Ethical Dilemmas Of Gene Therapy

Gregory Stock, in his article Choosing Our Genes, asserts that at this point not ethics are important, but rather the future of genetic technology. Stock supports his conclusion by providing powerful examples of how genetic modifications can benefit our population anywhere from correcting genes at the time of conception to extending lifespan. He wants to inform his audience about all of the benefits of genetic technology in order to prove that there are way more advantages in this technology that are highly desirable by people of different ages. He reaches his readers by writing a very detailed yet coherent article that brings awareness to various groups of people from parents to be to older populations.

The Declaration of Independence describes individual rights as “the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” (Congress). These inalienable rights are threatened by genetic modification. Specifically, Tony Wang, in his research on the ethics of genetic

The last 150 years have seen the origin of—and rapid expansion in—human knowledge involving the nature and mechanisms of trait and disease inheritance in human beings. Advances in genetic research hold great promise for the future development of effective prevention and treatment strategies for a great many, often devastating, heritable conditions. However, these advances also raise a series of policy, legal and fundamentally ethical questions concerning what we should and should not do with the knowledge and technology we acquire. These questions are numerous and both imminently practical and speculative, ranging from the exhausted, yet still largely unresolved, question of the moral status of the human embryo to fears about slippery slopes into a Brave New World or Gattaca-style dystopic future characterized by designer children and a genetic underclass.

Worryingly, there has been minimal public debate regarding this technology that could irreversibly alter the human race. Instead, ethical discourse has been largely contained to scientific and political circles. It is extremely problematic that a large majority of the general public is unaware of the research and debate regarding human gene modification. In addition, the current debate has stagnated, with researchers and politicians being unable to find any common ground. However, upon close examination of the three main ideological groups within this controversy, a key similarity becomes apparent: each group, regardless of whether they are proponents or opponents of human gene

(Glenn, Linda MacDonald, Ethical Issues in Genetic Engineering and Transgenics) There are many social and fundamental issues about genetically engineering organisms. The genetic modifyification of animal and human DNA results, intentionally or not, possesses degrees of intelligence or sentience never before tested. Instead of seeing the ‘subject’ of the experiment as a person or animal, they strip them of their rights and think of them as objects. Professor Nemur and Doctor Strauss did not care what happened to Charlie, as long as he provided the information and data they needed to make money and achieve fame. Social and legal controls should be placed on research like this. Who has the right to access these technologies and how will scarce resources (such as medical advances and novel treatments) be given out to experiment

Although the treatment is costly and only available in clinical trials, gene therapy has treated some of the most known diseases, like Parkinson’s disease. People who are for gene therapy believe that it will change our world by getting rid of sickness. They think of a world without cancer and Parkinson’s disease. However, the people against gene therapy see a world with technology overtaking civilization. In their eyes, they think that gene therapy is wrong because of the side effects and the concept behind it. In addition, when thinking about gene therapy, the opposers conjecture that changing the genetic makeup of someone affected with genetic illness is wrong. I, on the other hand, believe that changing the genetic makeup of someone that is ill and suffering is exceptional because it is to their advantage. All in all, gene therapy is a heavily debated topic, but I believe that gene therapy can change our world in a positive

Gene therapy is defined as the medical replacement of defective genes in living human cells; its aim is to replace the activity of a defective gene by activating a dormant gene which has a similar function (Wheale & McNally, 212). Under gene therapy comes the politically controversial Human Genome Project, a fifteen-year, $3 billion federally-funded biology program. The goal of the project is to isolate the defective gene on the chromosomes which comprise the human genome (Fletcher, 2). In this manner, the Human Genome Project may be able to rid the cancer-ridden genes from human DNA, thereby curing cancer permanently. The project has been the focus of much scientific and political controversy over the past few years for its possible ramifications are extensive to all of human existence.

Gene technology carries with it social and ethical implications—many of which engender personal views and discussion.

