Human embryonic stem cells have been grown for the first time in Britain by a research team at King's College in London. The cells came from an embryo created in IVF treatment, and donated to the researchers by its biological parents.
They will form part of research into treatments for Parkinson's disease and Type 1 diabetes.
However, the anti-abortion Pro-Life Alliance party has described the move as unethical and unnecessary.
Do you think that human cell research is an important means of finding cures for illnesses such as diabetes and Parkinson's disease? Or do the potential risks outweigh the benefits?
The following comments reflect the balance of views we have received:
This debate is now closed. Read your comments below.
Your reaction:
 |  We should be utilising these unwanted cells  |
I am totally shocked by some people's comments and views about stem cell research, simply because the media portrays such issues in the wrong way. I work in a related field and these cells are simply that - a ball of cells. They will never grow in to anything unless implanted in to a womb and are no different to a cell on the inside of your mouth for example - exactly the same genetic content. We should be utilising these unwanted cells (that would otherwise be discarded) to help provide treatment for so many diseases which will change lives for millions out there. Keep up the good work!
Kelly, UK People are impatient with stem cell research and want immediate results. But science does not work that way, and it will take years of basic research before any useful therapies are developed. That is precisely why the research must proceed without delay and with plenty of support. Those alive today may never see any direct benefits, but future generations certainly will. And yes, that includes Third World countries too!
Michael, California, USA
I'm a recently diagnosed type 1 diabetic. My chances of limb amputation are 1 in 7 due to poor circulation. I am at increased risk of kidney failure, heart attack and blindness. On a daily basis I have the real possibility of falling into a coma and worse. There are millions and millions of people like me who would love to lead a 'normal' life. I'd love to reduce the burdens on our health systems. What price the possibility of freeing people from the burdens of this disease? Stem cell research is critical to giving people their lives back.
Paul, Switzerland
My grandfather died of Parkinson's disease. If this kind of scientific experiment can even remotely contribute to the elimination of this disease then I am all for it. It is by large an ethical and moral issue, but think about what good may come of it. In my opinion, the good by far outweighs the bad and by this experiment we are helping to make a better world. Scientific technology at it's best.
Jessie, Brisbane, Australia
I find the whole thing sickening - these are human beings that we are harvesting for parts. It's only reasonable to ask someone before you take parts of their body to be used in research, no matter how early in development that body might be.
Richard Taylor, UK
The argument that an embryo becomes a human being when it can survive outside the mother is flawed because only our level of technology determines at what age a baby/embryo can survive alone. Many babies who are born premature now and survive would have definitely died 30 years ago, and our technology may one day be able to support a foetus from conception to maturity. I fully support stem cell research where alternative sources can be found (such as the umbilical cord method) but in the case of embryonic research, the end cannot justify the means.
Tracey A, UK
| How can the people against this call themselves 'pro-life'? |
These cells can be used to save lives, repair shattered bodies, give life and hope and happiness to millions of people. How can this be wrong? An embryo is not a human being, it is not sentient, and it is not alive. How can the people against this call themselves 'pro-life' when they have made it clear they will do almost anything to end the lives of people, of children, who could benefit from stem cell research? This embryo was created artificially, and would have been wasted normally. Now, it can create and save life. How can anyone 'pro-life' be against that?
Michelle, England Christians may well feel that stem cell research is against Gods teachings, but do they have the moral right to deny the benefits to others? Christians can always opt out of receiving the benefits of stem cell research but to deny others is selfish intolerance of the highest order.
Martin, England
My husband has Parkinson's and I find this very interesting and exciting that progress is being made. I am sure many people out there would be willing to give sperm or eggs to help research and overcome many illnesses such as Parkinson's and diabetes. I say good luck to the researchers and the wonderful work they are doing. Don't let us all have to go abroad yet again to get treatment.
Carol Whittle, England
People say that this is unethical, immoral, etc but in comparison to testing on sentient, living animals for medical research for human conditions, it's perfectly acceptable. Ask yourself which method results in the least suffering? That's where the ethical debate should go.
Jan, Scotland
| There is a better alternative using adult stem cells |
There is a better alternative using adult (the end patient's) stem cells. Recent research is encouraging, showing that adult bone marrow can respond to cues from damaged tissue and help repair it. This avoids the deeply unethical harvesting of embryo stem cells and may limit risks associated with it including tumour growth and rejection by the adult recipient's immune system to mention but two.
Richard, UK My wife is diabetic and we are both Christians. She has already stated that she will not undergo any treatment that was based upon stem cell research, whether it would cure her or not. Stem cell research is murder - to state that "oh, the embryos are not that developed" is a flawed argument. A life is created at the moment of conception - not when it develops hands and feet.
