Don’t play against nature, it will surely bite you back later...
The waiting game on embryonic stem cell research is almost over with Obama signing the bill to allow state funding of it. But the debate isn’t yet over. It was during the Clinton regime that the concept of Stem cell research took shape for the first time. Abortion was legalised and UK’s successful experiment with in vitro fertilisation inspired scientists in the US. Hence the Human Embryo Research Panel of the National Institute of Health approached President Bill Clinton to allow state funding but considering the moral and ethical concerns, he refused it. Later Bush faced similar predicaments but reacted more strongly than Clinton. In spite of unanimous support in the Congress in favour of it, he used his veto power thrice to stop it. He strategically defended his decision by stating, ‘the bill would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others. It crosses the moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect. So, vetoed it.’
Obama’s decision may revolutionise the medical research world but everything comes at a cost. US alone has 400,000 embryos in labs and it’s only a matter of time when selling embryos would become a vibrant business. Worse, some individuals have certain genetic uniqueness which make their body more resistant to chronic diseases than rest. Michael Crichton’s best seller named ‘Next’ precisely talked about how such people can be hounded by the research agencies for commercial cultivation of such blood. There are several instances where experiments with stem cell research created severe anomalies on those treated. Even if one keeps aside the religious reservation against stem cell research, if the objective is to create more healthy people then on any given day such artificial mutations are less effective than natural healing, something mankind has forgotten nowadays. Isn’t it better to do yoga to heal the body than tamper with genes? Think once..
The waiting game on embryonic stem cell research is almost over with Obama signing the bill to allow state funding of it. But the debate isn’t yet over. It was during the Clinton regime that the concept of Stem cell research took shape for the first time. Abortion was legalised and UK’s successful experiment with in vitro fertilisation inspired scientists in the US. Hence the Human Embryo Research Panel of the National Institute of Health approached President Bill Clinton to allow state funding but considering the moral and ethical concerns, he refused it. Later Bush faced similar predicaments but reacted more strongly than Clinton. In spite of unanimous support in the Congress in favour of it, he used his veto power thrice to stop it. He strategically defended his decision by stating, ‘the bill would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others. It crosses the moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect. So, vetoed it.’
Obama’s decision may revolutionise the medical research world but everything comes at a cost. US alone has 400,000 embryos in labs and it’s only a matter of time when selling embryos would become a vibrant business. Worse, some individuals have certain genetic uniqueness which make their body more resistant to chronic diseases than rest. Michael Crichton’s best seller named ‘Next’ precisely talked about how such people can be hounded by the research agencies for commercial cultivation of such blood. There are several instances where experiments with stem cell research created severe anomalies on those treated. Even if one keeps aside the religious reservation against stem cell research, if the objective is to create more healthy people then on any given day such artificial mutations are less effective than natural healing, something mankind has forgotten nowadays. Isn’t it better to do yoga to heal the body than tamper with genes? Think once..
Read these article :-
Outlook Magazine money editor quits
Don't trust the Indian Media!
No comments:
Post a Comment