genetic engineering

OK, so this is a pretty controversial
topic at the moment so I thought I’d
put in my views about it.  I don’t know
an awful lot, but probably more
than your average person, so I’ll put
forth my stance and what I feel is
acceptable and unacceptable.

One thing that sickens me about
genetic engineering for financial
gain is the idea that wealthy corporations are selling one
generation crop seeds to people in third world countries.  This
means that the seeds of crop e.g. rice have been genetically
modified so that after one season, they die, and the farmers
have to return to the sellers to buy more seeds thus creating a
dependence on the providers and a endless cycle of poverty.
This money is often result of donation, so the money given out of
good hearts is used for good – food, but the product is faulty, so
that the rich can get more money out of the poor.  Come on,
how can you cheat the poor?  Genetic engineering in this manner
I find totally immoral.  Is there any need in this world for seeds to
last only one year cycle?  How about the idea that companies
could one day seize all the commercially sold of a certain crop
e.g. wheat, and only dish out stuff that lasted one cycle, or could
not reproduce.  What company would we trust with all the wheat in
the world?  Already there are problems of power, money, and
               greed.  How high could they charge for seeds of wheat, which
were once free, or very cheap for seeds of crops that lasted more
than one harvest?  Crops that could reproduce?

At the moment, I can’t see any reason for this kind of genetic
engineering.  Injecting cells from animals to make a tomato last
a few days longer, great… is it really necessary?  I think not.  But
then I think, why not?  The world seems to all be living for money
these days, why don’t we just go along with it.  Any way to improve
the quality of life.  But in doing so, we are destroying other
lives.  The countless animals that will be destroyed for testing.
Sure, we eat them, but what happened to a time that we only took what
we needed from the earth, and what we took we took with great
respect.  I doubt anyone would think twice for the poor beast they
ate for dinner.  But that’s a totally different topic.

OK, so I’ve established that I don’t agree with genetic engineering
if it’s simply to alter crops etc but what about genetic engineering
for medicine e.g. insulin for diabetics.  First it was extracted from
a dog and then biochemists managed to reproduce it in a purer
form that was injected into humans.  Now it’s made in bacteria by
genetic engineering and available to those who need it.  So is
this necessary?  I don’t know what your argument is, but recently
when in a discussion about this in class, the teacher personalised
it completely and used a student who has diabetes in our year
level.  She asked us genetic engineering, or she dies.  How do we
choose if it’s so personal?  The thing is, we can’t choose from an
objective point of view, because no one is objective, we are all
influenced by something and that gives us good and bad ways of
judging things.  So because of this, I say yes to medical research
in any way related to genetic engineering because I want people
to live and fewer people to suffer when it could be medically
possible for them to be fully normally functional.

“genetic engineering…this technique is called cloning, because it
uses clones of organisms or cells. it has great economic and
medical potential and is the subject of active research.”  is an
extract from microsoft’s encarta, and even whatever your stance
on their accuracy, I think that you will agree with the latter part of
the extract about the economic and medical potential.  So it is
cloning, of cells.  Is it morally right? Is a cell a life?  Who knows?
If a cell is a life, and we are made up of millions of cells, are
we made of millions of lives?  I suppose it depends on what would constitute as a life.  And whether or not an induvidual believes in
a soul etc.  Yet another topic.  But then this leads us to the
question of whether or not we should interfere with the natural
order of things?  Where do we draw the line?
What if we would a way so that our cells
would stop ageing at a certain age?
 Could we become immortal?  When
we get to these morality questions, it
doesn’t take very long before the
idea settles into our minds,
and what was sci-fi becomes reality.

Once upon a time the idea of creating
human life in a laboratory was absurd,
freakish.  We know it as Frankenstein
and we called it a monster.  Now the
time is upon us that such monsters exist.
Not publicly yet, sure, but there
is no doubt in my mind that it’s been
attempted in the last 20 years.  It’s
only now that scientists are appealing
to the american government [and
others to their own governments] to
have their ‘research’ fully funded.  I am not  american, do I really
have a say in what goes on? No, but it’s my world too.  What’s going
to happen to the fuck ups and ‘mistakes’ that cloning will produce.
They had countless mistakes when they cloned animals are they going
to be terminated?  And for the ones that do work, it’s likely that
the one’s that are not severely deformed will be carried to term,
what quality of life will they have?  Constantly under testing to
see if they’re functional, how they’re growing the rate of healing, everything will be under scrutiny, and when this goes public, the
whole world will be watching.

So the race is now on to see who can create the first human
being.  I remember last year [I think it was last year, it was on
the news anyway] the outrage at the scientist that created the
first life form from scratch [publicly of course who know otherwise]
it was some really simple organism the simplest I think, but
anyway, imagine when they create more complicated things from
scratch.  will they ever create a human completely from scratch?
what I mean is they work out the DNA crap and reproduce it
completely artificially.

New Zealand as of yet has not promoted her status on the
cloning issue – no law has been passed banning it, so we are
currently open to it.  So we’re going to clone a human being.
What for?  It hardly seems to be a valid question anymore and
trying to resist this technology will only delay it.  It’s something
that will never go away.  One of those unanswered highly
controversial things that people are dying to know.  But is it really
worth it?  Is the preservation of one life worth the lives of others?
cloning from adults is currently possible, but this leads to
complications as the baby clone will have adult genes and
therefore has a shorter life span.  This public cloning will be done
using embryo’s genes as they will be as close a match as
possible to the age of the clone.  Once the gene is extracted, the
embryo will be discarded.  A human life destroyed for science.
The clones will now have a blueprint and as more can be made of
the clones.  But what for?  There seems to be many explanations
but is it really necessary? It seems to me that it’s just a
technology race for the first country to successfully achieve it
publicly.  Reminds me of nuclear warfare and look where that got us…

Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1