Scientists have stated that embryonic stem cells provide the best opportunity for devising unique treatments of these serious diseases since, unlike adult stem cells, they may be induced to develop into any type of cell.
I wholeheartedly support umbilical stem cell research, but also support embryonic stem cell research.
To be labeled a 'science-denier' in 2017 often just means you've upset someone who insists on teaching strict, Darwinian orthodoxy in schools or who advocates particular climate legislation or who supports ethically fraught research on embryos.
There are many alternatives to embryonic stem cell research, alternatives with great potential. We need to support these and oppose creating life for the sole purpose of destroying it.
If you are in support of in vitro fertilization, then you have to recognize that human embryos are being created in excess of what can be used safely to reimplant for a pregnancy. So they're going to end up being discarded.
The earliest period at which I have been able to detect the existence of the spleen in the human embryo is at the second month.
Is it more ethical to edit embryos or to screen a lot of embryos and throw them away? I don't know the answer.
Mr. Speaker, the scientific evidence is overwhelming that embryonic stem cells have great potential to regenerate specific types of human tissues, offering hope for millions of Americans suffering from debilitating diseases.
Embryonic stem cell research will prolong life, improve life and give hope for life to millions of people.
We can continue to make significant strides in the scientific community by exploring new stem cell research methods that do not include destroying human embryos.
