Quote:
Originally Posted by peter12
The so-called treatments are only hoped for possibilities with very little tangible and hard evidence to support them. To get to a stage where any treatments appear we will have to totalize the human body, utilizing "spare parts" of unused embryos for the fuel to run this particular scientific project with little purpose.
|
You're pretty far off on this one.
The whole point of stem cells is that you need not "totalize" the whole body. People are working on embryonic (pluripotent) stem cells to see what types of cells they can differentiate them into (liver, kidney, etc...), but they're also using them as a model blueprint to see if we can reprogram adult stem cells into embryonic stem cells.
So really, there is very little "harvesting" if at all. And if the aimed for outcome is achieved, you won't need to harvest anything from an embryo. All you'll need to do is get consent from the sick patient (or perhaps a healthy relative) to draw a few cells from a biopsy. Hardly an ethical morass.
TBQH, I'd rather use all those "embryos" in stasis (I hesitate to call them embryos at such an early stage following fertilization) rather than just let them sit there while we lie to ourselves that some day we'll find legions of women to carry them to term. As far as I'm concerned, the moral "line" has already been crossed by the people engaging in the in vitro fertilization process*, so there is little harm in maximizing utility.
* I'm not trying to make a positive or negative judgment for those who choose IVF. I'm just saying that the ethical decision is made *before* you choose to drop multiple fertilized eggs into liquid nitrogen for an undefined period of time.