ESCR v ASCR
Should we continue Embryonic Stem Cell Research (ESCR)?
Or should we terminate ESCR because Adult Stem Cell Research (ASCR) seems
to have the potential for developing treatments for currently untreatable
Like ASCR, ESCR is incomplete, and until ASCR provides treatments for most
if not all, and not just a few, currently untreatable human diseases/disorders
or ESCR provides such treatments and ASCR does not, then we do not abandon
Imagine being in a company of people lost in the woods. No one has a clue
as to where is a trail leading back to civilization. All trails are equally
potentially a trail leading back to civilization.
NOTE: Stick with the setup; if you add conditions, then you will be obfuscating
the setup: under the proposed setup, the analogy is nearly perfect if not
completely perfect, and therefore is a valid analogy.
Two, or more, scouting parties could be sent out from the current location
to find a trail leading back to civilization. All scout parties would have
equal potential of finding a trail leading back to civlization, until an
actual trail is found. Under such facts, there would be no justification for
terminating one scout party in favor of another.
Similarly, there is no justification for terminating ESCR when it has potential
for providing treatments for cunrrently untreatable human diseases/disorders.
ASCR and ESCR are currently two scouting parties looking for a trail leading
to treaments for currently untreatable human diseases/disorders, and until
the trails/treatments are found, there is no justification for terminating
one of those scouting parties, ESCR.
And there is the danger to the living that terminating ESCR would eliminate
its potential for treatments which would benefit those living, and this is
unjustified, and therefore unacceptable.
Thus, we continue ESCR and ASCR until they are complete or one provides treatments
for all currently untreatable human diseases/disorders.