Is gene therapy a necessity in today’s age or a disaster waiting to happen? Gene therapy, or genetic modification, is the act of deleting, inserting, or substituting genetic code in one’s DNA. Although there are hopes that this kind of operation will overall improve the health of many, such as curing genetic diseases, infertility, and preventing miscarriages, the possible negative outcomes of gene therapy outweigh the possible favorable outcomes. With this in mind, one question arises: is gene therapy the way to go? Gene therapy should not be pursued because it is seen as morally/religiously wrong, it could create a new genetic problem that cannot be fixed, and the possibility of abusing this new technology.
One reason gene modification should not be pursued is because it is a controversial procedure. Many people believe that genetic modification is morally unjust because it can be classified as “playing God”. Popular religions, such as Christianity and Catholicism, believe in the higher being of God. They believe God created everything, including all living and nonliving organisms. Because of these beliefs, they view the act of tampering with genetic code and DNA is counted as tampering with God’s creation, or “playing God”. Along with this, many people strongly oppose of the way scientists test this operation. To test gene therapy, scientists take a genetically modified human embryo and let it grow up to seven days, with the assurance that the embryo will be terminated
Genetic modification is basically building an offspring based off of what you want and don’t want. Conceiving a human being is not like going to Subway and telling them what you do and don’t want on your sandwich. Each and every person was created to be perfectly imperfect. I believe genetic modification should never be permissible under any circumstances. Picking and choosing whether you want tall or short, blonde hair or brown hair, blue
The advantages of gene therapy far out weight their disadvantages. People have lost their lives due to gene therapy are a few compared to the people that have got a second chance at life because of gene therapy. It gives
Now there are some people that are strongly against this.There are many people that believe scientist are ‘playing God’ by changing the gene of people.But genetically engineering isn't just for modifying humans but also for curing some disease.It's called gene therapy and it had cured some disease for example Cancer, Aids and much more.It’s better for us to act than to not act at
In 1990, gene therapy allowed for a girl to no longer have a weakened immune system through manipulated cells. The new gene replaced the mutated gene, allowing her to produce ADA and therefore boost her immune system. In the past 25 years, over 2000 new therapies have been approved to “cure” leukemia and rare disorders. In the future, we may even be able to cure HIV. However, is this gene manipulation ethical? From a scientist’s view, genetic engineering may eliminate disorders and some diseases. It would prevent life-impairing disorders such as Trisomy 13 and Huntington’s, and it would cure certain cancers. But, from a social view, is it moral to change someone’s DNA? Will gene manipulation allow the rich to “build a child” with the ideal characteristics and widen the class gap? Other questions also arise. How are we to support the growing population with our limited food supply? Will everyone eventually become the perfect being and become identical, resulting in no variation? And with this lack of variation, could a single disease wipe out
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
I was destined to be an educator from the age of 14 when I first started teaching first grade Sunday School. Two years later I began teaching an after school Astronomy program offered through the school district to third and sixth grades. This lead to a volunteer position in a fifth grade classroom assisting students with reading. Before I went to college, I became a pre-school teacher. Twenty years later, I am seeking a new challenge, which has led me to apply for the Early Childhood Education and Development Instructor position with Metropolitan Community College.
