I'm a biology/philosophy student. I support stem cell research as long as it does not involve sacrificing a human life (i.e. embryonic). Underdeveloped human life is too precious for us to merely harvest a few cells to benefit a grown person. I think that it would be more beneficial to use one's own stem cells to procreate certain tissues. This way, there is less risk of rejection when, say, a diabetic individual recieves pancreatic tissue that contains his/her own genome and cellular protein receptors. Adult stem cells tend to 'behave' better than embryonic ones- they do not replicate as fast and respond better to inhibiting factors. Embryonic stem cells replicate as fast as they possibly can, and often don't respond to competitive inhibition. In a sense they have the potential to act like tumor cells. This is how adult stem cells, and even some umbilical cells, are more beneficial and even more ethical to use. I think it is great that we are improving lives of those who have congenital disease; however, we must maintain a human approach, and not pretend to be God.
I agree. Is the scientific furor over embryonic stem cells really fueled by its potential, unproven, or by some hubristic desire to play God with a malleable life form?