Final Presentation

Sunday, February 7, 2010

Designer Babies Maybe?

A few years ago on January 11th, in Oregon, the first genetically engineered primate was born. This experiment took place on a monkey which was named ANDi (to symbolize DNA backwards), in order to get one step closer to altering humans' genes. Above, the monkey with blue eyes and spikey hair looks no different then any other. However, his genetic makeup was made by "splicing a gene from a jellyfish into a rhesus monkey embryo, which was then fertilized and implanted into a surrogate mother." ANDi then carried the new gene due to this procedure. He is mankind's closest relative which means that this process will shortly be available to humans. This article was written a few years ago so I believe that some technology is capable of this procedure on humans today. Many individuals are excited about this and see numerous benefits from this. By altering genes they will be able to choose their children's' appearance, athletic ability, and even mental ability. It also increases disease resistance. Supporters claim that they will treat their children like they are human and born naturally. They say that if God is supposed to look after everyone why did he create humans with such awful medical diseases and disorders? On the contrary, non-supporters of genetic engineering have numerous arguments as well as to why this new technology is wrong and unethical. They say that by parents altering their unborn child's genes they are playing the role of God. They feel that God made everyone individual for a reason and it is not our duty to alter that. It takes away the meaning of a human being. They also argue that these babies will appear as products or consumer goods the way they were basically "ordered." Enhancing genes will not necessarily bring happiness. Many intelligent individuals are unhappy while there are individuals with Downs syndrome who live extremely happy lives even though they suffer from a disorder. Another valid point is that this kind of technology would only be affordable to the wealthy. The already present gap in society would increase because unfortunate families would be unable to get this genetic engineering done for their children. Jobs would only be available to the genetically engineered in the future because they would be the best candidates for any work. The article states how a great debate about this topic is necessary because as it becomes evident, there are many strong points on both sides.

Masci, D. (2001, May 18). Designer humans. CQ Researcher, 11, 425-440. 7 Feb. 2010. http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/.

No comments:

Post a Comment