Genetic Engineering - Research Paper Example

Genetic Engineering: Genetic engineering has the potential to cure such physical failures as illness, aging, and attractiveness. Illnesses that are predetermined through genetics can be eliminated, increasing the probability of good health throughout life. In changing the genetic code so that the body is not hampered by predetermined outcomes, a great deal of pain can be avoided. Genetic engineering can also help to slow or possibly eliminate aging, thus extending life well beyond the current limits of life. As well, genetically engineering the physical attractiveness of a child will increase the potential for success and more often make a happier life. However, the need for controlling the unknown, for creating parameters through alteration so that the odds of a good life are increased deletes the potential for challenges and obstacles that stimulate creativity and innovation. In trying to control the future, in creating a life in which all elements of natural creation are subjected to human manipulation, the nature of human existence is greatly altered, inextricably detached from the surprises that enrich the nature of life. In genetically engineering children, the natural order of life becomes something that is defined by hubris, eliminating the potential for greatness that is born of adversity and ending the true existence of humanity. Francis Fukuyama puts forth arguments against the use of genetic engineering as a way to improve the human condition. He suggests that to use these forms of science to change the outcomes of life would be an inroad to changing the nature of humanity (Fukuyama). This argument clearly expresses the basic nature of scientific meddling in human development. The concept that humanity is vulnerable to the ways in which science has the capacity to change elements of life provides for a cascade of effects that can ultimately change perceptions, shift ideological beliefs, and push cultural construction towards a world in which little is left that has the basic elements of human life still held within it. When applied to the question of genetic engineering babies, the acceleration of these problems has the potential of changing the nature o human existence to a point where life is essentially changed. In choosing the attributes of a child from a menu of options so that parents have the belief that they can create the exact child that they want, human interaction and existence will fundamentally change in ways that will represent irrecoverable losses. One of the most powerful arguments for human genetic engineering is in the potential for stopping disease so that children do not have to suffer with terrible and horrible conditions that impede their ability to have a happy and successful life. Finding cures for diseases that are devastating and consuming is a viable use for genetic engineering. Preventing a genetic code from existing that will open up the possibilities for a good life is a reasonable extension of the ways in which science has found cures and vaccines to prevent disease. One of the problems at this stage of scientific development, however, is that the correlations between predispositions and actual development of disease are yet to be fully understood, thus suggesting that there is still an element of risk for potentials yet not understood to be part of the outcomes. As an example, HLA-B27 is found in 90% of the genetic code of those who suffer from arthritis and is found in 5% of the Caucasian population. Of the 5% of the population that carries the HLA-B27 code, only 25% develop arthritis. Therefore, carrying the HLA-B27 code suggests a 25% chance of getting arthritis, so the question becomes whether or not this code should be eliminated to lower the risk of getting arthritis. HLA-D types of code are associated with childhood rheumatoid arthritis and type-1 diabetes, but this does not mean that everyone who has these complexes will develop these diseases (Crowley 54). In eliminating these potentials, the possibility of eliminating these diseases becomes a real potential. This can be equated to the advantages of the polio and measles vaccines which have come very close to eliminating those diseases from the lists of potential human outcomes in life. Eliminating disease through genetic manipulation does not seem to have a down side and precedence has shown that in curing a disease, human existence as a collective is better served. One must make the distinction, however, between genetically eliminating the potential for disease and genetically creating a ’type’ in which diseases have no potential. One must consider what would happen if the population became infused with a sub-population of people whose parents could afford to have the genetic codes of their children altered to reflect a complete lack of predisposition to disease. In addition, there would be disparities between countries that changed all of their children and those that did it according to income. In addition, there would be deeper disparities between nations that had no such technologies in comparison to those that did. The existing disparities that already affect the poverty and modernity of third world countries in comparison to other nations creates entire societies that are at a disadvantage against