In September of 1999, the Institute of Human Gene Therapy at the University of Pennsylvania ran an experiment in which Jesse Gelsinger participated (Rowe, 2000). The experiment consisted of an ornithine transcarbamylase gene therapy, wherein participants would increase their abilities to eliminate ammonia (Rowe, 2000). Because Gelsinger had a genetic disease (called ornithine transcarbamylase or OTC) which caused him to have difficulties in releasing ammonia from his body, he seemed to be an ideal participant (Kolehmainen, 2000). Unfortunately, neither Jesse nor his father were aware before the commencement of the experiment that several monkeys had died from the therapy, and human participants had been suffering adverse effects from the experiment (Rowe, 2000). Also, Jesse Gelsinger and the other participants involved were not…
David Baltimore’s written work of Limiting Science: A Biologist’s Perspective discusses the controversy of research in molecular biology and its limitless freedom, disputing there should be freedom in which direction science heads, but the public should decide the pace at which it goes. Baltimore first begins his argument with the discussion of how molecular biology began. It was born from individual sciences where attempts at trying to solve the mysteries in these fields led to the realization that the answers lied in genetics. Advances in the field are what really are at the heart of this discussion though. The most critical one is the development of recombinant DNA where DNA can be multiplied for an indefinite period, but the potential of this process has scared some scientists, even Baltimore himself, about unforeseen events. This led to even more unsettling questions that inevitably hurt the field of genetics, which Baltimore goes on to explain that the dangers have been blown out of proportion. The most common subject that comes to discussion through these fears is genetic engineering. Baltimore delves into the two techniques for altering imperfect genes, and then raises two questions that normally pop up. Who gets to decide what genes get altered and how will they decide it will be done? For Baltimore this presents a dilemma of both ethics and morals and thus presents the real problem at heart. To clarify the argument against recombinant DNA research Baltimore presents to the reader similar arguments. After he gives us the danger of actively researching genetic engineering, Baltimore flips the coin and argues the danger of restricting it. His theory is that the criterion used to decide how science should be handled reflects a dominant principle of governing. This should not be allowed to control scientific advances nor should science be the servant to this ideology, mainly because of the repercussions on society it could…
In “Genetically Modified Humans? No Thanks,” the author Richard Hayes is responding to Ronald M. Green’s article on gene therapy. Hayes is a visiting scholar at the University of California at Berkeley and has a Ph.D. in Energy and Resources. He has also addressed the United Nations about banning human cloning worldwide. The author argues against using genetic therapy in human research because of the risk it provides for human rights. He believes that it will likely result in the escalation of social inequality. Hayes is wrong, but also right at the same time. He is right about how gene manipulation has the potential to cause some real harm, but is wrong about how people should never use genetic technologies.…
Darcy talks about how an advisory committee is producing genetically modified human beings. Meaning these would change cells in the the bodies of the born babies. Darcy also mentioned that 1,000 to 4,000 children in the United States are born with a mitochondrial disease each year, and the symptoms go from okay to horrific. Although many scholars, scientist and policy makers have had some concerns. They thought that we should be careful in the thought of doing this because what if it affects the lives of the generations ahead of our time. They also said to be thoughtful in the genetic experiment by which “we should…
The Human Genome project, a revolutionary study that spanned over 13 years, hoped to discover more about the DNA of humans. The study's main goal was to provide new information to help with the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of genetic disorders. From the substantial amount of information and knowledge acquired from the project, new ways to test for genetic disorders, and the probabilities of inheriting disorders was gained. Gene testing, which involved taking a sample of a persons DNA, helped screen for a number of different disorders and problems. Before genetic testing, couples at risk of conceiving a child with a particular genetic disorder would have to initiate the pregnancy and then undergo the testing, faced with the dilemma of terminating the birth if the results weren't good. But because of the new technology available, with the combined effort of IVF, sperm and egg cells can be removed from both individuals, and the eggs would then be fertilized within a laboratory. The embryo's would then be tested for genetic mutations,…
