Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Human norms
The Factor of Gene Therapy: the Ethics, Progress, and Future
Abstract
Erasing genetic diseases from the human race has been a vital role in science. However, there is a point where the moral standards have interrupted the advancement of curing genetic diseases. One of the many sciences that have the ability to completely wipe out the future of any genetic diseases, gene therapy, is being stifled due to the infliction of morals. There is a fine line in what is inhumane and moral to the standards of society; causing the advancement of gene therapy to be limited. The answer to the future of gene therapy relies on what we will accomplish for the future generations, but this is based on our past, our current morals, and our cooperation.
"Humans have long since possessed the tools for crafting a better world. Where love, compassion, altruism and justice have failed, genetic manipulation will not succeed." As quoted by Gina Maranto, without morals and compassion, the science of gene therapy will not be successful, but many debate that the current morals are restricting the progress of gene therapy. Using viruses with “normal” genes to penetrate a cell with defected DNA to cure genetic diseases is the science of gene therapy (Nichols 17). Throughout the years, ethics have been a primary factor in determining the progress of gene therapy by being directly related to both its arrival and fallbacks. The irrational belief that gene therapy will lead to the manipulation of the genome of a normal child to create the “perfect” child is a question of whether or not gene therapy will lead to the downfall of the integrity of our society’s beliefs (Nichols 166). This is one of the factors that have caused the lack in progress of the thera...
... middle of paper ...
...lth Genetics Unit. 28 Jul 2007 .
Hogarth , Eric. Aspects of Gene Therapy. 1996. 14 Jul 2007
.
Hunt, Katherine S. . "Gene therapy." Health A-Z. 14 August 2006. Health A to Z. 28 Jul
2007 .
Nichols, Eve K. . Human Gene Therapy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1988.
O'Connor, Eileen . "Gene therapy researchers defend trial after death of patient."
CNN.com. 10 December 1999. CNN. 29 Jul 2007 .
" The future of gene therapy." Frontline. 2003. Frontline. 20 Jul 2007
.
... fight the disease. It is crucial that regulation be a necessary component of gene therapy research and applications. In hopes that the government can regulate and can receive this treatment, not restricting it to people that has serious genetic diseases. Gene therapy will change the field of medicine from what it is today. As scientist discovers more genes and their functions, the potential of this treatment is limitless. Though gene therapy is an auspicious treatment choice for numerous diseases (including inherited disorders, some types of cancer, and certain viral infections), the procedure remains precarious and is still under study to make sure that it will be safe and effective. Thus government regulators and scientist must take a lead role in adopting a practical approach to address these issues and determining the correct procedures for dealing with them.
Human gene therapy is a method used in the medical field that treats diseases at a molecular level, by solving the source of the problem; our genes. Today, diseases and disorders are commonly treated by solving the symptoms, the surface of the problem. Many disorders and diseases are caused by defective proteins and within those defective proteins are damaged and defective genes. These defective genes can be treated through gene therapy. Gene therapy is not new and has been developed and improved by researchers for the past couple years. Being an experimental technique, gene therapy also has its pros and cons, but so far is showing positive and rising success rates.
...ne starts life with an equal chance of health and success. Yet, gene therapy can also be thought of as a straight route towards a dark outlook, where perfection is the first priority, genes are seen as the ultimate puppeteer, and personal freedom to thrive based on one’s self isn’t believed to exist. With the emergence of each new technological discovery comes the emergence of each new ethical debate, and one day, each viewpoint on this momentous issue may be able to find a bit of truth in the other. Eventually, our society may reach a compromise on gene therapy.
Many people often ask, “Is it acceptable for human beings to manipulate human genes” (Moral and Ethical Issues in Gene Therapy). Most of the ethical issues centralize on the Christian understanding of a human being. They believe God made them the way they are and people should accept their fate.The Society, Religion and Technology Project have researched and found that countless people are curious if gene therapy is the right thing to do. They have a problem with exploiting the genes a person is born with due to the fact they consider it to be “playing God” (Moral and Ethical Issues in Gene Therapy). They are also concerned with the safety. On account of the unfamiliar and inexperienced technology. Gene therapy has only been around since 1990, so scientists are still trying to find the best possible way to help cure these diseases. Multiple scientists are cautious with whom they share their research. For the reason that if it were to get into in the wrong hands it could conceivably start a superhuman race. Author Paul Recer presumes using germline engineering to cure fatal diseases or even to generate designer babies that will be stronger, smarter, or more immune to infections (Gene Therapy Creates Super-Muscles). Scientists could enhance height, athleticism and even intelligence. The possibilities are endless. Germline engineering, however, would alter every cell in the body. People would no longer have to worry about the alarming and intimidating combinations of their parents’ genes. Genetic engineers are able to eliminate unnatural genes, change existing ones or even add a few extra. Like it or not, in a few short years scientists will have the power to control the evolution of
In this paper, I will negatively expose Walter Glannon’s position on the differentially between gene therapy and gene enhancement. His argument fails because gene therapy and genetic enhancement is morally impermissible because its manipulation and destruction of embryos shows disrespect for human life and discrimination against people with disabilities.
In September 14, 1990, an operation, which is called gene therapy, was performed successfully at the National Institutes of Health in the United States. The operation was only a temporary success because many problems have emerged since then. Gene therapy is a remedy that introduces genes to target cells and replaces defective genes in order to cure the diseases which cannot be cured by traditional medicines. Although gene therapy gives someone who is born with a genetic disease or who suffers cancer a permanent chance of being cured, it is high-risk and sometimes unethical because the failure rate is extremely high and issues like how “good” and “bad” uses of gene therapy can be distinguished still haven’t been answered satisfactorily.
