Debate on embryonic stem cell research

I believe that embryonic stem cell research is sustainable.

I will start with some background information. Embryonic stem cells are stem cells derived from the inner cell mass of the blastocyst, an early-stage embryo. Human embryos reach the blastocyst stage 4–5 days post fertilization, at which time they consist of 50–150 cells. Isolating the embryoblast or inner cell mass (ICM) results in destruction of the fertilized human embryo, which raises ethical issues.

Most may be thinking that it is cruel to end a life like that just for experimental research. However, we must think, when does life actually start? Does the embryo know what is happening? Unlike abortion which is usually done much later during pregnancy, the embryo of 4-5 days old has barely developed any of its sensory organs. Besides, embryos are cultivated by in vitro culture, meaning they aren’t even placed in a parent’s womb, and it has been proven. “If the pre implantation embryo is left or maintained outside the uterus, it cannot develop into a human being.” Also, More than a third of zygotes do not implant after conception. Thus, far more embryos are lost due to chance than are proposed to be used for embryonic stem cell research or treatments.

Also, when harvesting the stem cells, consent from the involved parties is required. If all parties agree to it, why not? It is for the greater good of everyone. The stem cells can be used for research to cure people who are in need of these cells, people who are already on the verge of dying.

ES cell therapies have been proposed for regenerative medicine and tissue replacement after injury or disease due to its special property of being able to replicate infinitely. Diseases that could potentially be treated by these stem cells include a number of blood and immune-system related genetic diseases, cancers, and disorders; juvenile diabetes; Parkinson's; blindness and spinal cord injuries.

With all the above reasons, I believe that embryonic stem cell research is sustainable.

In this debate...

I learnt about the Lincoln-Douglas Format.

1. The Affirmative (almost always) reads a pre-written case

2. The Negative asks the Affirmative questions.

3. The Negative (almost always) reads a pre-written case and (almost always) moves on to address the Affirmative's case.

4. The Affirmative asks the Negative questions.

5. The Affirmative addresses both his/her opponent's case and his/her own. This speech is considered by many debaters to be the most difficult.

6. The Negative addresses the arguments of the previous speech and summarizes the round for the judge.

7. The Affirmative addresses the arguments of the previous speech and summarizes the round for the judge.