Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
It is now 10 years ago that human embryonic stem cell research appeared as a major topic of societal concern following significant scientific breakthroughs.1 2 During these 10 years it has become obvious that stem cell research is embedded in a narrative characterised by hope and hype and that it has created heated moral and political debate. Although it would be tempting to try to deconstruct the importance attributed to hope in this story or to unmask the different instigators active in promoting hype,3–5 the main aim of this editorial is to briefly review the controversies underlying the debate and propose some possible answers to a set of inter-related questions:
What are the main disagreements in the stem cell debate?
Is there any hope that we can resolve these main disagreements?
Has the debate been a fruitful model for future debates about ethically contentious issues in biomedicine, or has it been characterised more by rhetoric than by argument?
What kind of ethical debates are most efficient as models for future debates?
The two authors agree with regard to the importance of asking these questions, but they disagree about at least some of the answers. Let us start with the questions about the debate and its use as a model for future debates.
WHAT KIND OF ETHICAL DEBATE IS MOST EFFICIENT AS A MODEL FOR FUTURE DEBATES?
Could it be the case that ethical debates that are characterised by overselling of the potential of the technology are more efficient as models for future debates about ethically contentious issues in biomedicine than more sober and “neutral” debates? The narratives of stem cell research are full of examples of overselling and underselling, and we will suggest that it is precisely for this reason that there is a lot to learn morally from reviewing the narratives. The two main forms of overselling are
Competing interests: None declared.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Is a consensus possible on stem cell research? Moral and political obstacles
- Embryo as epiphenomenon: some cultural, social and economic forces driving the stem cell debate
- Stem cell stories: from bedside to bench
- What’s in a name? Embryos, entities, and ANTities in the stem cell debate
- A natural stem cell therapy? How novel findings and biotechnology clarify the ethics of stem cell research
- A qualified endorsement of embryonic stem cell research, based on two widely shared beliefs about the brain-diseased patients such research might benefit
- Creating and sacrificing embryos for stem cells
- How to depolarise the ethical debate over human embryonic stem cell research (and other ethical debates too!)
- Human embryonic stem cells and respect for life
- Human embryonic stem cell research debates: a Confucian argument