More handpicked essays just for you.
Advantages and disadvantages of genetic manipulation
Advantages and disadvantages of genetic manipulation
Effect of genetic modification
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Are We Turning into Gods? The Power of Genetic Engineering
Imagine that we could prevent disease by simply implementing the correct gene into someone's DNA sequence. Many diseases are primarily the result of an individual's genetic composition . . . Using genetic interventions, the hope is to add to, delete from, or alter a person’s genetic constitution in order to cure or prevent disease or undesirable conditions (FitzGerald). Genetic engineering is also known as recombinant DNA (rDNA) technology . . . It uses restriction enzymes to cut pieces of DNA out of two organisms. Then it implements one of the fragments of DNA into the other organism’s . . . This is used to produce insulin for humans with diabetes (Tortora ch 9; 245, 247). Some people are afraid of what the effect of
…show more content…
For instance, we might develop a race of people that are susceptible to many diseases. Also, the people who are not genetically modified could be discriminated against. I believe that we should keep using genetic engineering to alter people’s genes because it increases the genetic diversity among the population, because it can treat diseases, and because it can prevent diseases. On the other hand, people opposing genetic engineering would say that it is not guaranteed to work, and it will harm the human population and the environment. There is a ninety percent chance that it will work (Moyer). That means that there is a ten percent chance that does absolutely nothing at all. They say that genetic engineering will actually reduce genetic diversity causing us to be susceptible to many diseases; it will hasten our extinction (Powell). As humans, we tend to
A problem that could arise is a repeat of history. Inequality. Our society would be divided into two groups, the “valids” or “perfect humans” and the “in-valids” or “non perfect humans.” This is just another form of discrimination, whereby people are judged because of the circumstances of they were born, something that they have no control over. "I belong to a new underclass, no longer determined by social status or the colour of your skin. We now have discrimination down to a science." -Vincent. In the film “in-valids were granted less rights than the “valids.” Sounds familiar? In the 1960’s many protests occurred because of the inequality and brutality against African-Americans, who had their rights taken away from them based on the colour of their skin. Introducing the practice of genetically modifying humans to live up to the ideology of perfection could cause protests, violence, chaos and possibly a repeat of the Civil Rights Movement. For many years our society has been attempting to eliminate inequality, but this practice could just as easily re-create
Genetic screening for certain conditions is already a reality, along with some genetic engineering, so human genetic engineering is literally right around the corner. While this technology would be beneficial to some people, for example the prevent of cystic fibrosis, it's also feasible that, in light of the prejudices already rampant in society, people will be discriminated against for their genetics. According to Jeremy Rifkin, part of the problem with biotechnology and genetic engineering is the terminology itself (550). Rather than using the terminology "variation" or "mutatio...
In September 14, 1990, an operation, which is called gene therapy, was performed successfully at the National Institutes of Health in the United States. The operation was only a temporary success because many problems have emerged since then. Gene therapy is a remedy that introduces genes to target cells and replaces defective genes in order to cure the diseases which cannot be cured by traditional medicines. Although gene therapy gives someone who is born with a genetic disease or who suffers cancer a permanent chance of being cured, it is high-risk and sometimes unethical because the failure rate is extremely high and issues like how “good” and “bad” uses of gene therapy can be distinguished still haven’t been answered satisfactorily.
One of the most necessary uses of genetic engineering is tackling diseases. As listed above, some of the deadliest diseases in the world that have yet to be conquered could ultimately be wiped out by the use of genetic engineering. Because there are a great deal of genetic mutations people suffer from it is impractical that we will ever be able to get rid of them unless we involve genetic engineering in future generations (pros and cons of genetic eng). The negative aspect to this is the possible chain reaction that can occur from gene alteration. While altering a gene to do one thing, like cure a disease, there is no way of knowing if a different reaction will occur at the cellular or genetic level because of it; causing another problem, possibly worse than the disease they started off with (5 pros and cons of gen. eng.). This technology has such a wide range of unknown, it is simply not safe for society to be condoning to. As well as safety concerns, this can also cause emotional trauma to people putting their hopes into genetic engineering curing their loved ones, when there is a possibility it could result in more damage in the
Not only do individuals oppose the Genome Project, but also whole groups of people do. The main argument is that the Genome Project will allow scientists to genetically enhance humans and animals beyond what would be the average. They completely overlook the positive factors, such as the cure for genetic disorders. The way modern opponents of the Genome Project turn a blind eye to the helpfulness of the scientific breakthrough is like the way Cassius and Brutus turn away from the help Caesar might give Romans. Brutus differs from Cassius in that he genuinely weighs the profit of letting Caesar rule over Rome. & nbsp;
As a result of the discussions, there should be an implementation of steps to guide decisions relating to genome engineering. The simplicity of CRISPR-Cas9 has “revolutionized the field of genetics and molecular biology” (par. 2) thus allowing anyone with a “knowledge of molecular biology to modify genomes” (par. 3). Before this technology became available, this was a very difficult or impossible task. For example, using CRISPR-Cas9 technology, it is now possible to replace mutated genes that underlie liver-based metabolic disease in mice. Stem cells can be cultured to produce specific tissues such as heart muscle cells or neurons. CRISPR-Cas9 technology can also replicate the genetic basis for human diseases, which gives scientists insights into previously difficult to comprehend disorders. Along with its potential to change the world of medicine, there is the potential that this new technology may have unintended effects and could create unknown risks to human health and well-being. The authors point out that even straightforward medical scenarios raise concern over the possibility of unintended consequences because there are limits to the scientist’s knowledge of genetics, gene-environment interactions and the pathways of disease. Also, some of these genetic changes are heritable, raising significant concern for problems that could be passed to the next generation. All of these scenarios and examples show the urgent need for establishing guidelines for the implementation of genome engineering. In order to keep public trust in science, there must be transparency and open discussion regarding all decisions. Implementing these guidelines and decisions early in the process will ensure that these new technologies will benefit
