Genetic Enhancement and Politics Since the beginning of organized government there has always been a clash between science and politics. Whether it is as complicated as a new drug's detainment of federal approval or whether it is as commonplace as the social acceptance of a new medical procedure, politics has performed an integral part in the formation of science; this integrated unit is what greatly affects most of the society at large. Thus, it is no surprise the scientific discussion of genetic engineering is peppered with political rhetoric. Before entering into a discussion of genetics and politics, a few scientific definitions are essential to fully understand the arguments which will be presented. First, genetic engineering is the manipulation of heredity or the hereditary material; its goal is to "replace the activity of a defective gene by activating a dormant gene which has a similar function" (Suzuki & Knudtson, 135). There are two types of cells involved when discussing genetic engineering, somatic cells and germ-line cells. The first, somatic cells, are also known as "body" cells for they are short-lived and bounded by the life span of the individual patient. These "body" cells are not used in reproduction, and therefore not considered eugenic. For clarification purposes, eugenic is the "science which deals with all the influences tat improve and develop the inborn qualities of a race to the utmost advantage" (Suzuki & Knudtson, 213). The second type of cell associated with genetic engineering is the germ-line cell. Germ-line cells, also known as the reproductive cells, are passed on through the reproductive cycles. Since this type of cell has the ability to permanently alter a specific char... ... middle of paper ... ...re Vol. 374: "Pope condemns `immoral' embryo research." 6 April 1995; 489. Fletcher, John C. Introduction to the Virginia ELSI Project; "Preparing for the New Genetics: Education of Professionals;" University of Virginia Press, Charlottesville, VA. Gavaghan, Helen. Nature Vol. 374: "Gene therapy approval may be rocky road for industry." 16 March 1995; 202. Rogers, Arthur. The Lancet Vol. 344: "European bioethics convention stalled again." 9 Julty 1994; 118. Singer, Peter and Deane Wells. Making Babies: The New Science and Ethics of Conception. Charles Scribner's Sons, NY; 1985. Suzuki, David and Peter Knudtson. Genethics: The Clash Between the New Genetics and Human Values. Harvard University Press; Cambridge, Mass; 1989. Wheale, Peter R. and Ruth M. McNally. Genetic Engineering: Catastrophe or Utopia? St. Martin's Press, NY; 1988.
...nd an athlete. These meetings are a big hit and I feel relieved that they know I care about them as individuals outside of athletics.
Wheeler, Sondra Ely. "Ethical Issues in Germline Genetic Engineering." Christian Social Action. Oct. 1999: 4-6. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 17 Feb. 2014.
...Baddeley (1966) study of encoding in the short term memory and long term memory supports the MSM model on the mode of processing such that words are processed on recall and both models share the same opinion that processing does influence recall. Finally, the MSM model of memory states that all information is stored in the long term memory, however, this interpretation contrasts with that of Baddeley (1974) who argue that we store different types of memories and it is unlikely that they occur only in the LTM store. Additionally, other theories have recognised different types of memories that we experience, therefore it is debatable that all these different memories occur only in the long-term memory as presumed by the multi-store model which states the long term memory store as with unlimited capacity, in addition it also fails to explain how we recall information.
Today, genetic engineering is a powerful and potentially very dangerous tool if in the wrong hands. It can completely change a product that can be very useful, or on the contrary, it is extremely harmful to the people.
Throughout the course of human history, new technological advancements have always created opposing views, and conflict between the different groups that hold them. Today, one of the greatest technological controversies is over the morals and practicality of genetically modifying crops and animals. Reasons for doing so vary from making them more nutritious to making plants more bountiful to allowing organisms to benefit humans in ways never before possible. Genetic engineering is a process in which genes within the DNA of one organism are removed and placed into the DNA of another, a “…reshuffling of genes…from one species to another” (Steinbrecher qtd. in Epstein). However, uncertainty about the practice has resulted in several groups who argue for its future. Some believe that genetic engineering should be encouraged to its greatest potential, others argue that the cons of genetic engineering greatly outweigh any benefits and feel it should be entirely banned, while a final group feels genetic engineering should be continued but only under much more strict moderation and regulation.
Genetic engineering is the modification of an organism’s genetic composition by artificial means, often involving the transfer of specific traits, or genes, from one organism into a plant or animal of an entirely different species. Genetic engineering offers the promise of such things as cures for disease and the creation of a better world. However, although some people believe that humans will be able to use the powers given by new biotechnologies to create an enlightened society, it is more likely that they will be used for destructive purposes. “If genetic engineers can discover how to redesign human beings, the result will be people with the worst characteristics of humanity. At that point, equipped with the new powers conferred by biotechnology, we will be what [Russian Communist leader Vladimir] Lenin could only dream of becoming—engineers of souls (Gray).” “Humanity will be unable to reach a global consensus on the uses of genetic engineering, and the development of science and technology will continue to be controlled by economic and military interests, as they have been throughout history. The insidious weapons created through biotechnology will be used in wars of unimaginable brutality (Gray).”
