Biotechnology In Tim Burton's Planet Of The Apes Might Ever

On the last years, genetic technology have been improving. The research carried out in this area are focused on the early diagnosis of diseases. Moreover, manipulation of genes in the future provides a critical tool for eliminating fatal diseases to humans. Also humans will be able to manipulate genes from birth. But the real question is although can be perform it, we allow it? Everything possible is ethically permissible? Some dramatic demonstrations of genetic modification have been made with mice and other animals, however, evidence in humans are generally considered outside the ethical boundaries. Gregory Stock, director of the Program on Medicine, Technology, and Society at UCLA and author of Redesigning Humans, in his article “Choosing Our Genes” (2012) argues the use of technology to change humans genetic in order to avoid imperfections or diseases. Stock shows genetic engineering as a very useful technology and that applying it on the future to humans, positive results they will gain. Stocks article is effective, since he gives good reasons why using genetic technology would provide several benefits that people wish to have.

Biotechnology is not just a new fad. Prakash and Conko stated, “And a review of 81 separate research projects conducted over 15 years- all funded by the European Union- found that bioengineered crops and foods are at least as safe for the environment and for human consumption as conventional crops, and in some cases even safer.” (Prakash and Conko 359) This sentence summarizes an important

Although the intentions of genetically modifying DNA in human embryos is aimed to rid society of genetic defects, it is still essential that this scientific discovery remains ethical. In an article on NPR.org, Rob Stein describes an experiment that scientists have been conducting in which they modify human DNA in order to eliminate life threatening genetic diseases that could be passed on for generations (Stein). In Portland, at Oregon Health & Science University, Paula Amato, an associate professor of obstetrics and gynecology, explains “that their work is aimed at preventing terrible diseases, not creating genetically enhanced people...much more research is needed to confirm the technique is safe and effective before anyone tries to make a baby this way”(Stein). Because scientists like Amato realize their research is controversial, they are taking every precaution to assure what they are doing is morally correct, they are not intending to corrupt society. Although their intentions are good, it is their job to make sure their research is being used in an ethical way. If not, millions of people, who are already obsessed with the idea of perfection, will be able to do something about

“Genetic engineering and selective breeding appear to violate animal rights, because they involve manipulating animals for human ends as if the animals were nothing more than human property, rather than treating the animals as being of value in themselves” (Source A). Even though genetic engineering violates animal rights, it can be good for animals as well. Such as improving their resistance to diseases and removing characteristics that cause injury (Example: a cattle without horns). However, the cons to genetically engineering animals offsets the pros. Whenever animals are genetically engineered, it can lead to abnormalities. These abnormalities can range from heart discomfort to physical abnormalities (i.e. a body growing too fast that the growth of the legs are not able to grow at the same speed not be able to withstand the weight of the body). The abnormalities that the animals would have to live with from genetical engineering would cause the animal much pain. Therefore enforcing the fact that genetic engineering on animals is

Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs), have turned into an exceptionally questionable theme here in our reality today. GMOs are life forms that have been developed through a quality joining methodologies of biotechnology or genetics building. This is a moderately new type of science which permits DNA from an individual species to be injected into another species in a research center. This produces blends of plant, creature, microscopic organisms, and viral qualities that don 't show up in conventional crossbreeding systems or found in nature. GMO’s have been liked to several health-related issues, and should be banned by the FDA (Genetically Modified Organisms, N.D. ).

How far would you go to save human lives and to progress society for those in need? The benefits of genetic engineering have shown to outweigh the ethical and environmental consequences associated within the field. Genetic Engineering has shown to provide major benefits in the field of medicine and agriculture but is faced with extreme criticism and backlash, specifically on the basis of ethics.

In the afterward to this book, author Lee Silver, professor of molecular ecology and evolutionary biology and neuroscience at Princeton, states, "My goal has been to present both the scientific and the political realities of reprogenetic technologies as I see them, along with the ethical dilemmas their use will raise. I leave it to philosophers and bioethicists to figure out how these ethical dilemmas might be resolved." As the book opens, the reader is moved scene by scene further into the future when, ultimately, the development of genetic engineering and its accessability will have formed a world even more polarized

Human genetic engineering and eugenics have been a largely controversial topic over the past decades. Eugenics can be popularly defined as the science of improving and enhancing a human population or person through manipulating the human genes, selective breeding, and sterilization. The end goal and desired result of eugenics is to basically create a human race or people with more desirable biological, physical, or psychological traits. Eugenics and genetic modification is a current, pressing subject; in April 2015, a group of Chinese researchers, used a new gene-editing technology, called CRISPR to “[tinker] with the genomes of human embryos” (Adams). Presently, according to CQ Researcher, “New genetic technologies allow scientists to delete a mutant gene and insert a healthy one, which…has the potential to eliminate inherited diseases, such as cystic fibrosis.” However, these techniques have only been used on embryos belonging to laboratory animals. The big question here is whether or not science and technology are crossing an ethical boundary by using these techniques and performing genetic modification on human embryos. Do humans have the right to “play God” and alter nature?

