I am interested in this research question because of how many people benefit from this research but also because of how many people disagree with it and why they do. It is interesting to see how and why so much of the population is in a disagreement with embryonic stem cell research while it could meanwhile progress the medical and scientific world to new and amazing degrees. It affects my values due to the fact that I highly support this type of research, but to a certain extent. Overall, I do agree with this research but with limits regarding it. These limits include the proper time period before the stem cell becomes more developed. Seeing as a family member of mine has been affected by a disease that was treated by research of embryonic stem cells, it has become an important part of me and my family. I am qualified to write about this because of my family's personal experience with it and due to my interest in the medical field. I have learned about stem cells in the many science and biology classes that I've taken throughout my high school career and my short but enlightening college career. 

An article "What Are Embryonic Stem Cells", written by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, describes what embryonic stem cells actually are, the purpose of them, and the way they are scientifically studied. This information includes what stages of embryonic development are important for generating stem cells, how stem cells are grown in the laboratory, and what uses the stem cells are used for. Values at stake for this article include the factual information about how the stem cells are being grown in a laboratory, and at what point the stem cells are being disassembled and grown separately as stem cells. The credibility is high because the authors of it work with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which gives them credibility and knowledge on this topic, while avoiding any bias that may come along with this topic. The source itself is mainly factual, given this credibility and avoiding bias. 

"Embryonic Stem Cell Research Does Too Much Good to Be Evil", an article written by Janet Rowley, gives support for embryonic stem cell research and presents the fact that stem cells can be used to treat diseases and that advances toward treating diseases can be made through stem cell research. Major vales and interests at stake for this article are the moral issues that the scientific world have to go against while also trying to make important medical discoveries. This includes the complicated yet shared values of human embryonic life, and the preservation of lives after certain amounts of days. The author, Janet Rowley, is very credible on this specific topic because she is a professor of medicine at the University of Chicago and a member of the President's Council on Bioethics. Rowley has studied the complications of these moral issues intensely and can unbiasedly inform the reader of them. 

In Kristina Hug's article, "Embryonic Stem Cell Research: An Ethical Dilemma", arguments that people who are against embryonic stem cell research make were explored. Hug then creates a table for arguments against the view and for it. She also gives information regarding which religions accept and deny this research. Major values and interests at stake for this article include moral and ethical rights that go along with the values of those who follow many religions do. This includes the right of an embryonic life or, the contrary, which supports the idea of saving another human being's life if possible. Hug is a Ph.D. student in the Department of Medical Ethics at Lund University, Sweden and studies Human Rights. This matters because to use the information in an essay, it has to be reliable to base judgements and arguments upon. This author is reliable because of her experience and studies. There is no bias in this article seeing that the author gives both sides of the argument, rather than just mentioning one. 

This research question is arguable because there are many passionate arguments both for and against the research due to the seriousness of the moral issues that go along with it. An argument against this topic is the idea that an embryo has human rights from fertilization onwards. For the support, many think that embryos have no moral status at all. These different perspectives affect my own by bringing insight from professionals that could alter or reinforce my prior standpoint.  I do not feel the need to revise my research question, seeing as I have refined it after reading these articles. 

