The Pros And Cons Of Genetic Engineering

On the last years, genetic technology have been improving. The research carried out in this area are focused on the early diagnosis of diseases. Moreover, manipulation of genes in the future provides a critical tool for eliminating fatal diseases to humans. Also humans will be able to manipulate genes from birth. But the real question is although can be perform it, we allow it? Everything possible is ethically permissible? Some dramatic demonstrations of genetic modification have been made with mice and other animals, however, evidence in humans are generally considered outside the ethical boundaries. Gregory Stock, director of the Program on Medicine, Technology, and Society at UCLA and author of Redesigning Humans, in his article “Choosing Our Genes” (2012) argues the use of technology to change humans genetic in order to avoid imperfections or diseases. Stock shows genetic engineering as a very useful technology and that applying it on the future to humans, positive results they will gain. Stocks article is effective, since he gives good reasons why using genetic technology would provide several benefits that people wish to have.

You are probably familiar with GMO’s (genetically modified organism) and scientifically modified food that has had its DNA changes. There has been debate on GMO’s has been going on for a few decades, whether GMO are safe and even ethical. However, there is another debate that far surpasses GMOs and has a potential to radically shake society: the issue of genetically modifying humans. Changing our DNA could limit health issue or create a new Frankenstein’s monster among humans. Frankenstein had the wrong intent when he set out to create his monster. He only cared about himself and advancing his future. If Genetic engineering is sought after to just create something new there will be another monster. However, genetic can be safe and ethical if its intent and use is for medical purposes. We need to help the sick in society and one way to do that is with genetic engineering. With this purpose genetic engineering is not overstepping our authority like Frankenstein did.

How far would you go to save human lives and to progress society for those in need? The benefits of genetic engineering have shown to outweigh the ethical and environmental consequences associated within the field. Genetic Engineering has shown to provide major benefits in the field of medicine and agriculture but is faced with extreme criticism and backlash, specifically on the basis of ethics.

Why are humans stuck how they are? Why do some have lethal flaws? Why do theses flaws exist? The correct answer is they don’t have to: Human genetic engineering can solve some of theses lethal issues now and can solve more in the future. It can help the next generation experience what everyone strives to achieve. Human genetic engineering research should continue because it can save people's lives, improve human’s lives and improve the lives of the next generation of children.

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.

Humans desire perfection in everything, even if that means crossing the boundaries of natural life. A new looming untested technology, human genetic modification, raises questions as to whether it will advance human society or cause inconsistencies in the human genome. Essentially, this controversy will effect everyone since it is still early but it is an upcoming topic. Genetic engineering specifically effecting the next generations. Commentators on this debate argue that it will promote the positives of scientific advancements, but others dispute that this raises strong ethical concerns. Genetic engineering has the possibility to cure diseases while furthering modern medicine, but humans would abuse the process by creating a competitive

Every living thing has genes. Genes are a set of instructions for an organism that determine what characteristics that organism will have. The genes for an organism lie in strands of DNA called chromosomes. Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes in their body (Medical News Today/OI). Recently, scientists have found a way to modify these genes for certain reasons. These modifications are called genetic engineering. Forty percent of these modifications tend to fall in the category of cosmetic enhancements (OI). Meanwhile, other modifications are used to help a human’s experience of chronic diseases and pain. If genetic engineering is used to reduce specific, serious diseases, then I am in favor of it; however, if it is used for cosmetic enhancements, I am against it.

Genetic engineering has been the subject of controversy since it first started. There is a lot of fear and concern surrounding the possibilities it presents. It is difficult to make ethical decisions about genetic engineering because if offers opportunities to solve many genetic problems such as hereditary diseases. The consequences are positive and negative, but there is no way to determine which will have a greater impact. Genetic engineering could lead to new treatments for hereditary diseases, but it could also have long-term adverse effects. Although there are benefits to genetic engineering, the negative side cannot be overlooked.