On one hand, it seeks to root out the cause of diseases which have no cure, rather than only treating its symptoms. However, treatments vary from disease to disease. In the case of cystic fibrosis, the effects of treatment do not last very long, and in SCID-X1, the treatment has led to risks of leukaemia. There is an ethical concern that it could modify human capabilities, thus altering the standards of normal human life. Gene therapy is also a very expensive form of treatment and hence should be regulated effectively. Gene therapy has a remarkable therapeutic potential (14) and this should be exploited. Through effective research and regulation, gene therapy has the potential to cure genetic diseases, eliminate any possible side effects and usher in a new standard of…
Amy and Kif have decided they want to bring a child into this world. Having a child changes a couple lives forever. They have to think of someone else needs before their own. Having a child can be scary because you cannot predict anything about him or her. So when Amy and Kif heard about genetic screening they thought it was a wonderful idea. They are in interested in the idea of eugenics. Eugenics is selective breeding for the best people possible. Why not pick the exact traits of your baby? Sounds like a great idea to people that have not done their research about this topic. With the use of modern technology, doctors can do this with genetic screening. Couples should not be able to use genetic screening should not be allowed because of how it will affect society as a whole.…
Genetic modification is becoming closer and closer to an everyday possibility. With this possibility comes a whirlwind of possible effects, both positive and negative. There has been a history of opposition towards these technologies, oftentimes because of fear that the capabilities would be abused. However, the potential that newborns could be born free of hereditary diseases outweighs the fear of “designer babies”.…
Human genetic engineering is the process by which the human genome is being modified and manipulated in order to remove or select certain genes. Moreover, traits that are desirable can be selected, and preventing the genetic causes of diseases is possible. Human genetic engineering, as a new field, has raised a lot of questions and ethical issues. I argue about where we should put the limits for our genetic editing. Should we just use it to prevent harmful diseases or can we carry on with the modification and choosing the desirable traits of our future generations? Who decides? Who has the right to object? I will try my best to provide reasonable answers to those questions throughout my series of blogs, based on scientific articles that talk about its controversial and ethical aspects.…
1. How do doctors and researchers decide whether a disease is a good candidate for gene therapy?…
Just a simple test can cause such a massive effect on someone’s daily life. Many victims to genetic testing are affected by these examinations in such a negative way that many of these people develop the inability to exercise a happy lifestyle with their family, peers, or society…
From a patient’s perspective, people tend to see genetic information as more definitive, in the sense that 'you cannot change your genes' and that 'genes tell all about your future.’ Such genetic determinism is an oversimplification and does not take into account the nature of biologic pathways. From a provider’s perspective, genomics presents challenges with respect to ethical and professional responsibilities, including the appropriate use of genomic information in the health care setting. I believe that there should be an identification of provider education programs that increase use of appropriate screening, counseling and evidence-based genetic tests. By increasing the effectiveness of genomic testing, it will help dissolve the negative association and further increase the proportion of people who are willing to receive genetic…
Gene hacking is technology that has the potential to spare humans the heartbreak of genetic diseases. All of over the world, experiments being conducted on mice, in hopes of eliminating genetic diseases such as Huntington's disease and cystic fibrosis. My best friend has cystic fibrosis, so learning about how this genetic disease could be eliminated so that nobody has to suffer like her really interested me. To think that she can have a baby and remove the threat of the child carrying the gene makes me so happy. This could eliminate the disease from her hereditary line, and eventually it can be removed from the world. The Chinese attempted to repair eighty-six human embryos from a disease called bethathalassemia. When the public heard about…
Science has now reached a point where upcoming parents can choose what type of genes their children can be born with and not realizing that it can go terribly wrong.While trying to modify our babies the ending result can create a new illness that might not have a cure for it. According to Sheldon Krimsky “with respect to the farmer, there are safer and more dependable methods for preventing the birth of a child with a severe genetic abnormality than by genetic modification of the germ cell”. Modifying our babies can create an illness that will inquire a cure that won’t be existing but these babies will also create a gap in our society.…
Adolescents should be allowed to partake in predictive or predispositional genetic testing without discouragement from medical facilities or family members.…