People should not have access to genetically altering their children because of people’s views on God and their faith, the ethics involving humans, and the possible dangers in tampering with human genes. Although it is many parent’s dream to have the perfect child, or to create a child just the way they want, parents need to realize the reality in genetic engineering. Sometimes a dream should stay a figment of one’s imagination, so reality can go in without the chance of harming an innocent child’s life.
In this paper, I will argue that genetic therapies should be allowed for diseases and disabilities that cause individuals pain, shorter life spans, and noticeable disadvantages in life. I believe this because everyone deserves to have the most even starting place in life as possible. That is no being should be limited in their life due to diseases and disabilities that can be cured with genetic therapies. I will be basing my argument off the article by “Gene Therapies and the Pursuit of a Better Human” by Sara Goering. One objection to genetic therapies is that removing disabilities and diseases might cause humans to lose sympathy towards others and their fragility (332). However, I do not believe this because there are many other events and conditions in society that spark human compassion and sympathy towards others.
Usage of genetic modification to pick and chose features and personality traits of embryos could conceivably occur in future times. Wealthy individuals could essentially purchase a baby with built-in genetic advantages (Simmons). Ethically, these seem immoral. Playing God and taking control over the natural way of life makes some understandably uneasy. Ultimately, religious and moral standpoints should play a role in the future of genetic engineering, but not control it. Genetic engineering’s advantages far outweigh the cost of a genetically formulated baby and
Since its inception, gene therapy has captured the attention of the public and ethics disciplines as a therapeutic application of human genetic engineering. The latter, in particular, has lead to concerns about germline modification and questions about the distinction between therapy and enhancement. The development of the gene therapy field and its progress to the clinic has not been without controversy. Although initially considered as a promising approach for treating the genetic of disease, the field has attracted disappointment for failing to fulfil its potential. With the resolution of many of the barriers that restricted the progress of gene therapy and increasing reports of clinical success, it is now generally recognised that earlier expectations may have been premature.
Human Genetic Engineering: Designing the Future As the rate of advancements in technology and science continue to grow, ideas that were once viewed as science fiction are now becoming reality. As we collectively advance as a society, ethical dilemmas arise pertaining to scientific advancement, specifically concerning the controversial topic of genetic engineering in humans.
Bergeson, E. (1997) The Ethics of Gene Therapy [Online] Available at: http://www.ndsu.edu/pubweb/~mcclean/plsc431/students/bergeson.htm [Accessed 14 July 2011]
In an article titled “The Ethical Implications of Gene Therapy” the group of advisers on Ethical Implications of Biotechnology of the European commission states issues and rules that should be abided by, along with beliefs on the direction of biotechnology. At its present stage, biotechnology focuses on serious diseases which are incurable at the moment, however through this research treatment for these diseases could be found. The group of advisers feel that there should be levels at which research should focus on, instead of jumping into it all at once. Basic research should be carried out prior to clinical trials, and then move on to biotechnology. This can be done by supporting research actions, organizing training and exchange programs or any other appropriate means. Gene therapy protocols require that ethical evaluation consists of processes assuring quality, transparency and efficiency without delays of treatment to the patients who need it. This is crucial because an inefficient, poor quality treatment could cost someone their life. The group also feels that gene therapy research should be restricted to serious diseases for which there is not a current treatment. Expanding research to other things could be done if a medical evaluation calls for it. Equal access should be assured to all researchers within the European Union, thus sharing information and helping to improve orphan drugs. This could also save time and money. In order to insure the public of what is going on, conclusions of evaluations should regularly be published to encourage public debate. The public is not usually informed much about genetic therapy and many people have the wrong idea about it. Should reports be published more often, there will be less public confusion and ridicule.
Scientists and the general population favor genetic engineering because of the effects it has for the future generation; the advanced technology has helped our society to freely perform any improvements. Genetic engineering is currently an effective yet dangerous way to make this statement tangible. Though it may sound easy and harmless to change one’s genetic code, the conflicts do not only involve the scientific possibilities but also the human morals and ethics. When the scientists first used mice to practice this experiment, they “improved learning and memory” but showed an “increased sensitivity to pain.” The experiment has proven that while the result are favorable, there is a low percentage of success rate. Therefore, scientists have concluded that the resources they currently own will not allow an approval from the society to continually code new genes. While coding a new set of genes for people may be a benefitting idea, some people oppose this idea.
Advancements in science and medicine are usually accompanied with a myriad of ethical and moral implications. The fairly recent advancement in genetics called gene therapy is no exception to the baggage of polarizing views that come with new technology. Gene therapy is an extremely hot topic in both the science world and everyday life. New technology, discoveries, and breakthroughs are rapidly occurring in the field every day. The topic of gene therapy in humans is one that is highly debated due to the ethical implications connected to the science. Both sides of the debate have various reasons for their position, but the main factors come down to the ethics of changing someone’s genome and the consequences that accompany the altercations. The two types of gene therapy, somatic and germ-line are seen in different lights. There is more debate over germ-line therapy because the alterations have more consequences than somatic gene therapy. There are many moral and ethical decisions that need to be considered before gene therapy can be widely accepted. Do we have the right to change a person’s genetics, especially before they are born? Do we know enough to confidently insert or delete genes without detrimental consequences down the road? If we have the ability to help people who have disabilities or diseases, is it ethical to withhold and not treat the patient? I believe human gene therapy is a good and useful tool for medicine and needs to be developed because it posses the ability to help and cure people from ailments that degrade their quality of life.