Ethical Considerations In Genetic Research

DNA stands for Deoxyribonucleic acid. Deoxyribonucleic corrosive is an atom that conveys a large portion of the hereditary guidelines utilized as a part of the improvement, working and propagation of all known living creatures and numerous infections. The National Institutes of Health and Welcome Trust from the London UK and Craig Vendor of Celera Genomics from Maryland USA at the same time exhibited the grouping of human DNA in June of 2000, finishing the first significant attempt of the Human Genome Project (HGP) (Ridley 2). As researchers connection human attributes to qualities fragments of DNA found on one or a greater amount of the 23 human

   The Human Genome Project is the largest scientific endeavor undertaken since the Manhattan Project, and, as with the Manhattan Project, the completion of the Human Genome Project has brought to surface many moral and ethical issues concerning the use of the knowledge gained from the project. Although genetic tests for certain diseases have been available for 15 years (Ridley, 1999), the completion of the Human Genome Project will certainly lead to an exponential increase in the number of genetic tests available. Therefore, before genetic testing becomes a routine part of a visit to a doctor's office, the two main questions at the heart of the controversy surrounding genetic testing must be

DNA are like legos, they work together to build the traits of living things. They are the building blocks of the body. Many scientists today have been figuring out different ways to manipulate, change, add, and subtract genes from the DNA in living things; this is process is called genetic engineering. Some of the living things being experimented on are live people, plants, and animals. Today scientists are debating on the morals of genetic engineering due to what the community thinks of it, because of the christian 's viewpoint of genetic engineering. To some christians it may pose a threat to their, but to others it may be a blessing or a gift. Genetic Engineering is a growing breakthrough in the science community. “Over the last 30 years, the field of genetic engineering has developed rapidly due to the greater understanding of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) as the chemical double helix code from which genes are made. The term genetic engineering is used to describe the process by which the genetic makeup of an organism can be altered using “recombinant DNA technology.” This involves the use of laboratory tools to insert, alter, or cut out pieces of DNA that contain one or more genes of interest.”(Pocket K No. 17) Scientist have yet to unlock the full potential of genetic engineering, but the information and the use they have found for it today has reached farther than anyone 's expectations.

Genetic testing has brought about many changes in the way many couples look at conceiving and raising families. Through genetic testing you are able to screen for the increased chance that a fetus may have one of many congenital disorders, or even identify gene changes that are responsible for a disease that has already been diagnosed (Genetic Testing, March 2015). Unfortunately genetic testing is not always exact, in some cases giving parents false negatives or false positive results. Even if the results are accurate, there is the burden of knowledge once you know the results indicate a genetic abnormality such as Down’s syndrome. While caring for a 2 year old male patient with developmental delays and anotia, I learned that genetic testing had been started but never completed on the child. Genetic testing could help to identify genetic disorders that led to the child’s developmental delays and possible future disorders that may develop. The ethical dilemma I will be discussing to the ANA Ethical dilemma of the impact of informed consent of genetic testing on children for adult onset diseases and disorders.

The Goal of the Human Genome Project is to obtain genetic mapping information and to determine the complete sequence of all human DNA by the year of 2005. The project started in 1990 and 180 million dollars are being spent on it annually. This adds up to a total of over 2 billion dollars for the 15 year budget. Of this 2 billion dollars budgeted, 5% is spent annually on the ethical, legal and social issues. This report focused on some of these issues.

There are other types of gene editing out there but research shows us that CRISPR is fast, precise, and simple. Researchers are developing a way for CRISPR therapy to help with Alzheimer’s all the way to HIV. There are two categories the researchers and people have put CRISPR in: practical and philosophical. The researchers say that the immediate barrier is practical. During the tests, CRISPR has found targets in other parts of the DNA that need fixing other than the intended part of the DNA. Because of this, it may take at least a generation to ensure that it is safe. Some people oppose CRISPR because the oppositionists say it lets people play god but getting medicine every time you get sick with the same thing obscures the natural order of things. The opportunities are getting pushed ahead for treating cancer, childhood diseases that are genetic, and how to understand diabetes better. The one question some people have is whether it’s right to edit genes that are

Manipulating genes to behave according to what a person wants seems unrealistic. In our day and age, it is becoming a reality. Genetic engineering is being used in many ways, such as eliminating a specific genetic disease, or even selecting the gender and eye color of a baby (Skerrett). Genetic engineering is potentially dangerous.

