Considerations in Innovations - Case Study With Stem Cells

Research and innovation within the field of medicine can be very complex for both the science and technology involved and the regulations and procedures which must be upheld due to public safety, personnel safety, and ethics related to working with humans or human materials. Different countries may have different laws or regulations related to the activities which are or are not permissible when it comes to biological research and a change in these laws or regulations can have immediate and measurable impacts on the ability of researchers to complete their work. One area in which researchers in the United States and other countries face a dynamic environment when it comes to laws and regulations is stem cell research.

Due to the politics surrounding stem cells, the ability for researchers to leverage these materials for research related to genetic treatments for issues such as Type 1 diabetes, human development, and areas can be uncertain. In one example, research funding in California was left to a ballot measure which puts progress at the discretion of personal politics (Hurlbut, Robert, 2012). While the public should have input into how its tax dollars are spent, research funding is a much more controversial topic than repairing a highway. To that end, some researchers or biological research businesses have taken their operations to locations where the ability to continue research is not at the whim of public opinion to the same degree at it is in the U.S. While there may be legitimate ethical concerns regarding what research is being conducted, how the research materials are collected, or the goals of the research, it may limit the ability for positive outcomes such as curing Type-1 diabetes from progressing.

As we look to our own innovations, we must consider if there are any legal regulations which would prevent us from pursuing the research or making available to the public the output from that innovation be it a product or idea. We must also consider if there would be public outcry due to topic or nature of our innovation that we must prepare ourselves to process and understand the perception of. We may need to educate the public on the benefits, impacts, and rationale for the innovation and also be willing to receive feedback or criticisms of it.

 

References

 

 Hurlbut, J. B., & Robert, J. S. (2012). Stem Cells, Science, and Public Reasoning. Journal of Policy Analysis & Management, 31(3), 707–714. https://doi-org.coloradotech.idm.oclc.org/10.1002/pam.21611