Essay on The Moral Implications of Genetic Engineering

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

Buddhist behavior towards animals is not always positive. Thinking the principle of karma says that souls are reborn as animals because of past offences. Being brought back as an animal is a serious spiritual setback. Because non-human animals can't engage in conscious acts of self-improvement they can't build up their good karma, and their souls must continue to be reborn as animals until their bad karma is exhausted. Only when they are reborn as human beings can they resume their journey to enlightenment. This bad karma, and the animal's helplessness to avoid it led Buddhists in the past to think that animals are not as important as humans and therefore, do not deserve as many

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.

In an ever evolving society, the increased use of technology has become a staple in our day to day lives. With the constant advancements of technology the ideology of cloning has now become a reality. The increasing use of science today is slowly leading to the development of cloning and genetic selection. By altering the genetic make-up of a being, scientists have brought about several questions on how the population would adjust to the “super-beings,” and what benefits and consequences both human and non-humans would gain with their creations? Authors Francis Fukuyama, who wrote “Human Dignity,” and The Dalai Lama, writer of “Ethics and the New Genetics,” has called into question the use of cloning and how it could possibly affect others. With the creation of “super-beings,” humans would ultimately suffer a bigger separation from each other and create unfairness among the human species such as a stronger and more intelligent being.

I agree with your opinion in how genetic technology could leave a negative impact to our society. I believe the idea of genetic engineering is not natural. We have no idea of the harm that could result from this technology. Genetic engineering is another step in giving humans their desires. I believe that altering the DNA of any life form is not just. Genetically manipulating a life form could put an imbalance in nature and society. No one should have the right to manipulate the genetics of other life forms. The idea of genetic engineering is be consider unethical because it is enforcing animal cruelty. Furthermore, I am appalled that some parent choose their child’s appearance, rather than go through the ‘natural’ process, to prevent bullying and discrimination.

Online technologies are beneficial to the modern world. It can improve a person’s education, business, and helps in everyday life hassles. It has become an essential part of the way that people live and it is very likely that people would be a loss without it. In “Ethics and the New Genetics,” the Dalai Lama claims that to ethically use new technological advancements we need to develop a “moral compass”. Peter Singer, in “Visible Man: Ethics in a World without Secrets,” discusses whether new technology and “openness” makes our lives better, or if the lack of privacy takes away the rights of individuals. Both authors discuss how technology is advancing very rapidly and can significantly have major pros and cons to society. The two authors, however, have different viewpoints in which how the society can determine when technology has become ethical. Dalai Lama is firm believer that technology is evolving so fast that ethics could hardly keep up with it. He addresses how people should have ethical standards when dealing with the internet. Thus, he is directly proving to us how he would want society to ethically determine when and how technology should be used. Yet, on another spectrum, Peter Singer argues that although ethically, internet is invading our privacy, this invasion of privacy is the only way that the public is safe and people should brutally discover the truth about everything but somehow it can cause harm. Peter Singer and Dalai Lama both agree how the new online

“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

When you look at society today, it is plausible to say half of the population is affected by cancer or disease. Now based on the millions of people on this earth, this assumption is not one to be proud of. Day by day and year by year medical advancements have been in affect and so far helping decrease the number of deadly cases of disease. Recently researchers have made a major breakthrough in the field of medicine. Technology has become so advanced that physicians are able to detect disease present in genes inside a fetus before it is completely developed. Because they are now able to identify the gene, it brings up a whole new topic of altering specific genes upon our children to physically enhance them. In most cases, parents would choose to enhance these genes to have athletic or musically talented child. Now whether you think this is ethical or not is up to you however, I will be evaluating three articles on this topic and presenting the argument for each one.

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.

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

Medical professionals today can screen for certain genetic traits (genetic diseases and sex) with in vitro fertilization and preimplantation genetic diagnosis to obtain a healthy child, and reproductive technology continues to improve. With this in mind, the question arises whether sex selection is ethical. Julian Savulescu, Uehiro Professor of Practical Ethics at Oxford University, argues that sex selection is moral, based on his ethical principle of Procreative Beneficence: that “couples (or single reproducers) should select the child, of the possible children they could have, who is expected to have the best life, or at least as good a life as the others, based on the relevant, available information” [Savulescu 1]. Savulescu claims

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.

One of the biggest pictures that are against genetic engineering is that humans are not supposed to play the role of God. DNA is a unique thing to every person. Bioengineering itself involves the very technical aspects of modification, and the enhancement of stem cells or DNA and this process can change the human structure. “The progress of civilization has been having been largely dependent upon the out ‘interference with nature’.”(Encyclopedia of Applied Plant Sciences).

Are Genetically Modified (GM) crops safe for environment? Might organisms and environment be harmed by GM crops?