Human Genetic Engineering - Research Paper Example

Human Genetic Engineering Whereas this could sound as science fiction, it has become a reality that genetic engineering has now been adopted among human beings. To some, this development brings hopes of human enhancement and futuristic therapy, but to some, it generates fears of corruption of human genome. As such, human genetic engineering remains a highly controversial scientific aspect with wild expectations and media storms often eclipsing the truth. Borrowing from various secondary sources, this paper seeks to evaluate the arguments for and against human genetic engineering so as to validate its position against the technology. Introduction Human genetic engineering, HGE refers to a process where medical professionals and scientists interfere with the DNA or genetic makeup of a human cell. Ideally, this process aims at fixing defective genes that have the potential of causing diseases or other genetic complications (Berry 5). Hanna refers to this as genetic enhancement and acknowledges it as the process where genetic material would be transferred for the modification of non-pathological human traits. The institute further argues that the term entails not just making humans well, but rather better than well, by optimizing their capabilities and attributes. This could be accomplished through insertion of a foreign gene into an organism that is virus-like. Thereafter, this organism would be introduced to the human cells thus inserting the new gene into the subject’s genome. Three applications have been used for HGE. Somatic engineering would target specific genes in the given tissues and organs without interfering with the genes occurring in the sperm or eggs (Koops et al. 19). This application aims at treating an existing condition without altering the entire genetic makeup of an individual. On the other hand, germline engineering targets the genes in embryos, sperm or eggs at the early development stages. Thus, this genetic modification affects the cells in the body of the developing embryo that are created afterwards. If the individual sires offspring, such genes would be passed onto the new generation. Finally, cloning could also be applied in HGE in three different ways as given by Berry (24). DNA cloning, also referred to as recombinant DNA technology, involves the transferring of DNA fragment from an organism onto an element that is self-replicating so that the DNA replicates itself in the foreign host cell. To generate an organism with the same DNA as an existing organism, then reproductive cloning would be used. Finally, therapeutic cloning could be used to produce human embryos for research purposes, also known as embryo cloning. With these complex procedures interfering with the natural orientation of humans, a myriad of controversies have arisen. Thus, whereas HGE could aim at improving human capacity and abilities and treat genetic diseases, it poses potentially serious threat to human health and existence hence the need to ban the technology. Arguments for Human Genetic Engineering Somatic engineering has been credited for its therapeutic benefit to human beings. Therapeutic engineering aims at treating a disease or correcting a genetic dysfunction which could have innately afflicted an individual. Such conditions include Huntington’s disease, Lou Gehrig’s disease, cystic fibrosis and spina bifida as documented by Hanna. Somatic genetic engineering would target specific tissues or organs in the affected person’s body but not interfere with the sperms or eggs of such a person. In fact, Koops et al. refer to this as DNA being used a drug therapy just as would be the case with the other pharmaceutical treatments (43). This treatment slowly heals the patient of genetic disorders through the repair or replacement of defective genes or introduction of therapeutic genes that would fight diseases. This has offered pregnant women with the option of screening their fetuses for genetic defects and appropriate treatment undertaken before birth (Banchoff 33). Importantly, the treatment stops with the patient and the effects do not get transferred to future generations. Thus, it is a much safer and ethical responsible HGE procedure. However, the other applications of HGE like germline genetic engineering aim at enhancement. Such enhancement genetic engineering procedures aim at producing healthier and more capable, robust, long-lived and smarter human individuals as noted by Hanna. The difficulty in drawing the boundary between a dysfunction, disease or fault and personal genetic preference as argued by Berry makes it difficult to wholly attribute HGE procedure with benefits (37). This has caused people to hold their reservation against HGE. Secondly, HGE provides the ability for creating pharmaceutical products that are superior to the traditional medicines. Such pharmaceutical products would be created through cloning of some specific genes. As documented by Pugh, bio-engineered insulin, previously extracted from cows or sheep and human growth hormones which were previously extracted from cadavers are available in the market (4). Similarly, various forms of bio-engineered blood clotting factors and hormones are available. Therefore, HGE would be said to be a useful technology for disease relief by providing drugs capable of treating various diseases. Indeed, there is increasing evidence that HGE improves on human capabilities. One specific area that this has been evident is in sports. HGE technology has played a critical role in enhancing the performance of athletes and other sportspersons. Hanna gives the example of the 1964 Innsbruck Winter Olympics where a Finnish cross-country skier won two gold medals. On interrogation, it was found out that the champion had used genetic engineering procedures which increased the red blood cells count in his body, making it impossible for him to switch off the production of erythropoietin, Epo. This was noted to improve the capacity for the athlete’s aerobic exercises. Currently, a synthetic variant of Epo has found wide application in treating anemia even though athletes abuse it to increase their stamina (Berry 41). There have been efforts to have the Epo gene introduced into the cells of patients so as to do away with the need for regular injections. Even though this risks abuse by athletes, it provides a crucial milestone in improving the wellbeing of humans and thus their capabilities. Additionally, animal experiments prove the possibility of HGE improving human capabilities and attributes. Animal models have shown the capability of improving traits such as muscle mass and growth rate. Hanna cites the example of Schwarzenegger mice, bred in the laboratory to give it the ability to expand rapidly by being injected with a gene that enhances muscle growth. This experiment has greatly informed the ability of treating patients suffering from serious illnesses with degenerating diseases as this would allow for the recreation of damaged tissues, referred to as muscular dystrophy. This could be used to enhance athletes’ performance without detection. Furthermore, this experiment informs the ability of delaying the aging process. With