Genetic Engineering and Cryonic Freezing: A Modern Frankenstein?
In Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, a new being was artificially created using the parts of others. That topic thus examines the ethics of "playing God" and, though written in 1818, it is still a relevant issue today. Genetic engineering and cryogenic freezing are two current technologies related to the theme in the novel of science transcending the limits of what humans can and should do.
Genetic engineering is widely used today. Genetically altered bacteria are used to make human insulin, human growth hormone, and a vaccine for hepatitis B. Two vaccines against AIDS created with genetic engineering have begun clinical trials here in the United States ("The
…show more content…
Another facet of genetic engineering, gene therapy, has shown promise. This new process aims at removing genetic defects and certain personality traits (Begley, 61).
Most people do not like the idea of cloning humans. Many also disagree with being able to use genetic engineering to prevent genetic defects or to choose certain trait for their children. Many fear that children would become objects rather than human beings. President Clinton stated, "Banning human cloning reflects our humanity. It is the right thing to do. At its worst [this new method] could lead to misguided and malevolent attempts to select certain traits, even to create certain kinds of children - to make our children objects rather than cherished individuals." Besides, who can say for sure that this technology will be used in a beneficial way? Someone, somewhere is likely going to do the unethical thing (Kevles 354). Kevin T. Fitzgerald said cloning is not needed because alternate solutions to these problems already exist, social and psychological problems cannot and should not simply be solved by genetic solutions, and cloning humans for the purpose of supplying organs would cause a great ethical uproar (Fitzgerald). Gene therapy also presents many problems. Since it is very expensive, only the wealthy could afford to have children without undesirable traits. This would further
Some people actually say that we can benefit from cloning. Scientists think that we can clone “geniuses” and advance in society (Utah Genetics). This brings up a very good point. What if we can clone 5 Albert Einsteins?! What if we clone all of the smartest minds to ever exist. Can we cure cancer? I think we can! Maybe we can even stop ebola. Lots of people are seriously thinking about this and how beneficial it would be. But some people can take this out of hand. Some scientists are considering making “human farms” where clones are made and their only purpose is to kill them and take their organs to sell. This is why cloning should not be easily accessible. Some freaky scientists are actually considering this idea. We need to be smarter, we need to be consistent , and we need to keep an eye out for these crazy scientists. And God knows what other crazy idea they have inside their heads. But many people think that cloning can be beneficial to society if it is used
While there appears to be many advantages for the continuation of cloning research, there are other drawbacks that may negatively impact the society in the future. Cloning may reduce genetic variability by producing populations that have the same genetic make-up. This population would be susceptible to the same diseases and could potentially be wiped out by a single strain of virus. Such a result could be catastrophic and devastate entire nations. Cloning in human would inevitably lead to testings on human subjects and genetic tailoring of offspring. It is plausible that scientists could alter genetic coding to produce a baby with desirable traits resulting in a ‘perfect human’ with heightened senses and sub-normal intelligence. There have been no occurrences to
There are many good reasons to both develop cloning and incorporate it into modern medicine. Human cloning is extremely beneficial, but there are some downsides. Many of the problems are ethical in nature. Matthew Nisbet involved the public in his article. He polled the public on their opinions about human cloning and stem cell research. He found that “The public appears to have strong reservations about research that destroys embryos”
There are some scientist and the public that concluded that human cloning would aid in the progress of genetic knowledge and human advancement. In John Harris article, Is gene Therapy a Form of Eugenics?, he brings forth the issue of disabilities. He advocates that if we have the genetic means to create people free of disabilities, then gene therapy eugenics should be allowed. This would be a form of reproductive cloning. John Harris wrote, “It is not that the genetically weak should be discouraged from reproducing but that everyone should be discouraged from reproducing children who will be significantly harmed by their genetic constitution.” 3 This would insure people with genetic defects to have health children. Even in Dan Brock’s essay he points out the positive positions on the benefits of cloning for genetic reasons. He admits that even though cloning is not the natural way for reproduction, it could lead to some good things genetically. Cloning technology could also teach doctors how to renew damaged cells by growing new cells and replacing them. The study of cell differentiation could be enhanced by studying the development of a clone. Cloning could be used to produce extra human organs or prevent hereditary diseases. This process even could be capable of reproducing someone who died to help alleviate the pain of loss. In a bigger aspect, some of our most talented people or genius could be recreated like Mozart or Einstein. However, as Brock brings his essay
Over two centuries ago, Mary Shelley created a gruesome tale of the horrific ramifications that result when man over steps his bounds and manipulates nature. In her classic tale, Frankenstein, Shelley weaves together the terrifying implications of a young scientist playing God and creating life, only to be haunted for the duration of his life by the monster of his own sordid creation. Reading Shelley in the context of present technologically advanced times, her tale of monstrous creation provides a very gruesome caution. For today, it is not merely a human being the sciences are lusting blindly to bring to life, as was the deranged quest of Victor Frankenstein, but rather to
