The Human Genome

[Champagne]

(a nice 'n easy subject for a Monday morn!)

For years, scientists have been capturing data on the 2-3 billion DNA base pairs in the hope of learning more about human chromosomes and gain advancement in medicine (cures for cancer & Alzheimer's etc.). But how long will it be before this knowledge is abused? Is it only a matter of time before cloning or genetically perfect created babies are considered acceptable? I'm sorry to have to bring up a film comparison, but is the theme of 'Gattica' likely to become a reality?

[dot.hawkes]

well probably yes, it is being researched and developed with a huge amount of financial backing, and so there is no point in saying, right, we've sorted that now, let's do something else with all this funding, they have to make use of it. The moral and ethical arguments will rage over time but eventually any use of cloning will seep into our society and we may not even know it. (I think, very complex subject for a Monday morning Champers, as you quite rightly suggest lol)

[Champagne]

Sorry 'bout the complexity, Dot, but I was thinking about it whilst on the loo yesterday!! :o)

[Drusilla1S]

I'm sure there was a lot of fuss when the first heart transplant was performed and Louise Brown became the first test tube baby, but who would consider these medical procedures unacceptible today?

Technology moves on and morality progresses slowly behind it.

Trains were considered dangerous initially because there were fears humans would not be able to breathe at the speeds reached by the first trains. Printing presses were abhorred by the Catholic Church because it feared a literate public. Such fears are now something to smile at and I'm sure future generations of perfect people will view us as philistines and incredibly fat and ugly creatures.

[jake-the-peg]

It's even harder than you suggest.

Your question makes it sound like there are universally accepted notions of right and wrong and it's just a question of stopping technology from being abused.

Imagine a woman who via genetic screening discovers she has say a 50:50 chance of having a severely hadicapped child if it's a boy but normal odds if it's a girl.

She gets pregnant and discovers it's a boy. Is it ethical to have an abortion?

What about if it's a mild handicap?

These are the sort of questions that are with us now and medical ethics comittees constantly struggle with.

Before you stop science being abused we all have to agree what's abuse and what isn't

[Champagne]

But this is the problem, Jake. Moral issues will always come in between the decision making progress of what is considered right and wrong. Even if something is agreed as wrong, there are always illegal options, e.g. abortions in the 60's. It's one thing to use scientific discoveries to aid mankind, but where do we draw the line?

[jake-the-peg]

Well you used the word abused

In Gattica people who were not genetically engineered were discriminated against.

This is contrary to existing generally accepted ethics of not discriminating against people based on attributes they have no control over (female car insurance excepted but that's another issue)

We already have safeguards to stop people being forced to have DNA analyses by insurance companies and employers etc.

It wasn't such a tough ethical issue because it falls within a generally well explored area so we can easily see it as 'abuse'.

Where it gets really interesting is when technology gives us options we have not previously thought about too hard. Cloning technology is a good one as is embryo screening.

All of a sudden our notions of what is and is not abuse is challenged.

How about face transplants? Take somebody who is healthy but disfigured and cure the disfigurement at the price of a life on anti-rejection drugs which are likely to reduce their life expectancy.

Abuse or heroic surgery? Glad it's not my decision