Peer Response Number 2

           I recently read over Eric Lardinois’ blog discussing stem cell research. He explains that embryonic stem cells can be used to grow and develop a very versatile range of human cells. The human body can accept these cells without the fear of rejection. He then goes on to explain the controversy of the topic amongst the population. Many people find it harsh and evil as they consider the embryo a human life. Others believe that the embryo is so young that it cannot be considered a human life and that the use of stem cells is beneficial for movements in medicine.

            Eric posted two articles. The first was pro stem cell research. The article discussed that the use of stem cells will prevent deaths due to dying organs. It presented the ideas that stem cell work can help prevent birth defects, can further research to help other medical causes such as cancer, and it may help learn how to prevent the aging process. Although there are many benefits, there are negative aspects.

            The second posted article was based on the negative aspect of the use of stem cells. It was all based around the fact that stem cell use is murdering a human life and that it is not morally or ethically correct. The author of this article proposes alternatives for retrieving stem cells such as using umbilical cords or fat deposits.

            The ideas of my classmate’s blog are very clear. The information is very concise and revealing of the topic. The blog is even a little compelling. However the author does not side on the topic, but only states he finds the article on pro life more compelling. I agree with that statement as the article made me question if a human life is worth the benefits.

http://elardinoislsc100f09.blogspot.com