this regard, Hanna gives the example of the mechano-growth factor, MGF gene which would regulate naturally occurring hormones that arise out of exercises known to stimulate muscle production. With MGF levels falling as human beings age accompanied by muscle mass loss, such treatments due to HGE technology would allow humans to remain able-bodied and thus independent for a long time. Therefore, the possibility of HGE being beneficial to humans has been tested on animals and proven to provide a myriad of benefits. Other than experiments on animals, there are strict regulatory measures adopted to ensure the safety and objectivity of HGE technology are upheld. With this regard, Hanna observes that the National Institutes of Health, NIH have held several conferences to evaluate the effect of HGE on healthy human beings. Such conferences aim at determining when to use this biochemical technology on healthy persons. Liao further cites the Food and Drug Administration, FDA as an agency charged with regulating the application of HGE technology (116). With this regard, the technologies used to enhance human attributes are considered as drugs, medical devices or biologics which gives FDA the regulatory authority for genetic enhancements. This includes even those substances that aim at improving one’s looks such as tanning agents and wrinkle creams. Even so, the agency still faces challenges in differentiating genetic from non-genetic substances such as cosmetic surgery (Berry 61). Additionally, the ability of FDA to regulate genetic enhancement with regards to the traditional efficacy and safety would be hampered by deficiencies of data and subjective judgment on the benefits and risks. Therefore, while there continues to be increased effort towards the regulation of HGE, there still remain a lot of grey areas which regulators face difficulty to make decisions on. Arguments against Human Genetic Engineering The major argument against HGE has been on the infringement on ethical standards. While specifically referring to germline genetic engineering, Berry raises the concern that the procedure affects future generations (32). This is because, this procedure involves interference with the genetic composition of embryos, eggs and sperms with the results exhibited in the resultant offspring. With the difficulty in determining the effect of removing such genes, it becomes difficult to determine their impact on the gene pool of humans for future generations thus diminishing human gene pool diversity. However, Dresse argues that biological products and processes that have been exposed to evolution over years have proven to be robust (198). The billions of past years of testing have made such pass quality assurance tests. Theologically, HGE has been criticized for playing the role of God. Religion dictates God as the sole giver and taker of life, and as such holds the sole power and authority over an individual’s life. God’s will is manifested through the life of a person as it might be. For this reason, life should be treated as sacred with no alteration undertaken for one’s own gain (Pugh 3). So, for HGE to tamper with the human DNA as given by God, it is considered to be playing God’s role. However, Banchoff counters this argument noting that the creator gives humans free will that enables them, to alter nature and come up with new technologies (67). Therefore, it could be the will of God that humans come up with technologies such as human genetic engineering that would lead to the creation of better beings. Furthermore, there is the secular argument against HGE. According to this postulate, the dignity of all species should be upheld as per the existing evolutionary state and human beings should not interfere with it. Banchoff supports this postulate of HGE violating human dignity citing Article 1 of the Constitution which considers human dignity as inviolable (74). Particularly, the scholar argues that attempting to change the genetic formula of fertilized eggs in vitro through genetic engineering with the aim of creating better humans amounts to violation of human dignity. Thus, cloning, chimeras and genetic modification should be completely banned. This argument has been criticized by critics arguing on the non-existence of dignity where humans suffer genetic disorder which cause self-mutation. Thus, it would be more dignified to use technologies developed by humans to counter the suffering of those people who would have otherwise been unfortunate to be born with life-altering conditions (Liao 117). This counterargument basically postulates that for humans to survive in climates in which they previously could not survive in, they would have to adopt technologies to overcome natural disadvantages. Recommendations HGE remains a widely controversial topic in science. Because of relatively balanced arguments on both sides of the divide, it would be appropriate to acknowledge the argument by Berry of the technology still being in its infancy (12). It is not refutable that HGE stands to benefit humans in a great way. It would not only provide an effective solution to treating genetic disorders but also provide an opportunity to increase human capacity and abilities. However, the technology goes against ethical principles. It contradicts theological principles of God’s sole divinity over human life and the secular right to human dignity. Therefore, HGE should not be allowed to progress so as to allow humans to live naturally as intended by the creator. Conclusion While humans try to improve their lives through the HGE technology, which basically involves the alteration of human DNA, a myriad of controversies arise. On one hand, it is said to bear therapeutic effect for genetic disorders, create effective pharmaceutical products and improve human capacity and ability, with its safety tested on animals and regulated by appropriate government agencies. On the other hand, it has been said to go against ethical, theological and secular principles with no clear strategies to assure of its safety. Therefore, while the technology could be beneficial, the risks involved threaten the wellness and existence of humans hence the need to ban HGE in totality. Works Cited Banchoff, T. F. Embryo Politics: Ethics and Policy in Atlantic Democracies. Ithaca, NY: Cornell UP, 2011. Print. Berry, R. M. The Ethics of Genetic Engineering. New York, NY: Routledge, 2008. Print. Dresser, R. “Genetic Modification of Preimplantation Embryos: Toward Adequate Human Research Policies.” A Multidisciplinary Journal of Population Health and Health Policy 82.1 (2004): 195 – 214. Print. Hanna, K. E. “Ethical Boundaries Workshop.” Genome.gov. National Human Genome Research Institute Apr. 2006. Web. 25 Apr. 2014. Koops, B., et al., eds. Engineering the Human: Human Enhancement between Fiction and Fascination. Hiedelberg: Springer, 2013. Print. LaPrelle, C. “Genetic Engineering: For and Against Perfection?” Blinn College, 2012. Web. 25 Apr. 2014. Liao, S. M. “The Ethics of Using Genetic Engineering for Sex Selection.” Journal of Medical Ethics 31 (2008): 116 – 118. Print. Pugh, K. C. “Genetic Engineering and the Pursuit of Human Perfection.” 2014. Web. 25 Apr. 2014 Read More