Modifying genomes hasn’t been perfected, and is far too great of a risk to use on society. No one knows what could happen to the population after man starts messing with mother nature. Scientists who are trying to destroy genetic diseases could create new problems or end up killing its test subjects later down the line. The possibilities for disasters are endless. People also claim that modifying humans is the fastest and most efficient way to getting rid of physical and mental health problems, but according to Molecular biologist Ellen Jorgensen, Using CRISPR isn’t what people see it to be. Ellen explains that using CRISPR is not actually easy at all. To use the technology, damaging the gene is crucial. Once the gene is damaged, and the cells start to repair, scientists can then manipulate the cells to repair the way they want it to, and not naturally. This is a complicated process, and it not in any way

Technological developments are growing fast and individuals can not live without technology in the modern society. People all have their moral compass and ethical boundary which limit their behaviors. As technology is widely used, the connection between technology and ethics is getting inseparably associated. In the article “Ethics and the New Genetics” by Tenzin Gyatso, he mentions the genetic engineering field’s benefit and potential harms which lead people to consider the relationship between ethics and technology. He argues that technological development advances individuals’ lives and also pushes the envelope which leads people to shrink the ethical lines and is harmful to human societies. Thus, technology is the pivotal point of humans’ moral responsibilities.Although

All we need to do it change one letter in the genetic code. For example, in the article, “In Praise of Designer Babies”, it states, “‘It would be against nature to treat your child's illness.’ So why is it obvious that we should treat the illness after the child is born, but not prevent the illness beforehand?” It would be silly of us if we did not treat our children if we knew they had a fatal illness. It is superior to help them while they are in the mother, and not watch them suffer as they grow. We might even be able to save countless of kids everywhere, by just changing one adenine, a nitrogen base, even adding or taking away a code. For example, when a child is born with down syndrome will have an extra chromosome or a chromosome with an extra part. We can get into the DNA and delete that extra chromosome to help heal the child. Another instance is, in the same article, text, it says, “Imagine you knew that you carried a gene for a debilitating illness. But, doctors could go into your egg (or your spouse's) and remove that gene…” Just imagine all of the healthy kids that will be able to enjoy their life relating to normal children and being able to do normal activities. Kids can be ecstatic everyday and their overall health all over the world might even improve by so much just by using genetics. Another example is, from the article, “Will Gene Editing Allow Us to Rid the World of Diseases”, it

What I personally have always had an interest in but have never been able to recover solid answers on, is whether or not human genetic testing can be considered ethical, and what biomedical ethics should guide medical, specifically reproductive technologies.

Over 50 years ago, the first code of ethics was implemented by the American Nurses Association (ANA), and over time, this code has been revised to encompass its current nine doctrines CITATION Ame151 \l 1033 (American Nurses Association, 2015). Although the code has undergone several modifications, the basic tenet is for nurses to “do no harm.” Genomics and current legislative privacy protocols place nurses in a position to potentially do unintentional harm. The purpose of this paper is to determine whether nurses have an ethical duty to maintain patient privacy regarding genetic test results that can prevent potential harm to others.

Genetic testing is becoming more common as different types of genetic tests become available to the public. There are diagnostic tests, predictive tests, carrier tests and prenatal tests just to name a few. However, there are many ethical and social issues revolving around genetic testing. There are ethical issues involving the limitations of testing, the restriction of treatments available and the unknown implications of early prevention. There are also the social issues of potential for discrimination and the emotional impact of the test results.

I agree that although nutritional genomics seems promising and could have significant positive impact on today’s health care there are a lot of ethical, social, and legal issues that impede progress. I concur that information derived from nutritional genomics should be treated the same way as other health related information. I don’t think medical information should be disclosed to any third parties without the patient’s consent. The good thing is the government is already aware of the possible discriminatory risks resulting from these studies and they have taken action towards resolving it. According to Jones, (2013) “The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008, Public Law 110-233, 122 STAT. 881, prohibits discrimination based on an individual’s genetic information in both the health coverage and employment contexts” (para. 2). This means there is legal protection against the misuse of genetic information. Although this is not a complete solution to all the issues, it is a step forward. Reilly and Debusk (2008) stated that nutritional genomics is still in its infancy state. Researchers, lawmakers, and health care professionals still have the opportunity to resolve these issues and make policies that will help in the implementation of this science.

Genetic engineering has to do with manipulating organisms and DNA to create body characteristics. The practice of genetic DNA has shown an increasing amount over the past years. The process of genetic enhancement involves manipulating organisms by using biotechnologies. The technique is by removing a DNA from one life form and transferring it to another set of traits or organism. Certain barriers are conquered, and the procedure involves changing a form of cells, resulting from an improvement or developed organism. GMO which is a (Genetic Modified Organisms) is the operation done in a laboratory where DNA genetic from one particular species or animals is directly forced into another gene from an unrelated subject of plants or even animals.