The ethical debate concerning biotechnological exploration into genetic cloning has created a monster in itself. A multitude of ethical questions arises when considering the effect of creating a genetically engineered human being. Does man or science have the right to create life through unnatural means? Should morality dictate these technological advancements and their effects on society? The questions and concerns are infinite, but so to are the curiosities, which continue to perpetuate the advancement of biotechnological science. In order to contemplate the effects that science can have on our society we can look back in history and literature to uncover the potentiality of our future

With the world of technology making advances so quickly we sometimes forget our own limits as a mortal species. Genetic therapy has the potential to save millions of people from genetic mutations and protein deficiencies. This paper will go on to argue that the Utilitarianism approach in ethics shows all the right things about genetic therapy. The first-time gene therapy was used on a patient dates back in the 1990s when a four-year-old girl had adenosine deaminase deficiency. With this disease, her white blood cells were not doing their job and left her prone to infections. Through the power of genetic therapy some of her white blood cells were extracted, altered to produce adenosine deaminase, and reinjected. This treatment not only saved her life from dangerous diseases but also began a world of opportunities in the medical field. The ethical issue is, is it right or wrong to have that much power to alter genes and to what degree you should be able to modify them. Should people live out their futures the ways they are born or should they live life to the fullest and get the genetic treatments?

Ethics in Human Gene Therapy Throughout history, humans have continuously fought and struggled to improve their chances of survival and health. As advancements in therapy and technology have occurred, however, the field of medicine has become increasingly fraught with issues of ethics and morals. With a variety of problems, ranging from informed consent in human clinical trials, to issues of intentional neglect in the notorious Tuskegee syphilis experiment (in which impoverished African American males were misinformed and denied appropriate treatment in order for researchers to observe the progression of syphilis), to Nazi human experimentation during World War II and the Holocaust, biomedical research and the application of the new therapies have been riddled with such concerns. A contemporary topic in which ethical issues are being hotly contested is the application of

Genetic research has furthered our understanding of the human genetic makeup and has created the potential to transform medicine. This potential is not just limited to medicine, but the potential to further research and monetize the human genetic makeup. Through gene patenting, the monetization of genetic material can provide for a financial incentive for researchers and institutions to further innovation. The developments in the ability to patent genes and the laws surrounding gene patents has raised concerns of the ethical and medical issues as highlighted in authors, Michael Crichton’s article “Patenting Life” and John E. Calfee’s article “Decoding The Use of Gene Patents.” Both authors (1) share similar views on the ethical concerns and research results. (2) Calfee differs by explaining further that

The genome is generally considered sacrosanct and any modification to it is deemed “playing god”. For some, this opposition roots from religious faith and for others, it could be social and developing as a retort to science advancing too quickly for public moral compass to shift. Furthermore, a certain level of uncertainty exists in any scientific approach but any unintended consequences in genome modification or misuse could be devastating. For a non-scientific public, this could create a “Frankenstein”. The report does not delve deep into these moral, social and religious views that account for most of the opposition to gene

Just as there are different types of people who look at one glass of water and describe it as half full or half empty, the public has many different views on the future of our society. Gene therapy is also a glass that can be viewed in different angles – different perspectives. Some say it has great potential to shape the ideals of our future, while others believe it signifies intolerance for disabilities, imperfections that supposedly deplete from a person’s interests, opportunities and welfare (quoted by Peter Singer, xviii). This global issue has brought people with different opinions in the open, arguing their views using history,

Every living thing is the product of the genes that were passed down from ancestors. Genes make up everything we are. One gets their traits from their parents. Most people live full lives with relatively good health. However, some people inherit mutated genes or faulty genes. This could lead to genetic disorders that could be life threatening. Even today, many genetic disorders still remain incurable, leaving many people without hope. Genetic therapy could be their answer. It is through this research that the cure for genetic disorders can be found. Though some people believe it is unethical or immoral to alter genes, current therapeutics have not been able to save the lives of the patients with these diseases. Genetic therapy