What is Stem Cell Research?

Embryonic stem cells are unique cells that can develop into any type of specialized cell that exists in the human body. It’s believed that these cells can be used to reverse significant damage and serious disease, and this is why it’s such a hot research topic. For example, stem cells could be used to replace dead muscle tissue in a heart attack victim or repair spinal tissue and give someone who’s paralyzed another chance to walk.

Some of the serious conditions that stem cell research is intended to address include Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease, spinal cord injury, stroke, heart disease, diabetes, and arthritis. As such, the dramatic life changing potential of this research is quite obvious. However, despite this potential, the use of human embryos and the concept of regenerating human tissue is too morally unsettling for some people to support it.

The Moral Dilemma

To some, stem cell research is a naive attempt by humans to “play god.” I typically don’t like the idea of science attempting to outsmart nature, but how can you refuse a paralyzed accident victim the possibility of being able to walk again?

One of the major moral conflicts is the use of embryos. Because they must be destroyed for the research, and because they represent the earliest stage of human life, many consider their use to be unacceptable. However, millions of people are using fertility clinics and having embryos created in a lab. If it’s acceptable to create them in a test tube, freeze them, and discard them if unused, then why isn’t it acceptable to use them for revolutionary research?

Another significant moral concern is that embryonic stem cell research will lead to forms of human cloning. This is definitely a frightening topic, and in my opinion, is inviting science to become arrogant and lose respect for nature. Perhaps cloning an entire human organ can save lives, but where do you draw the line? While that’s a difficult question for society to deal with, I don’t think the potential of stem cell research should go unrecognized based on the possibility of it being misused. Besides, those who have influence and want to experiment with cloning will find ways to do it regardless of it’s legality.

Perhaps a better compromise is needed that will allow embryonic stem cell research to advance, but will limit the potential of it being used for questionable purposes. I don’t know what that would be, but I feel that disallowing it completely would be a poor choice.

Lifestyle will Always Matter Most

With or without the advancement of embryonic stem cell research, the foundation of good health will always be a healthy lifestyle. Many of the conditions that embryonic stem cell research is predicted to reverse are often a result of unhealthy lifestyle choices. As such, I fear that advances in stem cell research will make people feel as if they can get away with these unhealthy choices. I think it will reduce fear of disease and lessen the incentive for people to live healthier lives, and this could have a negative impact on all of us.

Perhaps stem cell research will create more trouble than it’s worth. However, I can’t help thinking about accident victims who’d miss out on the chance to walk again and others who are suffering severely from no fault of their own. It’s these victims of misfortune more so than those suffering from their own doing that inspire me to support embryonic stem cell research. I just hope it will be used wisely and responsibly.

Replace What You Take Away

When depriving someone of something they value, it’s only fair to replace it with something comparable. The opponents of embryonic stem cell research are looking to deprive some very unfortunate people of a precious opportunity. Instead of merely opposing embryonic stem cell research and shattering the hopes of these people, I suggest that opponents of stem cell research give back by advocating the healthier lifestyle habits that will greatly reduce the incidence of the diseases that the research aims to reverse. By doing so, you just may end up saving your own life as well!

What do You Think?

What are your thoughts on embryonic stem cell research, and what do you think of President Obama’s decision to lift federal limits?

Written by Vin Miller for NaturalBias.com.

The Pursuit of Truth

Many of the scientific discoveries and inventions that have occurred up until now are absolutely amazing. Using our advanced knowledge to uncover unknown truths is a marvelous thing. Finding truth is the core of what research is and is what drives scientists to dedicate themselves to it. But that doesn’t mean every piece of published research is worthy of this distinction.

To avoid having any influence on the results of a research study, researchers must have a strictly unbiased outlook on the results. Although this can be hard to accomplish, bias can inadvertently lead to changes in the design and protocol of a study that ultimately alter it’s outcome. A biased study leads to a biased truth which isn’t really the truth at all.

A Conflict of Interest

In today’s fiercely competitive marketplace, corporations are looking for any advantage they can get to sell their products. For a company selling a product in the health and fitness field, one of the most valuable advantages they can get is to back their product’s claim with scientific research. But keep in mind that a scientific study can be very expensive and cost millions of dollars. Unfortunately, this all leads to a situation where potential for profit drives the need for research rather than the need for honest answers.

