The Immortal Cells of Henrietta Lacks Easton by Ms. A. Easton

The Story of HeLa

MsEaston — 2023-05-22 15:15:25 UTC

The Immortal Cells of Henrietta Lacks

MsEaston — 2023-05-22 15:15:25 UTC

2023-05-24 14:03:00 UTC

No Because people don't get paid for donating blood or plasma so it shouldn't be any different for cells - Grant

2023-05-24 14:05:23 UTC

Yes, because many things may be created using the cells, and many people won't want part of them to be a part of these scientific things like cloning.
-Grant

2023-05-24 14:07:24 UTC

This story is controversial because it is on the topic of mistreatment and mispractice in science towards a person who had no idea anything was happening.
Grant

2023-05-24 14:10:54 UTC

This story is controversial since the individual who's cells were being used for research and many medical cures was never informed about what was happening. This violates modern rights however, back then were different times.
-Uday Toor

2023-05-24 14:16:17 UTC

I believe people should receive some sort of payment for providing their cells to be used for science because it aids in research and other significant things. Because of this significance, payment should be given.
-Uday Toor

2023-05-24 14:18:31 UTC

I think you should have to consent to your cells being used because technically, it is your own property that you own. It is the same as someone using your backyard to do something, they wouldn't just walk in, they would ask first.
-Uday Toor

2023-05-26 13:55:16 UTC

This story is controversial because Henrietta Lacks cells were used without her permission or her knowledge to be sent off for research.
-Jordanna

2023-05-26 13:58:23 UTC

I do not personally believe that people should be compensated for donating their cells to science because, scientists can receive donations from just about anyone for research so I don't think there should be any form of payment for those who do.
-Jordanna

2023-05-26 14:01:26 UTC

I believe that you should have to consent to your cells being used for medical purposes because, scientists can receive access to lots of information on a person from their cells which some people may not be comfortable with.
-Jordanna

2023-05-26 14:06:28 UTC

This story is controversial because scientsists have been using the cells of a person without her family's consent. Her cells were used around the world and her family hasn't been informed until 20 years later.
- Alyssa

2023-05-26 14:08:09 UTC

I don't think people should be compensated for donating their cells. I say this becasue everything else you donate you don't get compensated for, so why are cells any different?
- Alyssa

2023-05-26 14:22:01 UTC

I think you need consent to use somebody's cells because it's their cells that came from their body. Also researching somebody's cell can reveal a lot of information about them which some people may not be comfortable with others knowing.
- Alyssa

2023-05-27 05:11:07 UTC

The story is controversial due to the lack of informed consent when her cells were taken and used for scientific research. Her cells became widely used without her or her family's knowledge. The case brings up concerns, the need for fair treatment, and patient rights in medical research.
- Muneet

2023-05-27 05:19:21 UTC

I believe that getting consent for using someone's cells in medical purposes is important because it respects their rights over their own body. It allows people to make their own decisions about the risks and trust in medical practices. Consent allows people to maintain moral standards while also preventing the misuse of genetic information.
- Muneet

2023-05-27 05:29:39 UTC

I believe that people should not be compensated for this because this takes away the fact that it's a donation act which may drive people to do this for the money instead of contributing for further research. This may lead to people (with the desired cells) to exploit these systems and make profit from the act. Also people already donate cells (eg : blood) without any sort of payment so why should they do the same for other cell types.
- Muneet

2023-05-28 16:37:18 UTC

This story is controversial because the initial cells that were taken by scientists were used many times without consent or the knowledge of her family and used for research.
Carter

2023-05-28 16:46:59 UTC

In my opinion, I don't think people should be compensated for donating their cells. Donating your cells is a voluntary practice, people should donate because they want to out of kindness not out of a monetary gain.
Carter

2023-05-28 16:59:33 UTC

I think getting consent is an important part of medical research. I do not think that consent is required to be obtained if the cells are going to be used for new research though. I think consent should just be given initially for the person to agree to be part of a scientific study. Like organ donors signing up to donate their organs, they have no further say as to what happens to their organs after the fact.

Carter

It is deemed controversial as consent was not given for the researching and experimenting of her cells. Henrietta Lacks' family was not informed until decades later, it is not honest to be applauded for discoveries and contribution without crediting where it came from. Even if they revealed the person behind these cells after years of lab work.

2023-05-29 13:04:46 UTC

anu

2023-05-29 13:07:58 UTC

People do not get paid when donating blood or organs, so same goes for cells. People choose to donate, so payment should not be required
anu.