Over the past few years, genetic engineering has come a long way from its roots. What spawned as just a project for understanding has now become quite powerful. An article written by Michael Riess aided me in gaining some knowledge of the ethical dilemmas faced in the field of genetic engineering.
Children find it hard to make sense of reality, organizing the chaos and reconstructing normal. They see death and grief like the loss of meaning that is dependent on a relationship. As the child and adolescents grief, they seem to be constructing new reality and normality. As the teenagers and children grow, they are always in the business of establishing and making meaning to their life. This is their basic life and death, and loss of the loved ones disrupts this development. As they work to create their sense of self, at the same time existing as dependents, thus the loss, due to death is often devastating to them and their development in general.
Savulescu, Julian. “Genetic Interventions and the Ethics of Human Beings.” Readings in the Philosophy of Technology. Ed. David Kaplan. 2nd ed. Lanham: Roman & Littlefield, 2009. 417-430.
Advances in the field of genetic engineering could mean progress on an unprecedented scale for all civilizations." -Gail Dutton To others, this new technology borders on the realm of immorality, and is an omen of the danger to come. They are firmly convinced that this human intervention into nature is unethical, and will bring about the destruction of mankind. " the promise of genetic engineering as a tool of medicine is matched only by the threat it would pose to human society and civilization." -Ann E. Weiss Rapid advances in medical science have fuelled the question of bioethics.
Imagine a utopian society which does not have all the health risks which are prevalent today. Continue to imagine many of the world’s problems, some of which include world hunger, sickness, and overpopulation disappear. In reality, many people are affected by these predicaments, especially children and the elderly. Without these devastating problems, premature death would become a thing of the past. There would no longer be starving children or chronically ill people. The cure to cancer and other harmful diseases can be found. There is a possible answer to all these problems which will be developed in the near future. These dilemmas may be fixed by a method known as genetic engineering, a branch of biotechnology. Biotechnology is using biology for an industry and genetic engineering is changing the characteristics of an organism by modifying its DNA. These organisms are also commonly known as a GMO, a genetically modified organism. Through this technique, more nutritious crops can be created which can benefit society. Even though in reality, this method may be hard to believe, it may be a possibility in the near future. However, many people disagree with the practices of this science and are often a target in political debates. The act of genetically modifying foods has been thought to being dangerous to peoples’ health along with decreasing biodiversity. Politics influence the research and development of biotechnology through the many differing perspectives of bioethics, the question of how to support a growing human population, the treatment of patients using controversial methods, and the economic impact is has nationally and globally.
Prior research into the structure of memory have suggested that memory is comprised up from three separate stores each performing a specific and relatively inflexible function (in Passer, Smith, Holt, Bremner, Sutherland, & Vliek, 2009). That is the multi-store model, developed by Atkinson & Shiffrin (1968 in Passer et al., 2009) who claim a sensory memory store, short-term memory store (STM) and a long-term memory store (LTM) (in Passer et al., 2009). Although to some, the multi store model provided an adequate explanation of memory processes, it was regarded as being too simplistic since short-term and long- term memories were far more complicated than originally thought (in Craik & Lockhart, 1972). In essence, the multi-store model stresses the importance of rehearsal to long term memory. While rehearsal is crucial as a means of transferring information from the STM to the LTM, this is not necessarily always the case (in Atkinson & Shiffrin, 1968 in Passer et al., 2009). To this, sceptics challenged the idea of information being transferred from the STM to the LTM by active rehearsal since subsequent research has indicated that information had the potential to be stored in the LTM without it being actively rehearsed (in Atkinson & Shiffrin, 1968). In response to the difficulties and weaknesses presented in the multi-store model, an alternative model attempting to explain memory processes in a more precise manner was developed by Craik & Lockhart (1972 in Craik & Lockhart, 1972). Their theory of levels of processing proposes that different methods of encoding information into the memory will subsequently have an effect on recollection of information (in Craik & Lockhart, 1972). According to the levels of process...
Scientists and the general population favor genetic engineering because of the effects it has for the future generation; the advanced technology has helped our society to freely perform any improvements. Genetic engineering is currently an effective yet dangerous way to make this statement tangible. Though it may sound easy and harmless to change one’s genetic code, the conflicts do not only involve the scientific possibilities but also the human morals and ethics. When the scientists first used mice to practice this experiment, they “improved learning and memory” but showed an “increased sensitivity to pain.” The experiment has proven that while the result are favorable, there is a low percentage of success rate. Therefore, scientists have concluded that the resources they currently own will not allow an approval from the society to continually code new genes. While coding a new set of genes for people may be a benefitting idea, some people oppose this idea.
Today, Americans are faced with the increasing change of technology in our everyday life. Sometimes the change happens and we do not realize how it affects our lives. I think it is always a good idea to talk to someone that is older than yourself, like your grandparents to remind you of the times in their younger years. Hopefully, that will open your eyes to the changes we face in this generation and the generation to come. In this chapter, the author explores the relationship of changing technology to changes in both the environment and social institutions.
Lipkin, M., and Rowley, P.T., Eds., Genetic responsibility: on choosing our children's genes, (New York, Plenum Press, 1974)