There should be no room to clone any human being nor animal. There is so much more to find out about our world then to test the non-achieved and inefficient process of cloning. Therefore I am against any type of cloning, whether therapeutic or reproductive. Andy vidak I write to you this letter, to give you a better understanding of why funding for cloning would set us back as a society. Genuinely I care about our future because I want our generation to be known as the one who did brilliant things. The excuse that cloning can potentially result in medical breakthrough is unacceptable because, like president George W. Bush said in his 2002 speech about human cloning, “We can pursue medical research with a clear sense of moral purpose.” (Office of the Press Secretary par. 12). Research cloning would contradict the most underlying principle of medical ethics, that no human life should be exploited for the convenience of another. For that reason I stand by
Cloning is very unpredictable. Because of this, the results are unclear. Therefore, it is likely that people are apprehensive towards this technology in that there is a fifty percent chance the outcome will result negatively. There is no way to understand how human cloning will affect us as a species since the technology to do so has not yet been developed and used (‘Human Cloning”). Not only does human cloning stretch beyond our understanding but also it has a negative connotation in society. As stated in “Human Cloning”, “Expressing the popular distaste for cloning, Clinton stated that it undermines the uniqueness and sacredness of human life” (“Cloning”). It is evident that cloning provides for a negative connotation. If the technology and science behind human cloning were to be stable and provide for a predictable outcome, it would be a less controversial topic in society. Undeniably the unpredictable nature of human cloning proves that the science behind it is far too advanced for our wisdom to use it
Genetic engineering is a very controversial topic. People either agree with genetic modification, or they don’t. According to dictionary.com, genetic engineering is the development and application of scientific methods, procedures, and technologies that permit direct manipulation of genetic material in order to alter the hereditary traits of a cell, organism, or population. While researching this topic, I learned many interesting facts. I found out that genetic engineering first started in 1973, I did not know it had been around for so long. I learned that two men, Herbert Boyer and Stanley Cohen, were the first people to genetically modify an organism, which was bacteria. Yourgenome.org states that, “Genetic engineering can be applied to
Imagine the possibility of eliminating serious genetic diseases from the world. Imagine the idea of treating, preventing or even curing diseases that are yet to be cured. Imagine the feeling of being given improved health and a prolonged lifespan. This can all be accomplished with the aide of genetic engineering. Human genetic engineering refers to the process of directly manipulating human DNA to produce wanted results. DNA is a simple but very complex chemical that has the power to change the world and has begun to do so already. Many opponents to gene therapy fail to realize that genetic engineering has great potential to become very important in the biomedical industry. Though controversy exists regarding the ethics of human genetic engineering, it can produce numerous benefits, which outweigh its disadvantages and side effects; therefore, scientists should be able to manipulate the human genome for the purpose of helping people with serious medical conditions.
As well as having the ability to alter plant life, this technology is also said to be able to alter or manipulate human genes. Scientists are finding ways to manipulate certain genes to reduce the risk of Parkinson’s disease, Huntington’s disease, as well as depression. In the essay, Richard Hayes writes, “Last year Science magazine reported that a variant of the human 5-HTT gene reduces the risk of depression following stressful experiences” (185). By inserting the variant of that gene into embryos, some babies could have a chance at never experiencing depression. This would be an amazing feat, to be able to give a child a chance to never have to feel the devastating effects depression can have on a person. There are other disorders other than depression that could also be cured from the manipulation of human genes. Many children today are born with autism and Down syndrome. This technology could one day ensure that all babies are born completely healthy with no defects or disorders
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
Modern science has dramatically evolved over the past years, there is a concern on whether or not people will try to play God with such developments and what damaging consequences could occur. Body modifications, cloning, Genetic engineering, and various fields in biotechnology are prime examples of fields that are attaining great advancements in a swift manner that increase concerns over the consequences. Progress in science induces people to question what it means to be a human and their own human nature, just as it causes people to question the effects that scientific progress may have on their good fortune, happiness or common welfare.The protagonist of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, Victor Frankenstein is incited to advance the field of
While some believe cloning to be acceptable others feel equally strongly that human cloning is completely wrong. With the state of the science as it is at the moment it would involve hundreds of damaged pregnancies to achieve one single live cloned baby. What is more, all the evidence suggests that clones are unhealthy and often have a number of built-in genetic defects, which lead to premature ageing and death. It would be completely wrong to bring a child into the world knowing that it was extremely likely to be affected by problems like these. The dignity of human life and the genetic uniqueness we all have would be attacked if cloning became commonplace. People might be
Genetic engineering techniques have been applied to various industries, with some success. Medicines such as insulin and human growth hormone are now produced in bacteria, experimental mice such as the oncomouse and the knockout mouse are being used for research purposes and insect resistant and/or herbicide tolerant crops have been commercialized. Plants that contain drugs and vaccines, animals with beneficial proteins in their milk and stress tolerant crops are currently being developed
In the future, gene therapy could be used to alter genes that influence behaviour. There are two types of gene therapy: somatic gene therapy which modifies the DNA in the body, usually intargeted cells, and germline gene therapy where the reproductive cells are altered and the changes are transmitted to future generations (“Genetics and Human Behaviour: The Ethical Context”).