2023-05-29 13:09:19 UTC

Yes, they are your cells, you should be allowed to have knowledge on where they are going, what they'll be used for, who will be working on them, etc.
anu

Brooklyn

2023-06-21 21:25:08 UTC

This story is so controversial because Henrietta Lacks cancer cells were used without her knowledge nor her consent. Her family was not informed about this research either for decades, and did not receive any compensation.

Brooklyn

2023-06-21 21:39:58 UTC

I believe it should be the person's choice whether they choose to donate or receive a payment for their cells. As donating blood or organs is a voluntary act, your body is able to regenerate certain organs and blood however with cancer cells, terminal cancer is common.

Brooklyn

2023-06-21 21:43:15 UTC

Of course consent is important! The cancer cells are your cells, your DNA, your property. Without consent, it would be invasive and morally wrong to use your cells for research.

2023-06-21 22:24:10 UTC

This story is controversial because a person whose cells are being used for further scientific research without them knowing nor getting their consent, and without any explanation. Until years later they decided to spill everything to the family of the victim.

- Jasleen

2023-06-21 23:06:36 UTC

Its all up to the individual donating there cells, but in my opinion i feel like this action shouldn't require a payment because it is just for the betterment of the future, and form them to come up with more efficient and safer solutions to conditions.

-Jasleen

2023-06-22 00:59:43 UTC

Yes, consent is extremely important. This is because your cell is like a body part of yours imagine someone taking your kidney without your permission, just like that before taking cells from someone and using them consent should be needed.

- jasleen

sin bin

2025-12-08 18:36:12 UTC

sin bin

2025-12-08 18:43:48 UTC

Its controversial because her doctor took a piece of her tumor without her consent. She wasn't aware that her cells were being used in labs worldwide and her medical information was published without her or her families permission which raised concerns for patient consent, exploitation, and profit without compensation. - reet

2025-12-08 18:52:42 UTC

People should be compensated for donating their cells to science. I say this because firstly, no ones forcing them to donate, but they're doing it anyway, so a compensation would seem fair. Secondly, they are contributing to a good cause by donating their cells to science and compensating them would be a important way in recognizing their contributions. Lastly, their cells could lead to companies making huge medical breakthroughs which could generate them millions of dollars and the donors not getting any of that would just be unfair and unethical. - reet

Gavin Ricardson

2025-12-08 19:00:40 UTC

This story is incredibly controversial because of the grey area in the morality of certain scientific practices, such as the ethical issues that arise while a dead person's family cannot gain from their family's sacrifices because of poverty, as well as the lack of knowledge they had, of both cells & their mom's cells being used without their knowledge. These facts are most controversial when you realise the importance of the discoveries her cells were used to create without them knowing.

Gavin Richardson

2025-12-08 19:03:52 UTC

I beleive that they should, as in my mind it is the same as paying for art supplies or Canvases, it is essential to the creation of discoveries, and Uses lots of money, resources, emotion, and time to Create, it holds emotional, financial, and matirial valueand should be seen as such

Gavin Richardson

2025-12-08 19:05:56 UTC

Everyone should have complete Consent, control, and ownership out of every part of their body even once they have died.

2025-12-08 19:09:39 UTC

I think we should have consent to our cells being used for medical purposes because our bodies and our medical information belong to us, so doctors just taking that and using it for their own purposes would be unethical because it violates our rights to consent. - reet

2025-12-08 19:51:39 UTC

This story is considered controversial due to the fact that a woman and her family, had no say in whether or not her cells were to be used in scientific practices. Scientists used her cells without consent, and the individual had no idea this was even happening until around 20 years later, which is not in any way acceptable.

-Callie Ireland

2025-12-08 19:55:02 UTC

I believe when donating cells, there should be no form of payment/compensation needed. A lot of people donate these things for the purpose of scientific studies, and to do something good. Being given something more may defeat the entire purpose of their want to donate something so special, and with care.

-Callie Ireland

2025-12-08 19:58:13 UTC

I personally believe a person should be able to give full consent toward donating to science, and it should not happen behind backs. I can say personally, if I did not know that a cell which came from me, was being tested on without my consent, I feel like I would be incredibly upset and disappointed. It feels like a crossed barrier.

-Callie Ireland

700015930 — 2025-12-09 18:25:17 UTC

This story is so controversial because their doctor took a part of her tumor without getting consent from her. She did not know that her cells were being used in labs and that her medical information was leaked without her permission.

