What now can be accomplished in the world, especially in the
scientific field is truly amazing and illustrates how far humanity has come
over time. After Watson and Crick discovered the secret of life by determining
the structure of DNA, scientists have been making discovery after discovery.
Upon sequencing the human genome in 2003, the question is whether or not we
should open Pandora’s Box? This has been debated repeatedly between the science
community and the world. Breakthroughs in scientific research and health
continue to keep the discussion at the forefront. The chance of genetic
engineering being able to cure birth defects (ex. Down syndrome), diseases like
cancer and etc, is why opening Pandora’s Box could change the world forever.
However, many humans believe altering our human genome is ethically wrong and
brings up the question, what happens if this technology gets into the wrong
hands? The consequences of this
transpiring could be devastating, so, the question of “just because we can
should we?” is asked. In my opinion, I do believe that humanity should be able
to alter the human genome because I believe humanity is capable of managing this
technology appropriately, as we have learned from our mistakes in the past.
Imagine living in a world where there were no more genetic diseases like
cancer, diabetes, Alzheimer’s, etc. Humans born with defects and diseases no
longer would have to suffer the effects. People with these conditions also have
limits on what they can do in life, and have an emotional and a physical affect
on them. The ultimate purpose of Watson obtaining a 3 billion dollar grant from
the U.S. government for the Human Genome Project in 1990 was to use this information
and to unlock the potential to save millions of lives who suffer from genetic
diseases. Well, we have discovered the 3 billion nitrogenous bases that make up
our genome, so why are we not using it to help those who are affected with
deadly diseases and defects that affect their life each and every day. By just
knowing the sequence of the human genome and not applying this knowledge is
wasting all of the 3 billion dollars used to make this technology available. If
we are not going to use this technology, we would have been better off donating
the money to charities to help others with very little. Another question to ask
is why governments are investigating billions of dollars into health research
to find cures when the possible cure is right in our fingertips by genetic
engineering. Last year governments invested about 4.9 billion dollars to cancer
research alone and the cost of treatment for cancer in 2010 was 124 billion
dollars. Treatment costs are only increasing with more advanced therapies
becoming available to patients. Even with these advanced therapies people are
still suffering from their diseases and the very treatment that is supposed to
be helping them. For example, cancer patients may experience hair lost from
chemotherapy, delirium (malfunction of the brain), sleeping disorders, fatigue,
etc. All of these effects are from the treatment that is supposed to be
affecting the caner, not them. All of this suffering could possibly end through
genetic engineering. In conclusion, if I had a child that I learned from doctors
would be born with a genetic disease, and had the choice of altering his genome,
I would definitely do so. Today, 6% of abortions are carried out because the
parents are informed by their doctor their child will be born with a defect.
Opening Pandora’s box could save the lives of these children.
References:
"We are failing to segregate morons who are increasing and multiplying…
a dead weight of human waste… an ever-increasing spawning class of human beings
who never should have been born at all." – Margaret Sanger."
This
Is Abortion. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Jan. 2014.
<http://thisisabortion.wordpress.com/birth-defects/>.
"Cost of Cancer - Center for Cancer Research Funding."
Cost of
Cancer - Center for Cancer Research Funding. Center for Cancer Research
Funding, n.d. Web. 19 Jan. 2014.
<http://www.careforcures.org/Cost-of-Cancer-Research-Funding.html>.
"National Cancer Institute."
The Cost of Cancer -. N.p.,
n.d. Web. 19 Jan. 2014. <http://www.cancer.gov/aboutnci/servingpeople/cancer-statistics/costofcancer>.
"Side effects of cancer treatments."
Side effects of cancer
treatments. MamasHealth, INC., n.d. Web. 19 Jan. 2014.
<http://mamashealth.com/cancer/ceffects.asp>.
Devan,
ReplyDeleteAfter your discussion, I do agree that this Human Genome Project has already wasted too much funding to be left unutilized. I also agree that it could be very beneficial to us and future generations. However, I feel that it is obvious that the risks far outweigh the rewards. I do not feel that humanity is capable of managing this technology appropriately. There are way too many radical groups and governments out there that will misuse and mishandle this information. I also believe that there isn't enough evidence that this will have a completely positive impact. We are aware of all the genes in the human genome, but we aren't even sure about how to use this information. Who says this won't become more problematic? With the theories of Natural Selection, we already know that everything on this earth happens for a reason, and the earth is usually capable of bouncing back. How will we be able to sustain infinite lives? The earth already isn't able to sustain what we've done to it thus far. Lastly, I feel scientists do not have a complete execution plan for this. Where do they plan on harvesting these genes? Are we going to start creating lives for the sole purpose of harvesting their genes? Are people going to start donating them? If so, will this now become a market? Will people start selling themselves for the highest bidder? In the end, although I do agree with your points, I think Pandora's Box is best left unopened.