Just Because We Can... Does Not Mean We Should
The human genome should not be manipulated to inherit desired traits or resist disease.
"The Human Genome Project" was a huge accomplishment for the science world but, the uses of it have raise some questions. Is it ethical to use it to genetically modify humans to be immune to genetic diseases and to alter their traits to be more favourable? In my opinion, the answer is no. Humans need diversity and everyone on the planet to play their role to function correctly.
Biodiversity
Biodiversity is "the variety of life in the world or a particular habitat or ecosystem". In ecosystems there is a constant battle to survive called "survival of the fittest", it either makes or breaks a species. If human DNA was manipulated to make an "improved person" biodiversity would decrease significantly. Decreasing biodiversity makes the human race more fragile. Humans being biodiverse makes them more able to fight disease. If humans become genetically modified to have desirable traits they may not be able to fight off certain diseases. With a less biodiverse population humans could encounter a disease and many will die. Humans will no longer evolve based on the conditions to survive. We used to have to hunt for our food and were more independent. Overtime, we evolved and food that was hunted for can now be bought in stores. Without biodiversity we will not evolve. Technology, scientific discoveries and, many other things will not occur because everyone's traits will be similar.
Balance
Manipulating human DNA takes away the balance that the world has. The world is interdependent meaning that every species and the organisms inside that species have a role to play. For example, in a team everyone has a role and if they don't play that role the team does not perform. There are players that do their job and do not require the spotlight while others do. Some players are also better than others but, everyone has a role on that team for it to be successful. This is like the human race, everyone has a role to play and if humans are genetically modified the roles change. Most people will not encounter genetic diseases and there will be no variety in the human race. Although diseases and sicknesses are perceived as bad they also have a role. There role is population control, the population of the earth is getting too big to maintain. If humans are totally immune to diseases that effect large amounts of people such as cancer, then the population will be too great for the earth to support.
In conclusion, human DNA should not be genetically engineered to make them more desirable because it lowers biodiversity and it damages the balance between species. If these very important things are not present then many will die and evolution will not occur.
Works Cited
"Biodiversity." Merriam-Webster. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. 19 June 2017.
"Seven Point Wellness - Acupuncture, Herbal Medicine, Body Therapies." Seven Point Wellness - Acupuncture, Herbal Medicine, Body Therapies. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 June 2017.
"Athletes and human biodiversity." Hbd chick. N.p., 12 Nov. 2013. Web. 19 June 2017.
The human genome should not be manipulated to inherit desired traits or resist disease.
Hi Peter, your arguments are very clear and informative. However, I disagree with some of your statements. You mentioned that genetically altering the genome decreases biodiversity, which I agree with. However, your argument was that by decreasing diversity, humans become more fragile and susceptible to disease, causing death. But, what about the various genetic diseases that cause countless deaths that cannot be rid of through diversity? Diseases such as cancer, cystic fibrosis and sickle cell anemia are all genetic based. These diseases are unlikely to be eliminated through “survival of the fittest”, but can be eliminated through genetic modification, which you do not believe is right. Therefore, your statement alludes that only people with non-genetic diseases are deserving of having a cure. Furthermore, you argued that everyone has a “role” to play, and those roles vary from person to person. So, in 2014 was it the role of the 2000 children in America to die of cancer and not make it to their adult years? What if their role could have been to become the next president or end world hunger? You argued that diseases are necessary for population control, because without them our earth could not be sustained. But, I do not believe that people should have to unnecessarily die so we can keep living luxuriously. Our earth has enough resources to sustain billions of more people, but is only limited because of how recklessly us humans use the natural resources. Is our materialist greed more valuable than a life?
ReplyDeleteHey Peter, I have read your arguments regarding altering the Human Genome, and as you may have some valid arguments, I still feel that they are not powerful enough to go against altering the human genome. Firstly, you talk about the decrease of biodiversity, and how humans may be susceptible towards more diseases. This may be true, but there are many diseases that can not be genetically altered. For example, cancer is both a disease that can be genetic or can be developed later in life, through processes such as exposure to UV lights from the sun (skin cancer). Having our human genomes altered to prevent hereditary cancers will not decrease biodiversity, but eliminate one of the ways of getting it. Towards the point of balance, and how diseases have a role of population control, it is still unfair to say that. Treatments for various diseases such as cancer cost a boatload of money, especially if it is a life-long form of cancer. The middle or the upper class would not suffer from this, because they will be able to afford the treatments such as hormone therapy, which is used when chemotherapy and radiation seems to be ineffective, while the lower class will die off much easier. Somebody's fate should not be determined by the amount of money you have, and if altering the human genome can help all people of the world, it should be used. Lastly, for something to think about, why are we okay with genetically modifying the food and plants we eat and not worry about biodiversity, but when it comes to humans there is more of a controversy.
ReplyDelete