Stem Cell Research Offers Hope for Millions

Stem Cell Research is declared controversial because of religious mis-interpretations. Yet deeply religious people with stem cell treatable medical handicaps pray for research that one day may cure their disease.

Stem Cell Treatments could eliminate many medical handicaps

Stem Cell Treatments could eliminate many medical handicaps

We hear from all sides today about how this or that should or shouldn’t be done.  Not only does it seem that every one has an opinion of what’s right and what’s wrong, they do not hesitate to impose that opinion upon you. Years ago, when I was a fire rescue professional  we always noticed how grateful families are at 2 am when we would bring in a critical patient who had just been involved in a car wreck.  The family could not thank the doctor enough for saving their loved one’s life.  But within two days in the hospital the same family members turned into overnight medical experts with an opinion.  It seemed that no matter what was being done for the patient, they knew best.  The same doctor they were profusely thanking just two nights before, was now being questioned why this or that was being done.

The same goes for people who think they know everything concerning complicated matters such as Stem Cell Research.  Will it work? And if so how many people could it help? There seems to be a movement that somehow this is wrong as in interfering with God’s work and should be banned.  At that point I always have to interject the question: “If you were the person with the medical handicap, would  you not jump on board that train.  If you lived with someone who is handicapped, as I am, I know your opinion would be different, especially when things get worse over time.

Retinitis Pigmentosa Research

One area of Stem Cell Research I keep a close watch on is that of eye conditions such as Retinitis Pigmentosa.  Retinitis is a condition that affects approximately one in three thousand, or about 1.5 million people worldwide.  There are specialized cells in the retina called the retinal pigment epithelium that maintain vision.  Retinitis pigmentosa results from the death of these cells.  People with RP usually start with tunnel vision and then gradually they become worse until total blindness sets in.  My daughter has RP and is almost totally blind at this stage.

Columbia University is doing extensive research on RP and Stem Cell Research.  To date they have made great strides in their work and it seems they may be on to something that could help these patients with RP.  Who is going to question whether it is right or wrong?  That would be a question you could ask the patient with the condition as well as the people around them that sacrifice day after day. Why this suffering it stem cell treatment could heal or relieve.

I don’t think a clear answer can be given by one who has no clue what it is like to live with any handicap.  I for one hope the studies at the different Universities and medical research centers will come up with answers for RP and for the many different medical conditions many of us have to live with. Most of us don’t believe like Pat Robertson that every human suffering is the result of a pact with the devil.

Feedburner If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment below or subscribe to the feed to have future articles delivered to your e-mail and get the latest Amelia Island News, business, tourist activities and videos every morning!

SearchAmelia on TwitterYou can also choose to follow SearchAmelia on Twitter to get your daily updates!

2 Comments

  1. tommylee

    The question is not “if stem cell research can help people, why would there be a moral issue?” in my opinion but “by what standards do people have the right to protest against or for stem cell research?”. Simply said: “if religion is the measure of such right, I question the right to heal any victim and as such interference in any human deficiency through any source of assistance”. Yet “If religion is not the measure of voice because we believe it to be inhumane to let anyone suffer from any disease, science should get a right to use any means necessary to reach that goal.”

    The interpretation of the good book, written by men, not God, however has always been “self serving” and for that reason we have so many different interpretations (and so many different branches within the same objective of BELIEF). Even within the interpretation of the same bible we seem to stir up controversy yet societies have an unshaken belief in the freedom of religion (in most countries around the globe).

    So which interpretation is the right one and thus the measuring stick to what extend we can or can not interfere in what procedures societies interprets as “humane”?

    If we accept that God “reserved” the right to heal, than the question is answered and we should not be hypocritical about it by human intervention with exceptions.

    If society decides that God is not the only one that has the right to heal but man has that same right, we must accept that science is part of the same religious evolution. After all god gave us the capability to creatively think and thus create.

    There's a famous saying by Plato* recited in the first Jurassic Park movie when Jeff Blumberg says: “Nature will find a way!”

    *Plato was a Greek Philosopher, living well before Christ's being born, whose quotes remarkably resemble today's pitfalls in moral ethics. Maybe we should bring Plato and the Greek philosophy in general back into our educational system to re-acquaint ourselves with high societal logic we call civilization. It is a shame that we have to re-invent moral history all over again.

  2. tommylee

    The question is not “if stem cell research can help people, why would there be a moral issue?” in my opinion but “by what standards do people have the right to protest against or for stem cell research?”. Simply said: “if religion is the measure of such right, I question the right to heal any victim and as such interference in any human deficiency through any source of assistance”. Yet “If religion is not the measure of voice because we believe it to be inhumane to let anyone suffer from any disease, science should get a right to use any means necessary to reach that goal.”

    The interpretation of the good book, written by men, not God, however has always been “self serving” and for that reason we have so many different interpretations (and so many different branches within the same objective of BELIEF). Even within the interpretation of the same bible we seem to stir up controversy yet societies have an unshaken belief in the freedom of religion (in most countries around the globe).

    So which interpretation is the right one and thus the measuring stick to what extend we can or can not interfere in what procedures societies interprets as “humane”?

    If we accept that God “reserved” the right to heal, than the question is answered and we should not be hypocritical about it by human intervention with exceptions.

    If society decides that God is not the only one that has the right to heal but man has that same right, we must accept that science is part of the same religious evolution. After all god gave us the capability to creatively think and thus create.

    There's a famous saying by Plato* recited in the first Jurassic Park movie when Jeff Blumberg says: “Nature will find a way!”

    *Plato was a Greek Philosopher, living well before Christ's being born, whose quotes remarkably resemble today's pitfalls in moral ethics. Maybe we should bring Plato and the Greek philosophy in general back into our educational system to re-acquaint ourselves with high societal logic we call civilization. It is a shame that we have to re-invent moral history all over again.

Leave a Comment