Martin Pope, UK
Although extremely vocal, the opponents of this research are only a very tiny minority of religious nuts. Presumably, they also don't fly in planes, use computers or phones, drive cars, take medicines, have surgery, eat imported food, drink pasteurised milk, wear manmade materials, own anything plastic as all these things are also "unnatural". It's time we completely ignored these idiots living in a different reality, with their outdated and reactionary views.
Rob, UK
| If stem cells have rights, then bacteria should have rights too |
Surely if stem cells have rights, then by the same logic, bacteria, viruses and other unicellular pathogens should have rights too, as they can feel the same amount of pain as a human stem cell. In that case, we should stop administering antibiotics, vaccines and chemotherapy as we are infringing their rights to live
Anon, UK Almost two years ago when, at the behest of the bio-tech industry, the Blair government paved the way for destructive embryonic stem cell research (a murky saga that makes the Ecclestone and Mital affairs pale into insignificance) we were promised that cures were just around the corner. Yet we are still talking about the "potential" of embryonic stem cells while we remain oblivious to the fact that adult stem cells are delivering results in clinical trials and applications. We don't need to cultivate embryonic stem cells by the destruction of countless human embryos. There is an alternative!
Martin Foley, UK
If we use this research to find cures for disease, that otherwise would not be possible, then all the better. Science has to progress, that is the law of nature. We must move forward, but unfortunately not all of us agree in the methodology.
Raj, USA
It's the right thing to do but the wrong way to go about doing it. We should be focussing on nanotechnology as a means to growing human embryonic stem cells, not using or discarding embryos. The only exception to the rule is where a child's life is at risk.
A Highfield, UK
I've seen the horrors diabetes can afflict on the human body (and mind) and firmly believe that living, breathing beings with this condition are going to suffer far more without this research than a tiny clump of cells will with it.
Frances, UK
| How could we murder just because we want to live forever? |
As I sit here watching my six-month-old play happily I think to myself that he started out as an embryo, the very same embryo that people would destroy in order to save themselves from dealing with relatives' illnesses. This makes me very sad, all new life is beautiful, these embryos are human beings, why can't people see this? How could we murder just because we want to live forever?
Hannah, London, UK What this comes down to is whether you consider that a human being, in the full sense of that word, is created at conception. I don't (my belief being that a human life is one which is capable of existing independently from its mother's body), and there is no 100% logical argument for either view that would discount completely the other. What it comes down to is belief.
Katherine, UK
As parents of a five-year-old boy with type one diabetes we can only applaud this breakthrough and only hope that the loony lefties will butt out and let research progress and thus save our son from the prospective long term complications that the disease has and the shortened life expectancy of approximately 15 years which also results from it.
Katrina, UK
No, this goes against all Christian beliefs and while best intentioned will become just like Nazi belief of a superior race. As a species, we do not have the wisdom to handle this.
Jim, USA
Surely if God had meant us to carry out this kind of research, he'd have given us the requisite intelligence, an urge for progress and a drive to constantly improve our condition. What, he did?
Guy Matthews, UK
| To deny an embryo the chance to develop is wrong |
I believe human life begins at conception. To deny an embryo the chance to develop is wrong. To harvest parts of the embryo for research or medicine is something I find abhorrent. We as a country really need to think hard about the morality of these issues and about our attitudes to human life, and in doing so we also need to avoid the facile "The end justifies the means" attitude in such matters. Embryos and foetuses (ie unborn children) are the most helpless and vulnerable of people. They are not getting the respect and protection that ought to be their right.
Chris, England What would have happened to these embryo cells if they had not been used for research? Nothing. Would the cells have developed into a human life? No, they would simply have been discarded and burned. There seems to be a good deal of parallel between this and organ donation.
If a family member dies then their family decides whether or not their organs can be used for transplant or medical research, if that is acceptable then the biological parents of this IVF embryo should be able to make the same decision.
Giles Clinker, UK
You either accept that a human embryo is a human person from conception or you do not. If you do, it follows that human-embryonic stem-cell research requires the killing of innocent human persons - the taking of their lives - denying them their most basic human right.
I do not believe that we have the right to thus take innocent lives - even to save lives or to relieve suffering. What I would like to know is whether Human-embryonic stem-cell research happens to be the cheapest form of human stem-cell research as opposed to the only one.
Dave, UK
I've just taken a paperclip and run the end across my fingertip. In that action I have shed more cells than is possessed by an embryo at a stage of development comparable to the ones being used in research. In this, the advent of an era where we can clone living creatures, those skin cells are capable of producing another human life, just like the aforementioned embryos.