While the benefits of gene editing are immense, there are still multiple risk factors to be considered. Nearly every type of procedure in the medical field has at least some sort of risk element, but the fact that genetic editing alters the baseline for every single intricate part of the human body poses a far greater risk of damage to the patient. Furthermore, it would be extremely difficult to locate damages caused to the patient after the procedure has been completed because of the millions of cells that make up the body. It is of utmost certainty that genetic engineering will not be an ethical solution to genetic disorders until it has been further developed. Ethical concerns, set standards, and viability all need to be tackled first before gene editing can be a usable tool. None of the articles found for this report provided substantial evidence that gene editing or genetic engineering is ready for any type of real-world application. In fact, many of them provided evidence that it is not ready for usage. Regardless, there are certainly many roadblocks that genetic engineering has yet to overcome. Until it has been proved to be viable and safe for general usage, genetic editing does not appear to be ethically justified for usage in humans in its current

With the world of technology making advances so quickly we sometimes forget our own limits as a mortal species. Genetic therapy has the potential to save millions of people from genetic mutations and protein deficiencies. This paper will go on to argue that the Utilitarianism approach in ethics shows all the right things about genetic therapy. The first-time gene therapy was used on a patient dates back in the 1990s when a four-year-old girl had adenosine deaminase deficiency. With this disease, her white blood cells were not doing their job and left her prone to infections. Through the power of genetic therapy some of her white blood cells were extracted, altered to produce adenosine deaminase, and reinjected. This treatment not only saved her life from dangerous diseases but also began a world of opportunities in the medical field. The ethical issue is, is it right or wrong to have that much power to alter genes and to what degree you should be able to modify them. Should people live out their futures the ways they are born or should they live life to the fullest and get the genetic treatments?

The debate on whether human genetic engineering should be researched and used as the main alternative solution to disease have been going on since the creation of the "human genetic engineering" phenomenon. The ethical question is clear: should money be invested in human genetic engineering and should we research it at all, even if it is formally criticized by all monotheistic religions? The ethical principles in conflict are beneficence (people with fatal diseases could be cured) and non-maleficence (undermines the will of God, according to religious groups and in addition, there is no guarantee of successful results). My stance on this debated topic is that human genetic engineering should not be funded or researched, as there is no 100% guarantee that it will be successful, and in addition, I am a very religious person, and in my opinion, the body that a person has is a gift of God, and it should not be changed in any ways. However, there are still thousands of people with fatal diseases who have no hope for surviving, and human genetic engineering could serve as the only hope for them. There are many sides that can be affected either positively or negatively if human genetic engineering is funded and researched, however, the major stakeholders are primarily the government of US and private companies who fund all the experiments, people with fatal diseases who hope for any type of cure., and the science in general, because if

Genetic engineering has become a rising controversial issue in the world today because of its possible positive uses but further more its likely serious consequences and downsides. To understand the controversy we must first understand exactly what human genetic engineering is. Genetic engineering is the manipulation of the human genome to alter or get rid of undesirable genes; these include negative physical traits along with health related genetic problems such as disease and disability. Potentially, it could allow us to decide and design exactly which traits a newborn would inherit before birth.

This development has made the speculation of genetic engineering a reality, raising the question of whether or not it should be allowed. This is also just the beginning of what will be possible with genetic engineering of a human. Eventually, whole diseases could be eradicated, diseases such as alzheimer's or down syndrome. But as the technology would advance, it would make genetic engineering cheaper, and more available to the public, which raises the issue of people using the technology to create a

In this paper, I will argue that genetic engineering in humans should be considered ethically permissible. Genetic engineering is already widely used in modifying foods for our everyday consumption. Genetically engineered foods has aided in the business of crops and livestock, making the plants and animals that we eat plentiful and more sustainable. Thus proving for the advancement of society as a whole making genetically engineered foods a desirable resource. Genetic engineering in humans is also proving to be an important utility for the progress of future societies.

Although still a very debated subject, genetic enhancement has been around for many years with the genetic modification of crops. Just this year, researchers from Sun Yat-sen University in Guangzhou were the first to modify the genomes of human embryos in order to find a way to eliminate genetic diseases. The researchers used the gene editing technique CRISPR/Cas9, which, in layman’s terms, cuts out the bad genes and replaces the gaps with healthy genes. While this is a major scientific advancement, there are many ethical reasons why people might be weary of this new development.