Genetic Engineering

The topic of gene therapy is a very touchy one in the United States. It seems like just about every single person has their own personal opinion on this subject. Not only does just about ever person have an opinion regarding gene therapy, but the opinions also vary widely from one person to the next. Genetic engineering does not simply deal with changing the variation in genes; it also deals with human cloning, and human eugenics.

The word eugenics is a Greek word that literally means “good birth”. The word was originally used by a scientist by the name of Fancis Galton in 1883 (B&B). Eugenics was meant to positively change the genetic makeup of the world’s population through gene therapy. This is done so by singling out the “good” genes that will later be passed down to the children of the next generation. Negative eugenics tried to take out the “bad” genes through processes such as sterilization. This paper will examine several facets our lives that have been affected by genetic engineering.

On February 23, 1997, the first genetic clone of an adult mammal was born. The mammal was a sheep that was later named Dolly by Ian Wilmut and his team at the Roslin Institute in Edinburgh, Scotland. In “Healthcare Ethics in a Diverse Society,” it goes on to state that Dolly was created from a single cell from her mother’s udder, and was therefore genetically identical to her mother. This was the first time that any mammal was successfully cloned and lived to be seen by the world, as well as a great achievement for the scientific community. (B&B)

The real harm in using the technology is the possibility of creating a utopian society. This would mean that the richest people of the society would have children that are genetically “perfect” with more intelligence, beauty, and athleticism, while the poorest of the society would continue to struggle with despairing disease and genetic ailments. These so called “perfect babies” could later be considered as commodities that would be bought and sold on the market. (B&B)

In 2001, a BBC online news report stated that there were thirty genetically altered humans beings, fifteen of which were born as a result of an experiment conducted in the United States (bbc.co.uk). David Whitehouse, a BBC online science news editor, stated that these children had addition genes that they did not inherit from either parent. Whitehouse went on to say that these extra genes came from altering the children’s germline, or there collection of genes that they were to pass on to their children. By altering the germline, the scientist forever altered the future generation that is to be had by these children (bbc.co.uk).

The ethical issue regarding this is mostly focused on the possibility that the future generation would not like to have altered genes. What would happen if the child grows up and decides that he or she is not happy having altered genes. The person’s autonomy disappears when such procedures are done, and this kind of autonomy is very precious to people.

Another ethical issue regarding this topic is the question of who would benefit from this science. Would it be the everyday person with a chronic illness, or would it be the upper class citizen who wants model-like athletic children. As stated in an online BBC news report “…we don't have the moral right to judge what is and isn't fit to be human,” yet if placed into the wrong hands, this science has the possibility to do just that. In recent history there has been a drastic increase in the number of plastic surgeries that have taken place. If the people who can afford these surgeries can obtain similar results through genetic engineering, who is to say that they won’t? More on this point, who is to be in control of these processes? Should the government have legal restraints on the amount of genetic engineering that a single citizen can make use of, or should there be no constraints what so ever?

Genetic engineering not only deals with altering the genes of mammals and other creatures; it also deals with a variety of plants and crops. There is currently a large ethical issue involving a crop producer, Monsanto, which is currently genetically modifying foods and selling those foods to the general public. In the film “The Future of Food” scientists and farmers discuss the possible negative outcomes from eating Monsanto’s genetically modified foods. Thousands of people have already become gravely ill from these genetically modified foods due to allergies they developed to these foods. According to the World Health Organization, the percentage of the people who have actually become ill from genetically modified foods is below five percent, the public still has a right to know what they are putting into their systems, and if this product will make them sick.

Another problem that was mentioned in the film “The Future of Food” was with what Monsanto, and companies like it, are doing with patented genes that they have modified. These companies have gone on to seek legal action against farmers who previously bought the modified seeds and chose to replant the seeds after harvest, which is something farmers have been doing for centuries. The film goes on to say that in order to curb these actions, the companies have altered their seeds to be sterile so that the farmers will be forced to buy new seeds each harvest season.

According to the USDA, it is required to label any foods that have been genetically modified, yet I have personally not seen a single label thus far. I purposely went to Safeway in search of these labels, yet left the store without any results. I do not believe that the store is free of genetically modified foods, yet I do believe that the manufacturer does a good job a masking these labels.

Overall the topic of genetic engineering is a very important topic that is often debated. There is a lot to say regarding this issue and I do not believe that debate is going to end any time soon. Just as with stem cell research, genetic engineering is a very touchy subject that many do not believe in. There are benefits to the research, yet I believe that the risk of creating “super babies” is to create to treat this lightly.

Work Sited

10 Oct. 2007

<Http://online.sfsu.edu/%7Erone/GEessays/engineerhumans.html.>

10 Oct. 2007

<http://online.sfsu.edu/%7Erone/GEessays/gebabies.html>

10 Oct. 2007

<http://www.gspjournal.com/> Peter M. Hollingsworth

10 Oct. 2007

<http://jme.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/33/2/87?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&author1=Mameli&andorexactfulltext=and&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&resourcetype=HWCIT>

10 Oct. 2007

<http://online.sfsu.edu/%7Erone/GEessays/GEchildren.htm>

10 Oct. 2007