Numerous fertilised embryos fail to latch onto the lining in their would-be mother's womb, and numerous modern contraceptive methods such as IUD and the morning after pill induce such an event artificially. Until the day contraception, basic biological processes and scratching my finger are considered murder, stem cell research is infinitely defendable.
Rikk, UK
| There are no legal, ethical, moral or religious objections to using these cells |
As a scientist who did some of the very early work on stem cells I am delighted to see that the King's team have taken this work to the next stage. What concerns me is that other sources of stem cells, such as umbilical cord blood, are being largely ignored for the sake of this hi tech approach. Umbilical cord blood collected at birth contains millions of stem cells which could be used in the same way as embryonic. There are no legal, ethical, moral or religious objections to using these cells and the potential is just as good, if not greater, than embryonic cells. This information needs getting across to the general who often see embryonic stem cells as the only option.
Dr Peter Hollands, UK
The anti-abortion society should consider what it would be like if they contracted Parkinson's themselves. It seems hard to believe that they would suffer needlessly (the opinion of most would be to take whatever solution was available). My father has lived with the disease for over 10 years. Whilst I do not like the idea of abortion, surely unwanted cells and 'mistake' pregnancies can be put to good use.
Jane Carvalho, UK
The utilitarian argument that it is OK to kill one person (embryo) to help two is madness not medicine.
Edward, UK
There is a need for this type of research and it's not being used for cosmetic extravagances. Anything that can be done to alleviate that suffering should be allowed.
Ali Abedi, UK
I can understand the moral/ethical objections that people have, but stem cell research is vilified to sound like testing on babies. The embryonic stage is a relatively basic level of development. People suffering from degenerative diseases deserve the chance of a cure and the hope that stem cell research brings.
Mike, England
Cell division equals life. Human cells are human life. Killing an embryo is therefore taking human life. That's murder, and cannot be justified in any cause.
Phil, UK
| It should be used for experimentation instead of animals in laboratories |
I have no problems with human embryonic stem cell research. I believe that it should not only be used for finding cures for diabetes or Parkinson's disease (or any other) but should also be used for experimentation instead of animals in laboratories.
Richard, UK The Pro-Life Alliance annoy me greatly. I have no idea whether this technology will eventually prove successful. But I have relations and friends that suffer from these diseases. I want every avenue explored to cure them. If you have a moral objection then don't use it if the illness affects you, but stop trying to deny others the chance for a better life.
Peter, UK, Devon
The fact that people see nothing wrong with taking a human life to improve the life of another is deeply sad and deeply worrying. If human life has no value then there is nothing to stop us experimenting on the handicapped, the unemployed or the elderly - as long as someone else benefits. I am ashamed to be British.
Peter Farrington, England
As with all things, it can be abused. Does that mean that it should not be pursued? No. Who knows what may be discovered through the research that either prevents or cures some of these horrible diseases.
Neil, USA/Europe
If this advance in medical science will save lives of, say, the victims of heart diseases it should not be opposed. Life is supreme. But there should be strict laws in place to prevent stem cells being used for cloning.
Hyder Ali Pirwany, England
| We are only just beginning to understand what might be realisable |
Stem cell treatment is one of the greatest advances of medicine in recent years. We are only just beginning to understand what might be realisable, and how many lives might be saved. To heed the reactionaries and stop progress would be simply criminal.
Russ, UK Stem cells have the potential to be the most significant medical tool we have ever encountered. We should already be harvesting personal stem cells from babies as they are born, storing them so they can be used to treat that person in later life. The Christian right in the US has already crippled research over there, let us not join them!
Phil, UK
The world is full of grey areas and sometimes you have to weigh up the good with the bad. In the case of stem cells I think that the benefits far outweigh the ethical debates. Stem cells are not sentient, do not suffer, will not cross contaminate and genetically alter other cells and most importantly, the majority of cells are donated with full consent.
Harry, London, UK
I feel very strongly that stem cell research should continue as it will no doubt unlock the secrets of diseases such as Parkinson's. As long as a donor consents to the embryo being used, I see no reason why it shouldn't go ahead. The emotive argument of abortion is a separate matter, and should not be included, as we need calm ration debate, not hysterical outpourings.
Helen Kreissl, UK
To put things very simplistically, I find it difficult to see why someone with a life threatening illness should be denied the prospect of a cure to their illness being found because someone else regards the methods as "unnatural".
Graeme Phillips, Germany, normally UK
A couple who could not have children were helped to do so. During the process of this help, an extra embryo was created. This embryo will aid research that could lead to a cure for Parkinson's disease and diabetes. Now, I may be a simple country boy, but I cannot for the life of me, see anything wrong here. Quite the reverse.
TB, UK
One-Minute World News 
News services
E-mail this to a friend 
Printable version 
