The use of genetic therapy to replace the default gene or may even remove them from the germ line apparently can eradicate the illness from occurring. I always believe that being doctors, we are not playing God but we are just being used by God as the tool to help alleviate the suffering of patients. We can be very successful in some cases but we also face situations that we can do nothing about. The third meaning of ‘playing God’ is the use of our technology and science to alter life and influence human evolution. As scientist, we try to play God but altering the nature and how human nature will
Firstly, eugenics violates humanity and kills human diversity. Eugenics allow the engineering of the genetic material of a fetus to prevent negative heredity thus the health condition of the child can be improved. Yet, some scientists use eugenics as a tool try to change the genetic makeup, for instance, the skin color, IQ, blood type etc. in order to create a better person and fulfill the need of the society. Once the fetus was checked illness or disable, it was then immediately killed.
If you had the choice to start a new life in the same body when you are about to die, would you want to? Well, many people want the possibility to make this choice and is one of the reasons why they are in favor of human cloning. Even though it is tempting to say yes, think about the potential dangerous outcomes and the steps it took to be able to make this choice before supporting the cloning of humans. Human reproductive/therapeutic cloning should be banned everywhere because it disrespects human dignity, there are other alternatives, and most importantly, the low probability of success can lead to endangered potential human life. Human Dignity can be defined as, “...the special elevation of the human species, the special potentiality associated
It is obvious that, animals are physiologically, metabolically, and anatomically different from human beings, therefore, they will react differently from human beings. Consequently, how can results from animal experiments be reliable and work on humans yet thy react differently? It is possible for the tests to fail on humans because of the anatomic and metabolic difference. And using them for experiments so as to use the same experiments on humans is very wrong. Let us stop this cruel procedure on animals because we are denying them a normal life yet, it is not yet proven that after the process is done on animals, and it can work well with human beings (Lund et al.
Second, reproductive and therapeutic cloning can provide the means to reproduce the self genetically, a process that avoids the usual problems in organ transplants that can lead to wasted organs and morbidity or death of the organ recipients. Transplant rejection may occur when the individual 's immune system identifies that the antigens in the organ 's cells are different or not matched. Furthermore, mismatched organs or organs that are not sufficiently matched can stimulate a blood transfusion reaction or rejection of the transplanted organ. Since transplants between identical twins do not always result to transplant rejection, cloning presents a viable way of ensuring fully matched organs. Thus, cloning presents
The children that are granted euthanasia are seen as vulnerable and this contributes to the assumption of this process being evolution. So they state that this is only a natural form of evolution where the strong survives and the weak dies (Hunter, 2010). But some evolutionists disagree that euthanasia is just another development of evolution. They state that euthanasia is completely wrong, since it disagrees with evolution. They say that evolution has caused the development of empathy which led to the improvement of reproduction (Hunter, 2010).
Therefore, it is a problem that will arise since there will be conflicts between people as a result of differing opinions. Certain religions consider it to be immoral. From the point of view of a Christian they have concluded that the status of an embryo is similar to that of a human because it will become one and thus they should be treated with respect thinking of the human it will become. The main concern for religious groups as such from all religions is that through this they are “playing god”. They believe that messing with Gods will is erroneous and this will cause problems to arise between different groups who oppose the opinion therefore stem cell transplants are better off avoided and only tested in the laboratories but not performed on humans.
Chemotherapy is the most common treatment for leukaemia patients; this process is often used to remove their bodies of the infected cells so that normal blood cell production can be restored. This is what sends the disease into remission but if this method fails we turn to the stem cell transplant which gives the patient a bigger and better shot at a full and speedy recovery. Cord blood stem cells are less likely due to reject a transfusion, this is due to the fact that there will be a better chance of a perfect match between the patient and the cord blood because the stem cells are still immature. Cord blood stem cells have been utilised successfully to treat more than seventy different diseases such as cancers, blood disorders and immune deficiencies. Doctors recommend that patients do not use their own stem cells to treat or fight off a disease as their body could be producing the wrong stem cells that will complicate things and have the same defect on the body.
However, it would destroy people 's dignity and individuality where the clones would still have individual personalities. A lot of religious leaders are shunning cloning based on claims that we should not be playing God. Black market will be created for human embryos with specific traits and instead of seeing the many benefits that this
One of the most used phrases when talking about gene therapy is, ‘Are we playing God? (srtp.org.uk)’ The thought behind this belief is ‘that we are to play the hand we are dealt (ndsu.edu)’ and biotechnology is attempting to change that ‘hand.’ Is it okay for us to manipulate human genes at all? When looking at the why behind gene therapy, it is evident there are many pro’s to the experiments however there are also many con’s. The creation of non-consenting research subjects due to the determination of gene therapy is another concern for those on the opposing team. There are also many concerns drawn toward the uncertainty of gene therapy, especially when looking at previous deaths in result of gene therapy.
The most effective of the two is the Germ Line treatment as it not only helps the individual with CF but their offspring as well. It helps correct the default in the DNA sequence for future generations. Where 's Somatic only corrects the abnormality in the sufferer who could still pass on the disease to their children. Looking at how much technology and research is improving, treatment for cystic fibrosis is also improving making it easier for sufferers and allowing them to live a longer life. Conclusion: Cystic Fibrosis is the most common autosomal recessive genetic disease affecting one in 2500 Caucasians.
If we did testing on humans we would find cures faster but we would be harming ourselves, when animals do a good job and don’t harm any humans. All in all animal testing should be continued for the following reasons. In conclusion Animal testing should be continued as long as it is done humanely, so we can find cures and new medicines. If we keep animal testing our world will be a better place and we will be able to save many lives. In the future animal test will help us find cures to some of the world 's most serious diseases.
Eugenics causes a big stir about whether it is playing the role of God. It can cause religious protests because of the controversies. Such as, with eugenics a person can pick out what they want in a child, regardless of their genetic code. Most religious followers would believe this goes against God’s wishes. Their belief is that God is only allowed to create a person’s trait and characteristics.
Stem cell research destroys potential human life, and scientists should find other forms of research to obtain stem cells without harming anyone (“NIH Stem Cell Information”). While stem cells are removed (along with the embryo) and used for study to potentially save a life, more risks are taken in doing this than many people realize. As one of the biggest arguments against embryonic stem cell research is that the scientists are sacrificing human life, it is a fair
The utilitarian argument seems to make some sense, and deserves a thoughtful response. The difference in ethical issues are due to individual 's view about the beginning of life. Due to religion, culture and heritage the fate is founded up on, some believe life starts at conception and hence an embryo is a humane while others believe life starts after the embryo is implanted in the womb and hence the embryo resulted from fertilization outside the womb is not human. These controversies limit the resources of funds needed for the stem cell