The Pros And Cons Of Gene Therapy

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

With new technology it allows us to further research to attempt to benefit humanity and the environment people live in. As well as the genetic engineering playing a positive role in helping with “agriculture, aquaculture, bioremediation, and environmental management, both in developed and developing countries. However, deliberate or inadvertent releases of genetically engineered organisms into the environment could have negative ecological impacts under some circumstances”(Coker 24). With the engineering of plants and medicines, there seems to be no harm done if something were to go wrong and hurt the plant or the medicine just doesn’t turn out right. There comes a point when scientists cross a line and that is when they start to create designer babies. With designer babies, it gives the mother and the father the ability to change and enhance the outcome of their child. The parents are given the opportunity to improve the way their child's “eyesight could be greatly improved, perhaps even allowing [them] to see wavelengths of light that are currently ‘invisible’ to us” (Coker 26). Having a child with not only enhanced eyesight, but with them having your choice of hair color, the eye color you have chosen, or allowing them to have enhanced strength people are interrupting the natural way a child is supposed to be created. A child who has been genetically engineered to have enhanced strength is a child how going to ruin the way sports are played fairly. A child who has been born naturally and has had nothing altered about him will be no match against a genetically engineered one. Some people would take into consideration that the religious church would believe that genetically engineering anything is not moral. Inside “the moral evaluation of germ line cell therapy is different. Whatever genetic modifications are effected on the germ cells of a person will be transmitted to any potential

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

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 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

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?

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

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

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

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

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

Many parents worry about protecting their children, so they would like to know if the process for genetic modification is safe enough. Genetic engineering also raises the question of compliance. “Genetically altered babies will have no say in what 's being done to their bodies before birth, and consequently will have to live with whatever happens as a result of genetic tampering” (Bird). The process may take over 40 testing on humans or more just to get it right. I believe we shouldn’t allow people to risk their healthy on a risky project. Everybody has a different immune system so how do we know it will work the same for us all. We aren’t provided with a percentage of people whom gone through the process and succeeded. Unborn babies can end up with deformation or maybe death, so we should have reassurance for a positive outcome. There can also be the possibility by removing one disease it can cause an even more powerful one. By having a small portion of a disease it can be balancing out and not cause any health problems. We wont know how the body will react to no diseases

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

This is why I created an online survey and sent it to all of my friends here at Marlborough College, to see what people generally thought about genetic manipulation. The first question I asked was very simple, it was: “Were you aware that the manipulation of genes from IVF embryos has been allowed in the UK?” I got two clear answers- 60% no; 40% yes. This worried me, because not many people seemed to be aware of the massive decision that had taken place, which could very well affect them in the future. The next question I asked got much more variety of answers than the last one. I asked: “Do you think that gene manipulation could potentially be considered immoral?” These are the responses I

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,