Probably the most despicable aspect of modern research is that large corporations are funding, staffing, designing, and running their own research. This is a major conflict of interest and it’s being taken advantage of. Two of the most glaring examples are the pharmaceutical and food industries. For the FDA to approve a pharmaceutical drug, they require the drug company prove through research that the drug is safe and effective. But they leave it up to the drug company to do this! If you don’t believe me, the following quote is directly from the FDA website: “It is the responsibility of the company seeking to market a drug to test it and submit evidence that it is safe and effective.” Unbelievable, but true.

Next time you interview for a job, why not ask if they’ll let you be a reference for yourself? As ridiculous as that sounds, it’s basically what’s happening, and chances are that millions of people won’t be risking their health by taking dangerous drugs as a result of your new job.

Dishonest Intentions

As shocking as it may sound, some drug manufacturers rig their research to get the results they want and get their drug out on the market and back it with substantial health claims. The unfortunate part about this is that dangerous risks are sometimes being covered up. One major example of this is with cholesterol drugs. If you want to read about grossly we can be misled by bad science, I highly recommend that you read The Cholesterol Myths: Exposing the Fallacy that Saturated Fat and Cholesterol Cause Heart Disease by Uffe Ravnskov MD, PhD.

Another insidious example to read about is genetically engineered foods and how the food industry and FDA allowed these foods to enter the market based on flimsy and inaccurate science. You can read about this in the book Seeds of Deception: Exposing Industry and Government Lies About the Safety of the Genetically Engineered Foods You’re Eating by Jeffrey M. Smith.

In many cases, as you will learn from the two books mentioned above, most people who read scientific research typically only read the concluding statements. In many cases, these statements absolutely contradict the data produced by the study. It’s as if the study only takes place as a formality and the people in charge conclude whatever they’d like to. Does that sound like something you’d like to base health decisions on?

The Choice is Yours

I hope I’ve opened your mind to the fact that the scientific community isn’t nearly as pristine as you may think. This isn’t to say that all science is bad, but that you really need to have a critical opinion and not base your belief solely on the so called support of scientific research. As I always say, you have to take responsibility for your own health, and part of this is doing your own research to review the available evidence until you’re satisfied with your answer.

Written by Vin Miller for NaturalBias.com.

Many of these cells are specialized and grouped together to form glands, organs, systems, muscles, and bones that are perfectly integrated with each other and provide the incredible result we know as life. This is all the natural result of evolution. Ironically, it’s the intelligence we also gained through evolution that gives us the ability to manipulate, for better or worse, this delicate balance that nature has so cleverly created.

Are We Victims of Our Own Intelligence?

As humans, we have the consciousness to philosophize about life and reflect on emotion. As a result, we all want to live long and happy lives. While science has enabled us to manipulate the odds in our favor in some respects, it’s reduced our odds in others. After all, science is invention and discovery that results from human intelligence, and human intelligence is not immune to mistakes, greed, or corruption.

Regarding the long and happy life we all want to live, our own intelligence has led to a level of arrogance that is bringing us farther away from our goal. This is evident by the many diseases that were rare less than a century ago but are so rampant today. Science has allowed us to live far more sophisticated lives than our ancestors and the result is a lot more wear and tear. In other words, our intelligence has given us the opportunity to live a lifestyle that our bodies are not evolved to handle.

Back to Basics

Whenever something begins to function poorly, the obvious solution is to consider the point in time when it was last functioning well, identify what was different, and resolve the difference to restore proper function. Today, we have exceedingly high rates of preventable diseases that were quite rare less than a century ago. Heart disease and cancer are two of them. What has changed since these diseases became so prevalent? We stopped listening to nature, that’s what changed!

Common sense should tell us that many of the evolutionary habits that promoted our current existence should also promote optimal health. Instead of paying attention to this common sense, we’re eating poor quality synthetic foods instead of the natural nutritious foods we evolved on, we’re exposing ourselves to thousands of chemicals on a daily basis that didn’t even exist just a century ago, we’re ignoring the natural day and night cycle that we followed for millions of years, and on a daily basis, we’re subjecting ourselves to far more stress than our ancestors could even imagine. Is it any wonder that most of us aren’t functioning well?

Who’s to Blame?

Science has given us many forms of advancement, but we’ve become so detached from nature and the habits that made us what we are today that we’re losing our health and are becoming desperate for science to magically fix it. That’s not how it works! The laws of nature should be what guide us toward health and happiness, and science should be there to help along the way, not the other way around.

We need to remember that science is just an interpretation of nature. It’s not always correct and isn’t always intended to support our best interests. We have to take responsibility for our own health and aim to have a critical opinion that allows the laws of nature and common sense to help us differentiate the sound and useful science from the junk.

Written by Vin Miller for NaturalBias.com.