Why risk any more? How many things would we not have today if we took that approach to everything? Embryonic stem cell research (which is what I assume the debate is on) has really only been researched for just a lil over a decade. Do you know almost all meds and medical treatments are in testing for 20-30 years before they are available to the public? Do you know its Common for meds to only be tested in the lab for a decade before human trials?
Do you know it took almost 50 years from the discovery that bone marrow was probably stem cells, and the first succesful bone marrow transplant?
Failures happen in the lab all the time. And since the first human clinical trial using embryonic stem cells only started this summer, how can you say its gone wrong too many times to risk anymore??
Its not exactly like we are killing babies here. And that is where a lot of people get confused. The imagine mini babies being ripped to shreds. Thats not what happens at all. At the time the embryos are used in the research they are about 5 days old, have no organ formation, no brain, no heart, no nerves, no cns. Beyond that, they were killed by a legal and socially acceptable process. So long as IVF is legal, they will be producing extra embryos that die, and there is no way around that. Even if another extra embryo was never created, embryos still die in the freezing and thawing process, and still die when the embryo doesnt implant into the female.
So long as those dead embryos are there by some other legal and socially acceptable proceedure that any good medical insurance plan covers, I think it is absolutely ridiculous to call the research a risk. And as I already explained above, its ridiculous to say its gone so wrong after only a decade of research and no loss of human life that wouldnt be dead without the research. (yes, embryos are human, but once again, they are dead with or without the research... and that is IVF's fault)
