Why Should Biomedical Engineers Have To Consider These Types Of Issues

not be allowed because it does more harm then good. They may be right, but once genetic enhancement is available, it will generate a lower cost for the government to enhance their citizens, and not only for the government, for the parents this will be an avaible option to give their children a better and secure future. In fact, genetic enhancement would give the opportunity to end with discrimination by leting scientist enhance our genes. Genetic enhancement would give everyone the opportunity to succeed and compete at the same level. There are many natural disadvantages that we cannot compete with, for example when someone is faster or more inteligent. Genetic enhancement will eradicate those disadvantages and give the oportunity to have the same level of all the capabilities and this way have equal

The evolution of technology has been hand in hand with the human subjugation of earth, but the question persists, when does the use of technology go too far? Advances in medical science have increased the average human lifespan and improved the quality of life for individuals. Medical science and biology are steadily arriving at new ways to alter humans by the use of advanced genetic alteration. This technology gives rise to the question of how this new technology ought to be used, if at all. The idea of human enhancement is a very general topic, since humans are constantly “enhancing” themselves through the use of tools. In referring to human enhancement, I am referring specifically to the use of genetic intervention prior to

In an ever-increasing technological world, many scientists and researchers are now trying to revolutionize the human body through genetic enhancement. Genetic enhancement is defined as the transfer of genetic material intended to modify one or many non-pathological human traits.

To really understand the world in today’s debate about genetic modification, you must know the difference between genetic modification and enhancement. Modification is the ability scientists and doctors have where they can change your child’s genes to help cure diseases they may have, while enhancement is used to create a smarter, faster, and stronger human being. These two uses of engineering get people confused because they think of them as the same. That’s why you must

The Case for Enhancing People, the author Ronald Baily does not believe using medical tools to enhance humans is morally troubling. He believes that enhancements will only help people live better lives. (Kaebnick p 145)The author defines an enhancement as a procedure that improves functioning and increases the capabilities of human flourishing. I do not think that humans should try to play the role of God and do things that should be left to Him. But I also believe that God has given us the knowledge to discover these technologies and procedures that allow us to lengthen or improve our quality of life. The history of the last two centuries has shown that technological advance has been far more advantageous than harmful for humankind. One

Thesis: While genetic enhancement allows humans to improve our talents, genetic enhancement would lower appreciation for human life and talents and overall it would be detrimental to the human condition to partake in genetic enhancement.

My first argument against Genetic enhancement is about the safety of the technology used. Is it safe to use? There are several safety concerns about the technology, all of which lie within the physical alteration of the gene. Genes are very specific and will only work correctly in certain ways. Although scientists may know a fair deal about genes, do they know about the consequences if their technology were to fail? One of the risks directly involved with their technology is the technique of introducing a gene at a random place in the genome. By doing this the gene could interrupt another sequence of genes that are vital for survival. It could also alter the effect that the gene has. The gene might have the effect wanted, such as an increased intellect, but it may also introduce an unwanted effect. This became apparent in 2001 when Joe Tsien genetically altered mice to have a high memory capacity. The mice were able to learn very quickly and were able to retain more information but at what cost? The mice also had an extremely high sensitivity to pain: something that a human being wouldn’t be able to live with. Do you think that’s fair? Would you be willing to sacrifice your quality of life for an enhanced learning capacity? I know I wouldn’t. But what is more unfair is that the embryos, who are the ones who are going to be enhanced, don’t have a choice in the matter. What about the children’s

Genetic enhancement is a debated subject in the scientific and social communities. Some authors, such as Russell Powell, Guy Kahane, and Julian Savulescu claim that selective breeding led to the development of genetic enhancement. Selective breeding is an attempt to bring about desired traits in plants and animals; it is similar to genetic enhancement because both attempt to perfect a certain species (2012). However, selective breeding is not a desired method of genetic enhancement in humans because it relies on sexual aspects. As defined by Chris Gyngell, enhancement is the increase of specific traits (2012). Using Gyngell’s definition of enhancement, genetic enhancement can be defined as the increase of desirable traits in a human being. While scientists may perform tests on animals to assess the safety of genetic enhancements, the goal of genetic enhancement is to perfect the human species. Michael Fuchs, Chris Gyngell, Robert Sparrow, and Russell Powell, Guy Kahane, and Julian Savuescu explore the potential benefits genetic enhancement could create, such as the enhancement of intelligence or creating a more moral society, and the potential risks, such as creating generational barriers or a new species of humans, it may have on future and current generations while discussing how to explore a safe future in it (2010; 2012; 2012; 2012).