the standards of most of the world. In creating a ’super’ race that is impervious to all disease, these disparities would shift dramatically, creating sets of human groups and creating a new world order. There are consequences to engaging the genetic code in order to eliminate all physical challenges in life. Life is extended and aging becomes a relevant question. This is already an issue as the population of the aging has increased significantly in the last one hundred years as sanitation, drug therapies, and the availability of healthy foods has increased the potential for avoiding disease and death. Currently, while many of the ways that an early death have been eliminated, the rate of deterioration of the body has not experienced too much towards slowing. Therefore, consequences of aging are creating long periods of life that are experienced with problems that require extended care for chronic conditions. The average lifespan of a human being who has not had a significant interruption through disease or accidental impact has remained relatively the same in the last 100,000 years as represented through the time period estimated for the existence of the homo sapien. The lifespan of a human life is relatively between 100 and 125 (Cutler and Rodriguez 1148). (Wikipedia) At this point in time, if all potential reasons for life ending before the age of 80 are eliminated, what happens to people who survive for twenty to thirty-five years after that time. Mental acuity and the ability to function at high levels of motor skill and mobility are diminished, thus creating a long lived population of people who have no real world abilities to provide for themselves. The current problems in the United States with social security are an example of how longer lives with no increases in functional abilities means a population that must be cared for by the younger inhabitants. Make no mistake, the elderly are highly valuable resources and are underutilized within current Western cultures, but creating long life spans without an ability to be self-supporting creates deep social problems that will ultimate change culture. Changing culture is not the same as changing human existence, however, so at this point in the argument there has not been a point in which that line has been crossed. Manipulating genetic code to eliminate predispositions for disease will simply increase the social problem of a large population of the elderly who are long past their capacity to fully contribute to society in a way that is self-supporting. Adjustments to social constructions would mean cultural shifts that are no different than those that have been experienced throughout history. However, as genetic manipulations begin to change the nature of aging, changes in human life will begin to emerge. One of the points that Fukuyama makes on the issue of aging is that most species have life spans that do not extend much past the age that is appropriate for reproduction. It is an anomaly that the female human life span lasts long past the menopausal stage (58). With this taken into consideration, the nature of reproductive viability will need to be addressed for populations that are living longer life spans. This is already being seen in shifts that are occurring in the average age that women are bearing children. More women are giving birth after the age of 40 than have ever before in history been observed. As an example, Halle Berry gave birth to her first child at the age of 41, Geena Davis at the age of 45 and 48, Holly Hunter at age 47, Marcia Cross at age 44, and Salma Hayek at age 41 (Quest). However, it must be considered that Geena Davis’ child that she had at the age of 48 will graduate from high school when she is 66, and even if married at an early age, she will more than likely be in her 70’s at the time of a wedding. The concept of her child’s children having a grandmother during most of their lifetime becomes a decreasing possibility. A third type of genetic manipulation would provide for the ultimate shift in human existence in creating levels of existence that are divisions within the species. If children are genetically programmed for physical attributes to enhance their attractiveness, the way in which people are divided will be dramatically altered. Genetically enhanced looks will create a race that would be considered superior to other sets, no longer simply defined by social grouping, the nature of human life would then have subsets within the species. The social divisions would devastate an already struggling culture that divides people through visual cues. When genetically divided, the human species would become an umbrella over sets of people that would be valued according to their enhancements or lack thereof. One can only imagine the horrors of how that would end. The world would be full of blonde, blue eyed men and women whose physical beauty was perfected and their categorization in regard to genetic manipulation would place them within the world as a superior race. This is frighteningly similar to the aspirations of Adolf Hitler. The problem with advancing genetic engineering in embryos is that the limits and boundaries create a dilemma in where to draw a line of demarcation that separates helpful curative efforts to defining a superior race of people that are above