Treat the sick, but dont change our genetic future
Scientists should learn how to treat diseases using stem cells and gene therapy. But they should never try to engineer the genes of future generations.
Scientists can and should use new knowledge to treat individuals who have fallen ill, even by repairing an individual's genetic flaws. But letting any changes to the genetic code be passed on to future generations could have consequences that no one can even imagine. There's just no way to anticipate the kind of damage this might cause.
Eliminating one genetic disease might leave our grandchildren vulnerable to another disorder, for example. Trying to make people taller, or smarter, or more beautiful could carry a similar risk. Genetic perfection is tempting, but it's just too dangerous to attempt.
What Should be Done?
Explore the prospects of gene therapy to treat disease, but ban genetic changes that can be passed to offspring Regulate cloning of human cells and organs for gene therapy, but ban cloning of entire people Allow federal funding of stem cell research Ban discrimination on the basis of genetic profiles Require insurance companies to cover genetic screening and treatment
Arguments For This Approach
We ought to explore every promising avenue to treat the sick people in this world, but we would be arrogant to assume we can try to control nature without some consequence. We simply don't know enough about how genetics and nature work to be able to assess the risk and make informed decisions. Cloning on a large scale would reduce biological diversity, potentially endangering humankind. The smaller the gene pool the likelier we are to be genetically susceptible to a new disease or strain. Human cloning is simply too risky to attempt. Fewer than 3 percent of all animal cloning attempts succeed, and even those who come to term are stillborn, have severe deformities or die within a week. Human evolution could come to a halt because without sexual reproduction genes would not mutate through the generations.
Arguments Against This Approach
Banning genetic experimentation will simply drive science underground where there will be fewer safeguards and less oversight, leading to potentially more dangerous results than if the research were conducted out in the open. We shouldn't regulate science because of fear. Hypothetical what ifs aren't enough reason to stop scientific progress. Cloning technology is no more dangerous than other fertility technology; in fact, it may be safer. To get Dolly, all 29 embryos were implanted into 13 sheep (about 2 per sheep). The success rate of one healthy offspring per 13 sheep is better than the early in vitro fertilization rates. If we can eliminate diseases like hemophilia in future generations, don't we have a moral obligation to do so?
Tags: 
Comments
Post new comment