The Question of Whether Gene Therapy Should be Allowed or Not - Research Paper Example

The Question of Whether Gene Therapy Should be Allowed or Not Over the past decade, an entirely new approach to the treatment of diseases have appeared, namely gene therapy. The principal difference between the new method of treatment and traditional ones consists in the fact that it is aimed at addressing the root causes of the disease rather than its consequences. At the present stage, gene therapy can be defined as the treatment of hereditary and non-hereditary diseases by introducing genes into the cells of patients in order to change the gene defects or provide the cells with new features. In general, one can designate the following steps in gene therapy: “first, the partial removal of a patients cells, second, the introduction of normal, functional copies of the gene via vectors to replace defective cells in the patient, and finally, the reintroduction of the modified cells into the patient once the genes have been fixed in their vectors” (Bergeson). Treatment of diseases at the genetic level is a rather tempting prospect. Nevertheless, similar to any intervention in the human body, it can lead to completely unexpected results. Over half a century of development of this field of medicine scientists have received both positive and negative experience in the use of gene therapy. For this reason, currently, the question of whether the further development and use of gene therapy should be allowed is particularly important in modern science. However, despite the various ethical objections to genetic engineering, this paper defends the idea of further development of this field, since the use of gene therapy is able to save a large number of human lives, as well as prevent the development of serious and dangerous diseases, which are rather difficult or even impossible to treat. As mentioned above, humanity suffers from a variety of serious diseases. Moreover, some of them have a hereditary nature that implies that they can pass from parents to their children. The problem is that many of these diseases are resistant to treatment. This means that people who suffer from them are doomed to a painful life. Unlike other healthy people who enjoy life, these people are regular patients of hospitals and clinics, and their lives are always subject to continuous risk. In this regard, gene therapy is seen as a revolution in modern science, which is able to save mankind from a variety of serious and even untreatable diseases that are transmitted by heredity. Historically, gene therapy was aimed at the treatment of hereditary genetic diseases, but later it has expanded its field of application. Currently, gene therapy is being regarded as potentially universal approach to the treatment of the entire spectrum of diseases, ranging from infectious ones, including the so-called diseases of modern society (cancer, atherosclerosis, and diabetes), and ending with classical genetic and hereditary diseases (Bergeson). In the modern understanding, gene therapy is a combination of biomedical technologies performed by introducing genetic constructs that can repair or replace the defective gene or block the work of the mutant and alien genes. The main advantage of gene therapy is that it can not only prevent the development of a variety of diseases, but also help in the treatment of already existing diseases. Despite the special benefit that gene therapy can bring to all mankind, the opponents of gene therapy provide rather important counter-arguments against it. The first counterargument is that despite the success of gene therapy it may be associated with a particularly serious setbacks and even tragic consequences for human health. The consequences of gene therapy for human health, as well as their offspring have not been investigated fully. Their research may take more than a decade, while gene therapy continues to be used. It means that after a while the patients might suffer from serious complications. In fact, the history of the use of gene therapy knows a considerable number of such cases. Gene therapy is a danger and risk to human health, and it is a fact. As the researchers note, the danger lies in the fact that gene therapy suggests an invasion of the human body, while this process is accompanied by the risk of ingress of harmful substances in the human body. Given that gene therapy is the newest and yet little-studied method of therapy, the consequences can be truly catastrophic. In addition, the concerns are related to the fact that the scientists who conduct research in the field of genetic engineering may also jeopardize their health (Ruggles). Equally serious concerns are connected with the fact that gene therapy may be used in those cases when they are not needed. In particular, as noted by Ruggles, “the technique may be used for "treatment" of genetic "disorders" other than diseases." In fact, for example, in 1993, “an 11 year old boy was receiving gene therapy treatments at a cost of $ 150,000 per year to increase his height” (Ruggles). This suggests that, like any other field of science, gene therapy may become a victim in the hands of those who want to use it for personal gain or to inflict damage, etc. In general, the fear is caused by the fact that gene therapy is not being controlled properly. As a result, it can lead to abuse of power, medical negligence and other negative phenomena, the consequences of which can be extremely dangerous to humans. Indeed, the objections to the use of gender therapy seem rather reasonable. Nevertheless, the fact that gene therapy can bring tangible benefits for all mankind to get rid of the terrible suffering caused by incurable diseases, gives a good reason for its further development and application. As for the accusations against the uncontrolled use of the procedure, scientific and medical institutions must do everything possible that the development of this this scientific branch did not violate the ethical and legal principles and laws. In this regard, gene therapy should be guided by the following principles: “1) Favourable risk-benefit balance (principle of beneficence/non-maleficence); 2) Informed consent (principle of respect for persons); 3) Fairness in selecting research subjects (principle of justice)” (Mauron). To sum up, the main objections to the use of gene therapy are reduced to the fact that gene therapy is yet completely unexplored scientific practice. This can lead to rather serious negative consequences, since this procedure is not fully investigated. Furthermore, no less serious concerns are associated with the fact that gene therapy may be used for the purposes for which it was not originally designed: an increase of height, weight and other physical characteristics of the body. Given that the cost of this procedure is rather high, its use can contribute to inequality in society, because not everyone will be able to pay for the procedure. The problem of a rigid control of the use of gene therapy leads to an important counter-arguments against its use. Despite these charges, the ban on the use and development of gene therapy will bring more harm than its continued use. Gene therapy has proven its ability to help humanity to deal with a number of highly dangerous including hereditary diseases. The researchers task is to comply with all ethical and legal standards in order to avoid extremely negative and dangerous consequences for the health of people and their future descendants. Reference List [1] Bergeson, E. R., 1997, “The Ethics of Gene Therapy,” from http://www.ndsu.edu/pubweb/~mcclean/plsc431/students/bergeson.htm [2] Ruggles, A., 1996, “Ethics of Human Gene Therapy,” from http://www.ndsu.edu/pubweb/~mcclean/plsc431/students/amanda.htm [3] Mauron, A., n.d. “Ethical Aspects of Gene Therapy,” from http://www.gfmer.ch/Endo/Lectures_09/ethical_aspects_of_gene_therapy.htm Read More