- Arman Sidhu

2025-12-09 18:40:59 UTC

This story is controversial because its about malpractice in the science because they took Henrietta's cells and didn't telll anyone for nearly a decaide later

- Mason

2025-12-09 18:43:09 UTC

Yes, I think that you should have to consent to your cells being used for medical purposes. I think that you should have to consent so that your values, and privacy are protected. Some people may not be comfortable with their own cells being used for medical purposes so they should be able to have a say in weather they get used or not. This creates trust between paitents and medical professionals. - Makayla

2025-12-09 18:44:33 UTC

I think people should be slightly compensated for donating their cells to science because they're giving their genetics to people to experiment on

-Mason

2025-12-09 18:47:58 UTC

Yes I do believe that you should have to consent to your cells being used for medical purposes. One reason why I think that you should have to consent, is that many people are not allowed to have certain medical procedures because of their religion. For example I know that one religion is not allowed to have organ transplants. By testing on paitents without having consent, doctors are breaking trust and relationships.

- Kathryn

2025-12-09 18:48:25 UTC

I think they should ask for consent before taking your cells for science because they're taking genetics from you

-Mason

2025-12-09 19:01:22 UTC

I think that this story is super contriversal because the doctors used the girls cells without her consent. This invaded the girls privacy, could've gone agaisnt her values and beleifs, and hurt the trust between her, her family, and the doctors. - Makayla

2025-12-09 19:04:58 UTC

This story is very controversial as some people might say that the doctors had a right to use Henrietta's cells for science, to help other people. Whereas other people might say that they did not have the right to use Henrietta's cells because her or her family did not consent.

- Kathryn

2025-12-09 19:06:59 UTC

Yes, I do think that people should generally be compensated for donating their cells to science. I think this because by donating their cells they could potentially be able to greatly help others in the future. Also by doing something this kind they should get a reward. - Makayla

2025-12-09 19:09:00 UTC

I believe that people should be compensated for donating their cells to science. These people have spent their life maintaining their health, which can be quite expensive at times. So for doing all of that work to stay healthy, I believe that they should be compensated.

Kathryn

I think this story is so controversal because there might be arguments on whether or not it was okay to take the cells of this person without them knowing. Somer people might think ti was not okay to use them and let others use them without the consent of the person they belonged to, while others might say it was okay ebcause trhey were using it for research and they might think it wasn't that big of a deal. - William

362681165 — 2025-12-09 23:11:05 UTC

I think people should be compensated in some way for donating their cells to science. I belive this because they are helping people do research and doing a good thing that they are not required to do. Also compensation doesn't always mean a payment so if it's to a lesser extent then other things could be used for compensation. - William

362681165 — 2025-12-09 23:14:38 UTC

I think people should have to consent for their cells to be used for medical purposes because it is each persons choice what happens to their own body and cells, which is usally supported by law. I don't believe that anyone else ,other than the person, should have the abillity to decide what happens to a part of another person if they are still alive. - William

362681165 — 2025-12-09 23:19:22 UTC

2025-12-09 23:24:09 UTC

People should be compensated if their cells are used to make important and big scientific discoveries. But some argue payment isn’t needed because cell donation is meant to help research, not make money.

- Arman Sidhu

2025-12-09 23:27:00 UTC

Yes, people should have to give consent because their cells are part of their body, and they should control how they’re used. Consent protects privacy and makes sure people are treated fairly.

- Arman Sidhu

2025-12-12 14:25:20 UTC

her cells were taken without her consent or knowledge during medical treatments, her family wasnt told for decades, raises important questions about patient rights and medial ethics-

David, Linc, Liam

2025-12-12 14:28:02 UTC

Yes because their biological material may be used to create profitable products or important scientific tools, and it is important to give something in return when their cells have value- David, Linc, Liam

2025-12-12 14:30:18 UTC

Yes because it protects your rights and autonomy over your own body, also builds trust between patients and the medical system. David, Linc, Liam

362682759 — 2025-12-30 23:24:04 UTC

This story is very controversial for several reasons. The first being that Henrietta didn't give consent to her cells being taken and wasn't even informed that they were taken. This event should never have been permitted to happen, but sadly they had looser restrictions then. The second reason it was controversial was that the family was not informed (at least not until it benefited the scientist), and the concept of what was happening with Henrietta's cells was not explained thoroughly. They also didn't properly explain what the kids' cells were going to be used for and why they needed them. Due to this and other poor communication, the kids couldn't properly consent to their cells being taken, yet they were taken despite the previous facts.

362682759 — 2025-12-30 23:30:50 UTC

I believe that if their cells were even partially responsible for a breakthrough or discovery, the person whose cells were used should be compensated to some extent, depending on the importance of the information learnt. I believe this because without the donators' contribution, the discovery would not have been made. Since they contributed (by providing the main necessary equipment, i.e., their cells), they should still be recognised for their contributions.

362682759 — 2025-12-30 23:34:00 UTC

I believe everyone should have to consent before their body can be used for the purpose of science, alive or dead.