Genetic Modification of Human Beings - Research Paper Example

?Janelle Perry Eng 112 Robert Westbrook December 9, Genetic Modification Introduction Genetic engineering has been in existence for a period. This process is described as the field in which the characteristics of an organism are deliberately modified. The process occurs by the manipulation of genetic material and alteration of specific genes, and this leads to the creation of new variations of life (Uzogara 180). Most of these transformation and modifications are done in the genetic material known as DNA. This takes place through manipulation of DNA in different ways to adjust to the intended purpose. This has made it possible to put traits of almost any organism (Institute of Science, Technology and Public Policy 1). Most of the organisms are produced in large quantities after the process of transformation and improvement is done. On the other hand, the process has made it possible to create foods, pesticides, cells, tissues, and organs (Uzogara 180). The technique has been used mainly to change or alter the plants and animals we use today as food. On the other hand, there has been advancement of genetic modification in humans. In human, it is usually done to change non-functional or malfunctioning genes (Isasi, Nguyen and Knoppers 2). Moreover, such genes are manipulated or supplemented with health genes. In human, two categories of genetic modification are involved. These categories include somatic and germline modification (Isasi et al. 2). In somatic gene therapy, a gene or a gene element is introduced into a tissue or organ in a human subject with the purpose of curing a disease (Isasi et al. 2). This process does not alter the genetic structure of future generations, as the altered genes do not exist in sexual eggs or sperms. On the other hand, there is germline gene therapy. This process involves the introduction of gene into germline cells (Isasi et al. 2). As a result, there is heritable changes and thus alters the resulting offspring (Gold and Carbone 1). For this reason, this technique has generated a serious debate due to its implementation in humans. Genetic Modification of Human Beings is unacceptable; it strips the human race of free choices, treats human as a commodity, loss of uniqueness and individuality, and leads to increased inequalities. Proofs Genetic modification leads to interference of freedom to make choices. This means that such person has no control making free choices in relation to the modified trait. This makes its inevitable for the person to avoid expressing such trait. The person who initiated the modification process controls the human future (Resnik and Vorhaus 5). For example, if the person is given the gene for specific skill such as football, he or she has no choice but to become a footballer. Moreover, the process limits the options of the person who is modified by limiting their scope of behaviors and life plans (Resnik and Vorhaus 5). This means that the life choices of such people are limited. For example, if there is a modification of a person height to increased height, such a person cannot become a jockey. Additionally, the person’s ability to make free choices is interfered with as the process increase parental expectations and demands (Resnik and Vorhaus 5). This means that their parents in a large percentage inherently limit their destiny. This is because such person life is artificially molded in the way that they could not have chosen (Seck 1). For example, a person with a gene for football talent will be under pressure from the parent to become a footballer. Secondly, genetic modification treats human as commodities. This is seen through children arising from the modification process. Such children are treated like products to be designed, perfected, manipulated, and controlled (Resnik and Vorhaus 8). This goes against the basic principle of having children as gifts. Therefore, the parents exercise control over their children to fulfill their own desires. The parent believes that this is possible through genetic control of their offspring. This means the traditional notion of children as a gift is changed. This is because the modification sees children as a product that requires constant refinement (Resnik and Vorhaus 8). Moreover, genetic modification leads to loss of authenticity. This is because the talents and abilities of a person are not his own but rather a result of modification (Resnik and Vorhaus 8). This can lead to a general opinion that such talents and abilities are not real. For example, a person with genetically enhanced football talent is not a football genius at all; he or she can be described as possessing an imitation of talent. This means that the process acts in giving advantage towards the betterment of a certain trait, but does not offer an individual with the natural form of the trait. Additionally, the modification process violates the uniqueness of a person. This is generally seen when the cloning process is done to a person. The children generated out of the cloning process will be lacking originality and individuality (Almond and Parker 11). According to the President’s Council on Bioethics (1), the cloning process would inherently interfere with the individuality of a cloned person. This happens in relation to the importance of genetic uniqueness in an individual. According to Resnik and Vorhaus (9), genetic composition plays a significant role to a person’s own self-identity. Moreover, genetic modification may lead to escalation of inequalities. This is because almost all processes of genetic modification are expensive. As a result, only the few rich in the society are likely to afford the process. This means they will be able to have a perfect condition such as perfect eyesight, improved height, and more intelligence (Seck 1). Therefore, the poor in society will fail to achieve their goals in life. Consequently, the process will lead to a creation of unequal society. Therefore, in the end there will be a people with complete different genetic qualities. Refutation However, proponents have argued that biological modification is of the essence to the society. One of such uses is the creation of biologically related children. This occurs through cloning and will help individuals or couples who are sterile to have biologically related children (The President's Council on Bioethics 1). For example, an infertile person will be able to have a child with a similar genetic structure. The other argument is that the process will assist in addressing the issues of genetic disease. This will happen to couples at risk of giving rise to children with genetic defects. This means that human cloning will help prevent the risk. This will help such parents to ensure a child does not inherit a genetic defect (The President's Council on Bioethics 1). Moreover, the proponents argue that human cloning will provide a solution to transplant challenges. This will help in generating transplant that is “rejection-proof” (The President's Council on Bioethics 1). They also argue that human cloning will allow the parent to “Replicate” a loved one in case of death. They argue that resolving such a tragedy will be possible by cloning of a dying person (The President's Council on Bioethics 1). Others argue that it will help in reproducing individuals of extraordinary genius. This will help in retaining person such as incredible athletes, musicians, and mathematicians (The President's Council on Bioethics 1). Conclusion The current genetic modification offers incredible potential to the scientists. This is because they will be able to adjust various attributes of human. In the process, this will lead to effects such as loss of choice, uniqueness, identity, loss of human value, and increased rate of inequalities. On the other hand, the modification process may play a significant role in society This may include preservation of family identity, easy transplant of organs, solution to infertility problems, avoidance of genetic defects, and maintenance of incredible talent in society. Therefore, the process of genetic unification requires thorough understanding so that it may be accepted in the future. Moreover, the process needs to consider the uniqueness of human being as compared to other forms of animals. Works Cited Almond, Brenda and Parker, Michael. “Ethical Issues in the New Genetics: Are Genes Us?” New York: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2003. Print Gold, Richard and Carbone, Julia. “Myriad Genetics: In the eye of the policy storm.” Nih.gov. Web. 21 November 2013. < http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3037261/>. Institute of Science, Technology and Public Policy. “Genetic Engineering: A Cautionary Approach.” Istpp.org. Web. 21 November 2013. < http://istpp.org/genetic_engineering.html>. Isasi, Rosario, Nguyen, Thu and Knoppers, Bartha. “National Regulatory Frameworks Regarding Human Genetic Modification Technologies (Somatic And Germline Modification).” Dnapolicy.org. Web. 21 November 2013. . Resnik, David and Vorhaus, Daniel. “Genetic Modification and Genetic Determinism.” Ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. Web. 21 November 2013. . Seck, Chris. “Arguing For and Against Genetic Engineering.” Stanfordreview.org. Web. 21 November 2013. . The President's Council on Bioethics. “Human Cloning and Human Dignity: An Ethical Inquiry.” Georgetown.edu. Web. 21 November 2013. < http://bioethics.georgetown.edu/pcbe/reports/cloningreport/children.html>. Uzogara, Stella. “The impact of genetic modification of human foods in the 21st century: A review.” Biotechnology Advances 18 (2000): 179–206. Print. . Read More