For my ethnographic essay I chose to study the life of police officers who work in the City of Saginaw. Today’s society is consumed by false statements and false social media articles. There are thousands of articles, television commercials, and websites about police brutality, race problems, and rarely seeing anything good about police officers. Lately it seems as though society is more concerned about police brutality than actual positive affects police officers have on society. With all of the things you hear on social media, and fake Facebook articles there are many different things that need to be taken into consideration. What are the positive affects police officers have on the world and in your
Although the intentions of genetically modifying DNA in human embryos is aimed to rid society of genetic defects, it is still essential that this scientific discovery remains ethical. In an article on NPR.org, Rob Stein describes an experiment that scientists have been conducting in which they modify human DNA in order to eliminate life threatening genetic diseases that could be passed on for generations (Stein). In Portland, at Oregon Health & Science University, Paula Amato, an associate professor of obstetrics and gynecology, explains “that their work is aimed at preventing terrible diseases, not creating genetically enhanced people...much more research is needed to confirm the technique is safe and effective before anyone tries to make a baby this way”(Stein). Because scientists like Amato realize their research is controversial, they are taking every precaution to assure what they are doing is morally correct, they are not intending to corrupt society. Although their intentions are good, it is their job to make sure their research is being used in an ethical way. If not, millions of people, who are already obsessed with the idea of perfection, will be able to do something about
I believe that there is nothing wrong with the therapeutic gene modification when it involves somatic cells. I think that it is our moral responsibility to do what we can to help save the lives of people who are suffering. The doctors who would be proscribing the treatment have all made a hippocratic oath so it would be their moral duty to follow through on using this particular treatment. Therapeutic gene manipulation with somatic cells would break any moral, ethical, or legal laws. But the other forms of genetic manipulation are a little tricky. Therapeutic gene manipulation of germ cells can be a useful treatment of disease but its effect plays a role in a larger scope then just the patient alone. I think that it poses a greater risk to the whole of humanity of we allow changes to germ cells and future generations. It would open the door to all other types of genetic manipulation. So rules have to be put in place so no abuse of medical treatment occurs. Finally there should not be any type of enhancement gene modification occurring. I think that it will overall produce more harm then good. It is not a medical procedure that is used to help people who are suffering it would simply be a mechanism that would only play a negative role in human development, simultaneously breaking many ethical rules along the way. Genetic
“Philanthropy is almost the only virtue which is sufficiently appreciated by mankind. Nay, it is greatly overrated; and it is our selfishness which overrates it.” — Henry David Thoreau, “Economy,” Walden
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
Human genetic engineering and eugenics have been a largely controversial topic over the past decades. Eugenics can be popularly defined as the science of improving and enhancing a human population or person through manipulating the human genes, selective breeding, and sterilization. The end goal and desired result of eugenics is to basically create a human race or people with more desirable biological, physical, or psychological traits. Eugenics and genetic modification is a current, pressing subject; in April 2015, a group of Chinese researchers, used a new gene-editing technology, called CRISPR to “[tinker] with the genomes of human embryos” (Adams). Presently, according to CQ Researcher, “New genetic technologies allow scientists to delete a mutant gene and insert a healthy one, which…has the potential to eliminate inherited diseases, such as cystic fibrosis.” However, these techniques have only been used on embryos belonging to laboratory animals. The big question here is whether or not science and technology are crossing an ethical boundary by using these techniques and performing genetic modification on human embryos. Do humans have the right to “play God” and alter nature?
Altering a person’s genes create an ethical issue that needs to be thought out. Altering a person’s genes could help prevent disease but without laws being in place for the extent of using this alteration, parents would be playing god with genetics (scientists seek ban). Not only would parents be playing god, but the most fundamental issue is how we will view humanity in the future and “whether we are going to take the dramatic step of modifying our own germline and in a sense take control of our genetic destiny” said George Q. Daley who is a stem cell expert at Boson Children’s hospital. (Scientists seek ban). Even though scientist want to know more about the genes ethics is important to them. Volti talks about how if this is available to
Scientists have projected there to be many benefits to gene therapy in the near future. For starters, gene therapy could cure diseases like cancer, aids, as well as thousands of genetic disorders (Will). Sara Goering, a philosopher concerned with biomedical ethics, argues throughout “Gene Therapies and the Pursuit of a Better Human” that germline therapy could mean disorders would be eliminated for good, leading to the relief of pain for many. It poses the possibility to eliminate human suffering at the root, and in turn, better humanity. Throughout society, people already focus on ‘enhancing’ their kids through vaccines and vitamins. Kids are out through surgeries because they are believed to be what is best. Goering points out that because of people’s willingness for treatments like this, there really are not many moral concerns prevalent (Goering 403-40). For many diseases, treatments that people already feel comfortable with will not work as effectively (“List”). Currently, there are no real cures for genetic disorders besides replacing defective
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,