Before the 21st century, the world's best scientists and researchers met in Paris to discuss the possibility of human augmentation. Plastic surgery and implants were becoming more common as the century was ending. The conference discussed the ethical and moral quandaries of human augmentation only being made available to wealthy, developed countries. It also discussed the “need” and “want” in human augmentation, and the potential for human augmentation over the next century. After the discussions, The Code of Ethics on Human Augmentation was showed to the

Starting with a master's degree, biomedical engineers are often expected to design and develop new medical devices of all kinds; ranging from the internal, such as artificial organs, to the external, such as prosthetic limbs or features. These devices are generally integrated with the body. Biomedical engineers are also responsible for designing devices such as surgical lasers, and any and all equipment used nowadays in the medical field. Duties outside of design and the production of equipment are also extensive. They are required to describe a method on how to use these devices to the best of their abilities, including therapy for a patient learning to use, for example, a prosthetic leg, all the way to teaching doctors how to use a new piece of equipment, and what it is capable of. Before a biomedical engineer can actually make the equipment, they must first prototype and test the equipment. They study, test, improve, and test again the equipment they design until the quality is up to standards, and performs as

Elon Musk, an inventor, once said, “If something is important enough you should try, even if the probable outcome is failure.” In the medical world, doctors have to be satisfied with their outcomes, no matter the circumstance. After they research a new topic and establish a base for a new invention, they work hard in order to make it perfect before using it in a human body. The doctors make many improvements to their invention and test it in every possible situation. Following the tests, the doctors will implant their invention into a human body for the first time. They do not know if there will be any complications during this surgery or if it will be a success, but they have to live with the initial result and improve on it for future transplants. For example, the first artificial heart transplant was a surprising success, but the surgery had several complications, which led to improvements on all artificial hearts.

By definition, biomedical engineering, or more affectionately known as bioengineering, is the use of engineering philosophies in correlation with the fields of biology and health care. It can range from from electrical and mechanics to the chemistry side of the equation. Examples of this include, but are not limited to, prosthetic limbs, lab grown organs, and implanted devices such as pace makers and insulin pumps. Though the actual foundation of bioengineering is unclear, the earliest example “is a wood and leather prosthetic toe found on a three thousand year old Egyptian mummy” (Lucas, 2004). Some noteworthy individuals include John Charnley 's artificial hip replacement(1961), Wilson Greatbatch 's internal cardiac pacemaker(1970), and Charles Hufnagel 's artificial heart valve(1960).

Human enhancement is a ubiquitous aspect of our society that “adds” to an individuals life. What humans classify as enhancement is not fixed nor ever-changing, but rather a form of the human desire to improve. As long as humans have the will and means to live, enhancements will continue to be the seed of many controversies and the stem of new scientific discoveries that will change our society. For this reason, human enhancement is a necessity. A necessity, however, that must be monitored.

Many disregard the opposed based on the fact that genetic engineering is seen as a sophisticated form, given that they are presented with manageable risks and great benefits that should be further explored. There are three moral implications that need to be addressed with the growth of biotechnology. The ethical concerns, which are both secular and religious, the benefits versus harmful consequences and the justices of these enhancements. Well first touch on the secular and religious concerns of genetic engineering. Religious parties object to genetic engineering because they see life as being sacred and shouldn’t being altered by human hands, and is seen as playing with God. It violates the dignity of human kind and other forms of life that are having their DNA altered. These objections are based off of the existence of the power of one to defy and the secular objection is assuming that having a life in its natural state, not being altered is inviolable. This claim is sometimes disagreed by others due to the fact of evolutionary processes. By altering a life, their sacredness is being altered, which violates ones creator. Also genetic disorders that are uncontrollable and inflict self-mutilation such as Lesch-Nyhan syndrome, present altering of one’s self without being modified. It is sometime rebutted that what if one believes there is no creator and that simply things are just there. That

Human augmentation is any attempt to temporarily or permanently overcome the current limitations of the human body through natural or artificial means. The fusion of genetic and mechanical technologies will allow humanity as a whole to overcome the limitations of our own biology. Human augmentation or human 'enhancement ' is not only an inevitable next step in our human evolution but it is also morally sound to encourage this development. I believe that humanity will not only accept this, but that we have already taken the steps to embrace it.