It will make diversity and uniqueness weak, everyone will be "perfect" and no one will focus on the uniqueness of human beings. The great things we may achieve will be of less value since more people will be similar and have those same abilities. Children will be less appreciated because they will be more of a product (robot) than a unique gift. Through this practice we will face the dangers of races being eliminated and our world becoming a male dominated place. Genetic modification takes away our right to create and live our own story. If we are all genetically modified our lives will all be similar and less exciting. If creating designer babies will weaken diversity and uniqueness, why should we allow it? The world will be dull and full of clones, is it worth
If a limit is not set between using genetic engineering for treatment and using genetic engineering for enhancement, then many parents could use it purely for eugenic purposes. This could cause ethical concerns but social concerns as well. If this was allowed to occur, it would also give the rich even more advantages than they already have to begin with and drive the social classes even farther apart. The use of genetic engineering may also lead to genetic discrimination. As in the movie Gattaca, a person could easily get a print-out of his or her genotype, this information could then be used by schools, employers, companies, and others; giving rise to a new form of discrimination based on a person’s genetic profile. As the world is already full of discrimination, genetic engineering would even increase the numbers of discrimination against people.
Human genetic engineering increasingly causes dissonance between various groups of scientific and religious groups of people in regards to if we should or should not ‘play god’ and attempt to modify humans for the better of the race. First, let’s take a look at what exactly genetic engineering is; according to, yourgenome.org, “Genetic engineering refers to the direct manipulation of DNA to alter an organism’s With all factors put into place the potential benefits of perfecting human genetic engineering far outweigh the negatives. A world with genetic engineering is a world that would be advantageous to all who undergo the procedure to positively modify their DNA. A genetically engineered human race will be able to have defeated all genetic mutations and diseases, rid humans of possible illnesses in young and unborn children, create drastically longer lifespans, and provide generations with a high quality of life. Human genetic engineering has progressed more rapidly than projected; according to Stephen Hawking, when human genetic engineering is consummated he hypothesizes, “With genetic engineering, we will be able to increase the complexity of our DNA, and improve the human race.
Human genetic engineering can provide humanity with the capability to construct “designer babies” as well as cure multiple hereditary diseases. This can be accomplished by changing a human’s genotype to produce a desired phenotype. The outcome could cure both birth defects and hereditary diseases such as cancer and AIDS. Human genetic engineering can also allow mankind to permanently remove a mutated gene through embryo screening, as well as allow parents to choose the desired traits for their children. Negative outcomes of this technology may include the transmission of harmful diseases and the production of genetic mutations.
Genes are made of DNA – the code of life (Gene Therapy- The Great Debate!). The changes in genes may cause serious problems, which we called genetic disorder. In theory, the only method to cure genetic disorders is gene therapy, which basically means the replacement of genes in order to correct the loss or change in people’s DNA. Although gene therapy gives patients with genetic disorders a permanent cure, it is controversial because it has safety and efficacy problems, and raises ethical issues.
In conclusion and my personal opinion, genetic engineering could lead to a technically better and more advanced world despite the fact that it suffers from deep moral downfalls. The main issue that causes debate seems to be if artificial superiority is a viable alternative to nature. It could work in society if people only used it for things such as evading cancer, but if a new social class is formed or people start creating super humans, it’s unquestionably a problem.
Genetic engineering could potentially create little genetic variation within the human population because individuals would have a similar genetic makeup. Individuals within a population share a gene pool which is the total sum of different alleles within an interbreeding population. Genetic variation is the measure of the different genetic combinations that are in the gene pool and the amount of genetic variation within the population can affect the survival of the entire population, in this case the human population because the environment is constantly changing such as climate change, introduction of new predators or a new disease than the organisms with the favourable alleles will survive and reproduce and pass those alleles onto the future
The moral question of genetic engineering is answered by looking at the advances in medicine. Today the advancements in medicine are evolving at an extremely high rate. If the science of genetic engineering is wrong, then so are the rest of the advances in medicine. The reason is because genetic engineering is just another form of medical advancement. Gene manipulation is not going to be used for any other purpose except for the treatment and elimination of disease. The one thing that people need to realize is the potential of genetic engineering. Try to visualize what parents of a child is dying from a disease like multiple sclerosis think about the benefits of genetic engineering.
The moral conflicts put aside, the process of genetic engineering is difficult. Changing the proteins in people’s body differently is an unnatural action. Scientists state that genetic engineering only works 50% of the time. Also, when a new gene is placed in the gene code, there will be various mutations that will definitely result in change but may not be for the better.