Ronald M Green Genetic Engineering

We are living is a world where very soon it will be possible for people to create ‘designer babies’ that have all the features they wish for. In the article Building Baby from the Genes Up, Ronald M. Green talks about all the positive impacts that genetic modification of human beings can have on our future generations. Green acknowledges some of the negatives such as parents creating perfect children and being able to give them any trait the parent wants. However in the end he comes to the conclusion that the positive impacts of getting rid of genes that cause obesity, cancer, learning disorders, and many other diseases and disorders, outweighs the negative aspects. Richard Hayes, author of Genetically Modified Humans? No Thanks, takes the stance that we should not be able to change anything about human beings through genetic modification. He believes that once we start modifying a few features, it will slowly turn into every parent altering as many of their babies’ genes that they want. While he does acknowledge the positive impacts of getting rid of negative genes such as Tay-Sachs, he believes that it is not worth the risk of having parents manipulate all their future children’s genes to their liking. Green and Hayes stand on opposite sides of the debate about genetic modification of human beings and this essay will explore the similarities and the differences of their articles.

Throughout our lifetime we are in constant change, many of those changes are ones that you don’t notice. However permanent we set a change to ourselves, one thing we hardly notice change is our DNA. Just growing recently in popularity is genetic engineering , along with its immense potential which can do very much for us, in the future and today. However, with all the potential that genetic engineering carries many people have begun to resent what genetic engineering could become instead of focusing on the great capabilities, and what lies ahead of its bright future. Regardless of what others believe, Genetic engineering will renovate the way we do things today, genetic engineering is a tremendous step to accept, and without a doubt a step

In the essay, titled "Building Baby from the Genes Up?" Ronald M. Green proclaims his approval of genetic selection and extraction of human genes. He gives reasons that support his outlook on the matter, that this will be useful to civilization. Ronald M. Green is in violation of several ethical codes, with his view on genetic modification. I am against genetically modified humans, and I will explain to you, why this is my stance on the subject. First, I will summarize exactly what Ronald M. Green says in his article about his view on genetic modification and why practicing it is vital. Second, I will describe research

Genetic Modification is often perceived as the answer to humanity’s faults because it will enhance human abilities, prevent the survival of incapacitating disabilities, and guide the innovation of the future. Sounds pretty good, right? That is not the reality. Genetic modification is not the solution to the ubiquitous problems of the human race, but rather infringes on individual rights, decreases diversity, permits too much power to the human race, and contributes to overpopulation.

Through these “battles”, authors also display their rhetorical prowess. One eloquent example of these “rhetorical battles” is the bout between the progressive Ronald M. Green and the conservative Richard Hayes. In his article “Building Baby from the Genes Up”, Green advocates for genetic engineering- realizing the inevitability of this new technology due the potential it has in improving mankind. Hayes responds to Green’s stance on human genetic modification in his own article “ Genetically Modified Humans? No Thanks.” Hayes’s own stance of the subject is polarizing to Green’s. Hayes believes that genetic engineering will not benefit society at all and in fact Hayes believes it would take away our humanity; claiming genetic engineering would “undermine the human community.”

Though it is evident that the concept of “Designer Babies” would prove unpopular amongst the majority of society, there still remains to be advocates for a future compromising of GM children. It is argued that gene technology will bring about a new age of human beings who are happier, smarter and healthier. Supporters look forward to a future when parents could quite literally assemble their children from genes listed in a catalogue. A future in which the health, appearance, personality and life span of our children become mere artefacts of genetic modification.

Nowadays, people will claim that the world is on the verge of scientific revolution that leads to the most controversial idea; genetic engineering of humans. When science technology grows exponentially faster than moral understanding, therein lies the argument between these two aspects. One can argue that genetic engineering is some sort of vast achievement in technology especially in this modern era whereby people live in full of access. However, if we look closely at the impact of this technology towards human beings, genetic engineering has many flaws and ramifications that can be debated thoroughly. Arguments and points of view are explained by Michael J. Sandel, the author of “The Case Against Perfection” and Nicholas Agar, the author of “Liberal Eugenics”.

