving lives but simply disagree on how to accomplish that task. The fairest option for negotiation is to give 50% of funding to non-embryonic research and 50% to research involving left over embryos from in-vitro fertilization and creating a clear list of regulations about the sources of stem cells. (8) • Pro-Life (Against Stem Cell Research) • The people involved in the campaign against stem cell research are: • pro-life activists • certain religious followers • conservative republicans including, the Bush administration (4) • others who find it is morally wrong to kill a fertilized egg (8) • Some of the options supported by the pro-life campaign include: • banning of all embryonic research that kills the embryo • exploring other avenues of research that do not include embryos (9) • . REFERENCES 1 "Stem Cell." 06 Feb. 2006. Wikipedia. 06 Feb. 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell>. 2 Ibid 3 "Stem Cell Basics." Stem Cell Information. 12 Aug. 2005. National Institutes of Health. 05 Feb. 2006 <http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/basics4.asp>. 4 "Recent Developments in the Ethical and Policy Debates." Monitoring Stem Cell Research. Jan 2004. President's Council on Bioethics. 05 Feb. 2006 <http://bioethics.gov/reports/stemcell/chapter3.html>. 5 "PDF History." 2005. Parkinson's Disease Foundation. 06 Feb. 2006 <http://www.pdf.org/AboutPDF/history.cfm>. 6 "ALSA: What We Do." About ALSA. 2004. ALS Association. 06 Feb. 2006 <http://www.alsa.org/alsa/what.cfm?CFID=1657676&CFTOKEN=61155663>. 7 "About Us." 2006. Alzheimer's Association. 06 Feb. 2006 <http://www.alz.org/AboutUs/overview.asp>. 8Hoffman, William. World Stem Cell Map. University of Minnesota Medical School. 06 Feb. 2006 <http://mbbnet.umn.edu/scmap.html>. 9 Olsen , Ted. "A Brave New World, Indeed." Weblog. 13 2001. Christian Today Magazine. 06 Feb. 2006 <http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2001/128/52.0.html>. 10 "Fact Sheet: Embryonic Stem Cell Research." News. Aug. 2001. The White House. 13 Feb. 2006 <http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/08/20010809-1.html>. 11 "Stem Cell Research: Science and the Future." Health and Science. 14 Feb. 2006. NPR. 14 Feb. 2006 <http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5204335>. • In 2001, nearly 80,000 people needed organ transplants, fewer than 24,000 got them, and 6,000 died waiting. • By 2010, over 2 million Americans are projected to contract end-stage renal disease, at an aggregate cost of $1 trillion. • In 2002, the prevalence of diabetes in the United States exceeded 18 million people -- 6.3 percent of the population. That year, total heath care costs of diabetes surpassed $130 billion. • Nearly half of the people over age 85 have Alzheimer's disease • The total cost of treating cardiovascular diseases and stroke in the United States in 2004 is estimated to reach $368 billion (11).