Malik, Kenan. "Concerns About Biotechnology Altering Human Nature Are Groundless." Designer Babies, edited by Clayton Farris Naff, Greenhaven Press, 2013. At Issue. Opposing Viewpoints in Context, link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/EJ3010850213/OVIC?u=j170902014&xid=e7789a12. Accessed 31 Mar. 2017. Originally published as "Reviews: Francis Fukuyama, Our Posthuman Future," New Statesman, 20 May 2002.

From cloning to genetically modified food to designer babies, humans have long been known to interfere with the way nature does things; humans have been modifying genes and improving the outlook in the pretext that it improves the quality of our lives. Humans also have a long history of interfering with and trying to control the more divine

We have technology everywhere in all aspects from organ transplants to digital and social media, the internet and cell phones and so much more. All of these technologies have helped us improve as a species and evolve at a rapid pace over the last few decades. We can quickly connect, get information and decide on which choices to make. More and more we realize the importance of personal health, healthy food, and the health of the planet. Technology in Genetics is moving front and center, gaining a higher profile than it has ever previously had. The GMO has brought about changes in resources for food and medicine and even animals. The controversy both for and against combined with mixed unclear information make it a bit of a double edge sword

Fast forwards two hundred years and the science (or lack thereof) depicted is almost indistinguishable, a revolutionary new process called CRISPR (clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats) is allowing science to edit the human genome almost at will. With the announcement of US scientists creating the first genetically modified embryo, an outburst of ethical debate has arisen. While they are certainly not the first (a Chinese division won the achievement in 2015), this achievement was created through the CRISPR process.

Genetics is a world of unknown limitations. From the small fraction of application seen being explored today, they have yet to even begin exploring its true wonders and comprehend its beauty as an entirety. As of today, animals and plants have been the only beneficiaries of genetic research and experimentation (National Human Genome Research Institute). Such experiments have led to the development of better chances of survival of modified organisms against harsh environments. Pigs and cows are an example of how organisms can be modified to better effect the environment (Moss). Corn is an example of how crops can be adapted for other, previously unsuitable areas such as Africa (Glenn). Animals and plants have greatly benefited from genetic modification and research, but why should they be the only ones to get such great results. Humans should be granted the right to

Genetic engineering has become increasingly normalized in today’s society, and people are exposed to this technology now more than ever before. Most people are aware that food companies practice genetic engineering on their plants in order to design the most profitable crops, but it isn’t generally known that this same technology can be applied to humans. The concept of picking certain traits and characteristics of a human may appear desirable, but many risks and potential side effects may follow considering that it is unknown what genetic engineering could affect in future generations. Francis Fukuyama, an accomplished and distinguished professor of political economy and philosopher, conveys his concern that genetic engineering is developing at a surprisingly rapid rate. Within his book, Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution, he claims that genetic engineering not only will potentially be detrimental for the human race, but due to the change in nature of human beings, such engineering will also result in significantly impacting government and politics. Although genetic engineering can be seen as a huge technological advancement that could potentially help millions, there are drastic negative effects and reasons for disapproving genetic engineering that are too important to be overlooked.

Bostrom argues that society can adapt to see the worth in modified, “posthuman” people, allotting them dignity and rights as humans even though they are modified (Bostrom 3). Sade looks at genetic modification through a much more practical lens, observing real, immediate benefits and drawbacks of genetic modification rather than overarching philosophy. There are undoubtedly many dangers and problems that will arise from mainstream genetic modification, some that may even shake the foundation of the society and culture of today. However, countless benefits come with gene therapy as well. Concrete improvements to the human race, from increased intelligence, athleticism, and height, to immunization from major diseases to perhaps eventually immortality. These benefits largely outweigh the ethical drawbacks that society will surely adapt to as the years go on. Many groundbreaking technologies have changed the structure of society in the past, like the cotton gin, assembly line, and internet. Each time, humans have successfully adapted to take full advantage of the benefits while manage the dangers and drawbacks, concrete and cultural. Whether people like it or not, mainstream genetic modification is inevitable as technology keeps increasing, and society should find solutions to manage it rather than cower from it. The future is coming, and humans should be ready for the