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

Minerd, Jeff. "Genetic Engineering Will Benefit Human Health and the Environment." Genetic Engineering, edited by Lisa Yount, Greenhaven Press, 2002. Current Controversies. Opposing Viewpoints in Context, link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/EJ3010212206/OVIC?u=j170902014&xid=22c07df8. Accessed 27 Feb. 2017. Originally published as "Trend Analysis: Genetic Engineering Increases Human Power," The Futurist, Mar.

It is incredible to see how far genetic engineering has come. Humans, plants, and any living organism can now be manipulated. Scientists have found ways to change humans before they are even born. They can remove, add, or alter genes in the human genome. Making things possible that humans (even thirty years ago) would have never imagined. Richard Hayes claims in SuperSize Your Child? that genetic engineering needs to have limitations. That genetic engineering should be used for medical purposes, but not for “genetic modification that could open the door to high-tech eugenic engineering” (188). There is no doubt that genetic engineering can amount to great things, but without limits it could lead the human race into a future that no one

Scientists have recently brought up the idea of genetically engineering humans, as if we are machines that need to be tinkered with. Genetic engineering is the deliberate modification of the DNA of an organism. We have seen this type of modification in the food that we have consumed and in the animals that many purchase. It has never been proven to be 100% safe for humans to consume genetically modified food as it is not from nature and our bodies do not know how to react. Also there have been many cases where purebred dogs have been susceptible to numerous diseases because of the decreased gene pool they were modified from, which is the cause of inbreeding. Scientists must never engineer humans because we have seen the bad effects it has had

New technological advances and scientific methods continue to change the course of nature. One of the current controversial advances in science and technology is the use of genetically modified embryos in which the study exceeds stem cell research. Scientists have begun planning for research involving human embryos in the genetic modification field. Many technological developments are responsible for improving our living standards and even saving lives, but often such accomplishments have troubling cultural and moral ramifications (Reagan, 2015). We are already beyond the days in which virtually the only procreative option was for a man and a woman to conceive the old-fashioned way (Reagan, 2015). Genetic modification of human embryos can be perceived as a positive evolution in the medical process yet it is surrounded by controversy due to ethical processes. Because this form of genetic modification could affect later born children and their offspring, the protection of human subjects should be a priority in decisions about whether to proceed with such research (Dresser, 2004). The term Human Genetic Engineering was originally made public in 1970. During this time there were several methods biologists began to devise in order to better identify or isolate clone genes for manipulation in several species or mutating them in humans.

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.

If the world had the possibility to be a healthier one, one can rest assure that it would make that possibility a reality. However, the world already has been having that possibility through genetic engineering, but at the same time, it has remained a possibility and not a reality. With this in mind, one must wonder why; why has it remained a possibility? In order to successfully answer this, it is important to understand what genetic engineering is, and how it could allow the world, specifically the human race, to become healthier. In his article, “What’s Genetic Engineering,” Remy Melina, a staff writer for Live Science, defines genetic engineering as the use of technology to manipulate the genetic composition of an organism (Melina). Basically genetic engineering consists of a process in which genes of an organism are changed to get a desired result. As of now, genetic engineering has been used on animals and plants, but the possibility of a healthier world relies on human genetic engineering. According to The Center for Genetics and Society, a nonprofit information and public affairs organization, human genetic engineering is the potential of changing inherited genes of future children (“About Human Germline Gene Editing”). Considering the possibility of a healthier world, human genetic engineering could be used to modify, clone, and transform genes.

Genetic engineering is the process of modifying the DNA of an organism to improve its functioning, or to benefit the human species. This broad term can apply to diagnosing and curing diseases, developing new vaccines, and more controversially, manufacturing animal and food products. A less well-known fact is that genetic engineering has been around since approximately 8000 BCE with the domestication of plants, according to experts from National Geographic. Through time, humans have had an ever-increasing effect on the natural world, and recent strides in genetic technology have shifted the primary focus from artificial selection in the wheat fields to growing virus-resistant rat embryos in research laboratories. The possibilities are seemingly endless, but there are many ethical and health concerns associated with this practice as a result.