pg.1
Should Canada be allowed to continue with
genetic engineering without federal
guidelines?
In the past ten years there has been a
rise in a relatively new science, a science that raises alot of controversial
questions with very few answers. This
science is called Genetic
Engineering. In it¹s simplest terms it
is the reordering of a genetic DNA sequence.
It is a very controversial science because it leads into moral and
ethical issues, as to what can be done with it and what cannot.
Canada is one of the few countries without
nationwide, federally legislated guidelines to deal with genetic engineering
and experimenting.
Within the last six months (as of this
paper being written) there was a baby
born in the Calgary hospital with a disease commonly referred to as Boy In The
Bubble Disease. The child would have
become violently ill within two weeks of It¹s birth and would have died before
it reached one year old. However the
parents of this child were told about a highly unprecedented technique that
could quite possibly change the baby¹s future of life or death, they were
warned that this method had not been tested on small children, but only
laboratory animals. The parents agreed
to try it. They allowed Doctor Tom Bowen
of the Calgary children¹s hospital to remove blood from the child 4 hours.
after birth, the blood was then promptly flown to Los Angeles California where
the blood testing was done and a new gene introduced into the specimen
blood. From there the blood was flown back
to Calgary and then reintroduced into the child¹s blood stream. Today child leads the life of an average 6
month old.
Dr. Bowen states ³We have the potential to do alot of harm,
and an incredible amount of good. Let¹s
harness the good, keep some control to it, and get our heads out of the sand.²
Developments have come a long way since
genetic engineering was first discovered.
Right now scientists are working on a bacteria that will break down
crude oil and could be used to master the giant marine oil slicks caused by
tanker accidents. (Taking Sides:
Clashing views on controversial bioethical issues, 1989.) Another
great thing they can do is the farming of bacteria which can provide
medicines such as; insulin, the human growth hormone, the blood
clotting agent, and the rare
pg.2
interferon for immunity. (Taking Sides, 1989)
One of the newer things that scientists
have been working on only recently is a cure
for HIV or the AIDS virus, what basically would be done is, reintroduce
the DNA sequence that deals with the immune system. (New York Times,1993)
One thing that environmentalists have
already tried to stop is, the testing of bacillus causing ice crystals to form
on the potato plant : the genetic lowering of it¹s temperature threshold is to
delay the seasonal onset of frost damage, with obvious advantages to
agriculture. (TAKING SIDES, 1989.)
But
what would become of the bacteria and medicine? Would they emancipate from the
confines of their task, strike out on their own environmental and mutational
careers, and drastically disturb an ecological equilibrium unprepared for
them? Is it permissible to play such
games of chance with the environment? (Taking Sides, 1989) When scientists
created these medicines, bacteria and genes they wanted to be able to allow
themselves to intervene with the experiments and let the old master take over
again at any time and command, ³In the closet/broom! broom! / As you were,² and there they would
stand motionless. ( ³The Sorcerer¹s Apprentice.² ) But at times things do not
go quite as planned and you get what is called the ³Malcolm Effect² which is basically this- no matter how you
calculate and try to figure something out you cannot totally predict what will
happen with it. (e.g.) There is pool table set up, on it is one ball and your
shooter, you calculate that if you knock the shooter with just the right force
at the side wall it will ricochet and
land in the opposite pocket. However you
do not calculate the fact that the ball is not perfectly smooth and that the
side of the table is not exactly straight thus the ball just misses and does
not go in the hole as you had calculated that it would. (Jurassic Park, Michael Crichton)
The new developments that were stated
earlier also have great downfalls, for example the growth hormone is excellent
for people who have the corresponding gene deficiency, but what if someone
wished to be taller because, as alot of people are told ³Tall Is
Beautiful² the gene then would be
greatly desired. Unfortunately however
if it burns right down to the issue of money, the abuse of this for people who
simply have familial or ethnic shortness and who have the money will receive
it, legally or otherwise.
What if they created a gene to prolong the
biological clock, allowing women to have
pg.3
babies at a later age in life. Or maybe one that would prolong the sexual and reproductive
capacities into higher ages, for which male demand would be extremely
keen. Imagine it, and ask yourself
whether it is good and wise, with respect to the individual or the group, to
meddle for ephameral-hedonistic reasons with the ways of nature, who here has
set her own times by the long trial of evolution. (Genethics: the ethics of
engineering life, 1988)
In answer to all this one might say that
any drug, even the most beneficial, prescription or otherwise, can be abused,
thus the responsibility lies not with the manufacturer, but with the patients and doctors with their
responsibilities as middle-men.
In Goethe¹s play Faust II, ( act 2 Scene
³Laboratory² ) Wagner chastises
Mephistopheles for thinking that he would create a man in the ³old fashioned²
way, rather than in a new and unattempted way.
There is one line I would like to quote ³Yet in the future we will laugh
at chance² . Is it not chance that
brings us to the joy of knowing that if I were to give birth to a child I could
not have one identical to it by natural means?
And is it not chance that surprises us with what is ever new and what
has never been? but if we were to
replace chance with science we would assumedly calculate what would be and we
would never be surprised. Wouldn¹t that
be a boring life? An extremely boring world to live in? Isn¹t it chance that allows us our mistakes
and our successes?
In my opinion I believe that there should be
some staunch guidelines which would protect us from scientists going to such an
extreme. The guidelines should not
however, make the scientists feel as though they were under the leadership of a
benevolent dictator. They should allow
the scientists the freedom to explore in the medical field to save human lives
and and cure diseases but not allow them to research for their own personal
gain. One thing that needs to be changed
is the fact that cures and antidotes can be patented, I believe that if this
were to remain in effect scientists could eventually patent their own super
humans.
Bibliography
Levine, Carol Taking Sides: Clashing Views On Controversial
Bioethical Issues. Dushkin Publishing group, Inc. Guilford Conn., 1989.
Suzuki, David. Knudston, Peter Genethics: The ethics of Engineering
life. New data Enterprises, Toronto,
Ont. 1988.
Bowen, Tom. Press Conference Dec. 1993
World book encylopedia, 1985 genetic
engineering. vol. 8, G. p. 85
Dolan, Edward F. Matters of Life And Death Grolier Libraries, New York, N.Y. 1982
Medical Research Council of Canada. Vocabulary of Genetic Engineering. Canadian Government publishing centre. Ottawa, Ont. 1990
--------------------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment