The Human Genome Project – a project which allows us to further understand our DNA – has allowed many, many opportunities for humanity’s future. Specifically, they may allow us to predict the qualities of offspring and even ensure that they receive certain qualities.Did you know that clinics that allow people to select the gender of their babies have existed ever since 2001? A technique known as pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is used to examine embryos in their early stages. They can be used to predict many qualities in advance; diseases the child may have inherited, gender, and even more recently, hair and eye colour. In February of this year, a company known as Fertility Institutes announced that they were going to perform services involving the prediction of hair and eye traits, but stopped this project soon afterwards as a result of public ethical opinions.
This begs the question: Is PGD beneficial or bad for humankind?
PROS – “I just want the best for my kids,” – Every single loving parent in the world
Alright, class, raise your hands if you’ve ever wished that you were born smarter or stronger. Everyone? Thought so. Let’s face it; everyone wants their baby to be stronger and smarter, and gene therapy seems like just the way to do it.
However, the real gem of the Human Genome Project is that it would allow us to perform gene therapy. You see, genes are a key factor in disease immunity. About 3500 diseases ranging from cystic fibrosis to muscular dystrophy – and these are just the ones that have been discovered – have been attributed to genes. Resistances are possible, but cures have not even been found. With the miracle of gene therapy, cures won’t be necessary because the disease won’t even be existent in the first place! This can allow inherited diseases – diseases that have ran through several generations – to finally stop. Millions of dollars are currently going into caring for children with A.D.D. and associated disorders; money that can be saved because these disorders can be stopped.
CONS – “It is what God has given me. Why should I change it?” – A Sikh in response to the question of why he does not shave
All of us have seen trends in what is “in”; in Grade 4, everyone had Yu-Gi-Oh cards and Beyblades, and today, everyone has Apple products. If a few people end up getting this product, most kids would buy it. Oh, you don’t have an IPod? That’s probably because it’s either too expensive or because you just don’t want one. That’s okay; you’ll just be the kid who’s left out of everything. Don’t lie; it’s happened to all of us.
Now let’s apply this example to certain societies like China, in where boys are more favourable than girls. This can also apply to other cases like natural shortness or even disorder prevention. When a trend is alive, everyone naturally follows it, and those who don’t would end up being inferior to certain other people. If everyone naturally followed certain trends, society would be very similar and diversity would begin to die out (See Unit 2 Blog for details). And as for those unlucky children who haven’t been modified, would they be remarked as more inferior than modified children?
CONCLUSION
It’s inevitable that we now have a better understanding of human genes.
Even with this knowledge, however, I think that this knowledge should only be used to fight diseases. We are already doing this, and we have been able to free certain children from the possibility of breast cancer and other diseases. It is through this project that genetic defects that have plagued a family for generations have been stopped.
As for choosing a gender/hair colour/IQ, that is where it gets ridiculous. Why in the world should we spend money and effort just to change a petty thing like hair colour? Perhaps a child would appreciate that their parent allowed them to be tall, but I know quite a lot of short and medium-sized people who are quite happy with what they are, and a bunch of tall people who find their height a hindrance. Have you ever been annoyed when your parents said something like this…
“My son is going to be a (insert ambitious career that never appealed to you here)!”
The point I’m trying to get at is that parents have an amazing knack for not really seeing what’s best for the child (at first, anyway). All those times that humans have tried to have an incredibly firm grip over things, they’ve gone incredibly wrong (again, see Unit 2 blog on diversity for another example). The Human Genome Project is useful for certain things, but there has to be a line drawn somewhere.
After all, if humans got what they wanted all the time, we’d all be dead.
SOURCES
David Bjerklie, Michael Lemonick, and Park, Alice. “Designer Babies.” Time Magazine. Jan. 1999. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,989987,00.html
Kiem, Brandon. “Designer Babies: A Right to Choose?” Wired Science. Condé Nast Digital. Mar. 2009. http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/03/designerdebate/
“Designer baby row over US clinic.” BBC News. Health. Mar. 2009. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7918296.stm
Anissimov, Michael. “The Great Designer Baby Controversy of ’09.” H+ Magazine. Infoswell Media. June 2009. http://www.hplusmagazine.com/articles/bio/great-designer-baby-controversy-%E2%80%9909
Comic by Jed de los Reyes
MiiSkin.gif from http://www.nintendo.com/consumer/systems/wii/en_na/channelsMii.jsp
4 comments:
Before I begin commenting on the contents of your blog, let me just say that your images are hillarious. Original and very 'to the point' nonetheless, especially the mi's.
You have brought up an excellent point by saying that children's parents only want what is the best for their kids. The problem with this though, is that when do people know when it is too much? How will people determine which traits of a person should be changed so that it is the best of their well-being? How do we know if it is in deed for the better of things and simply not vanity and selfishness? See the problem is nothing is ever enough with us. We want too many things than we are ought to, and we try our best to get what we want. We have an obsession with being perfect and this drives us to do these kinds of things. But I do think you're right; playing around with people's genes has got to stop somewhere.
Hey Jed,
I completely agree with your points in this blog. Sure, PGD and gene therapy cures diseases and saves people, but that's where it should end. Gene therapy shouldn't go any further to non-therapeutic uses such as appearances like eye or hair colour. I really liked your images, they were very creative and I wouldn't have thought of using the mii image. The only thing is that I think you could have expanded on the cons. In my post I also mentioned how parents overlook what is best for their children. Just stuff to think about, though keeping an incredibly firm grip over our children's lives is wrong, how firm a grip should we have? And not only on our children, but on our world? Where should the line be drawn? Overall, very good post, and very strong opinions.
Laura
Hey Jed,
I don't how you found the inspiration to create that first picture but that was really funny! If only that was legit. I really liked how you broke it down to making references to:" It is what God has given me. Why should I change it?” – A Sikh in response to the question of why he does not shave.
I also liked your interpretation of the trends of yugioh cards and beyblades because I've been there and done that. Yeah this is always happening as for how a little amount of people get to "have" these things. Mii's would be our future for all designer babies. Hey maybe researchers will turn to Nintendo someday and ask for some tips.
Anyways, I enjoyed your blog at 12:23 in the morning!
-Juness
Post a Comment