naturalized human procreative efforts. In creating children that have all of the advantages of the potential of genetic manipulation, physical, mental, and slowed aging, there would be a division between people that would far exceed that of the current racial groupings that have caused immeasurable problems within society. Imaging a race of human people with scientifically provable superiority is a terrifying prospect. Eliminating all diversity is equally disturbing if all people are the product of genetic manipulation. Human existence is irrevocably changed and diminished without the ability to have conflict and struggle to move the human evolution of thought and innovation forward. The Human Genome Project is dedicated to human genetic mapping to greatly improve human health within the 21st century. In doing this research, the project has also dedicated 5% of its budget to studying the “ethical, legal, and implications of genome research” (Rabino 366). In a survey of 1,229 professionals in the field of genetic research about their ethical concerns about genetic testing, 72% believed in genetically testing adults for predispositions to disease, although there is a small degree of variance to a lesser percentage where incurable conditions are concerned (Rabino 369). The Committee on Assessing Genetic Risks from the National Academy of Sciences has stated on the issue of testing children for predispositions that “Children should generally be tested only for genetic diseases for which their exists an effective curative or preventative treatment that must be instituted early in life to achieve maximum benefit” (Rabino 371). Even in those who are already born, there is hesitancy in using genetic information. There is definitely an argument to be made for the use of genetic engineering. With the ability to support an optimum development of positive attributes, a parent is giving their child the best possible resources for a successful life. In choosing enhancement, a parent is providing for both the health and the well-being of a child in such a way to give them a potential that might not have existed without genetic manipulation. Through looking at the predispositions for certain conditions and eliminating that potential, the welfare of the child is attended. As well, in creating a physical appearance that is superior in aesthetic qualities, parents are giving children the potential for a better social experience in life that will extend into their professional experiences. This type of eugenic manipulation allows for humanity to choose how best to continue forward. However, the question then becomes centered on whose aesthetics are superior. What values provide the best structure for creating a superior race? The differences that would occur during those enhancements would then begin to shift into social groups that would be considered better and worse, a touch of green in the eyes meaning a superior human in comparison to those who do not have that touch of green or lighter blonde hair being appreciated over that which is a little darker. It is human nature to create identifications in regard to physical differences. The future of such a place would be dangerously exposed to volatile consequences that cannot fully be predicted. From an individual point of view, the ability to choose the attributes of a child before it is born has an appeal in giving one’s child the best possible future in a world where vanity and superficiality causes a large number of people to live in turmoil with unsatisfactory lives. However, in a broader perspective, the idea of choosing genetic advantages is a recipe for the development of disastrous long term problems through cultural, social, and naturalized human experience. There is a risk for a longevity that burdens the population with large populations of people that do not have the capacity to care for themselves as they grow older. If age is extended, then the nature of life cycles and the stages of life will be dramatically altered, changing homo sapiens and the nature of life. Eugenics provides the danger of creating ’super’ races that then subjugate those not part of the altered genetic human groups. In creating the ability to chose attributes through a menu of options, the beautiful diversity that creates tensions and opens up new potentials of thought would be eliminated, most likely slowing the ideological, philosophical, and intellectual pursuits in human life. (word count 2490) Works Cited Crowley, Leonard V. An Introduction to Human Disease: Pathology and Pathophysiology Correlations. Sudbury, Mass: Jones and Bartlett, 2010. Print. Cutler, Richard G, and Henry Rodriguez. Critical Reviews of Oxidative Stress and Aging: Advances in Basic Science, Diagnostics and Intervention. New Jesery: World Scientific, 2003. Print. Fukuyama, Francis. Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnological Revolution. New York: Picador, 2002. Print. Rabino, Isaac. ‘Genetic Testing and its Implications: Human Genetics Researchers Grapple with Ethical Issues. Science, Technology & Human Values. 28.3 (Summer 2003): 365-402. Print. Quest, Sara Webb. ‘Despite Physical Toll, More Over-40 Women Having Babies’. Cape Cod Times. 30 March 2008. Web. 3 June 2011. Wikipedia. ‘Life Expectancy’. Wikipedia. 30 May 2011. Web. 3 June 2011. Read More