I am in my senior year of undergraduate college and I have recently started research on my senior thesis topic. I am not exactly sure what the paper will be titled, but I know that I want to focus on the stem cell debate in Congress and how it has affected the Republican party/how the Coalition for the Advancement of Medical Research has shaped the debate.
Anyway, I found it interesting to glance over at ESPN.com one day and see that stem cells may be entering the sports arena sooner than you or I may think [Stem cells could be next generation of sports doping]. Might we see Julio Franco still playing in the big leagues at the ripe age of 68? He may do that without the help of stem cells. In all seriousness, the ESPN article does make it seem that the introduction of stem cells in the sports world could truly give a competitive advantage to those players that choose to apply the technology. If allowed by sports officials, would you let your client use stem cells? If not allowed, but unable to be tested for, how would you respond?
Remember that you have a fiduciary duty to protect your clients’ best interests. In that case, do you take a chance with the introduction of stem cells or let your clients fall behind competitively while others take advantage of the technology?
[tags]stem cells, sports agents, fiduciary duty, doping, anti doping[/tags]
One reply on “Stem Cells”
[…] On September 14th of last year, I declared my intention to write a senior thesis on how stem cells have changed the Republican Party [Stem Cells]. Six months later, I am almost done with the thesis, which is titled, The Stem Cell Divide: How Embryonic Stem Cell Research Altered the Republican Party. I will definitely post the paper in its entirety once a final copy is established, but today, I would rather discuss a very interesting development that I have come across in my stem cell research. […]