 |
 |
Your point is well taken that objectors to stem cell research are not idiots or cruel, but sympathetic, rational people. There is one minor point you overlooked. The primary source for stem cells in research are fertilized eggs leftover after a woman has conceived her desired number of children. With no further use for these eggs, they are normally incinerated. If she donates them to research, there are many regulations and safeguards that make sure (among other things) she cannot specify to whom the product goes, and she cannot charge for her excess eggs. Keep in mind that the stem cells they don't use are the Totipotent cells. This means "toti" or total potential. If these are implanted into a womb the cells might be capable of creating life. Instead the scientists use pluripotent cells -- which means cells that have "pluri" (plural) or many potentials. But are not capable of ever growing into a life form. Question: Which is better: To incinerate her surplus eggs or to extract the stem cells for the betterment of mankind? Please think about these two tough alternatives. I'd appreciate your response. PS Note that "saving the eggs is not a viable alternative. Women want there own child. If incapable of bearing a child, she wants to know about the donor, who in turn is entitled to privacy not publicity.