Major socialethical Ramifications of Genetic Engineering and DNA work
On the contrary, opponents of genetic engineering and DNA work blame it for negating the process of realizing sustainable social, economic, and health development of the human community. According to them, genetic engineering and DNA work is the reason behind the short life spans witnessed in the modern society, especially as a result of genetically modified products as food (Stanley, 2000). Another common claim by opponents of genetic engineering and DNA work is that it only serves to compromise the realization of sustainable environmental conservation and preservation practices in the world. This is because it leads potential intoxication of the environment. They assert the fact that the world has more than enough resources for sustaining its population.
Despite these opposing claims, genetic engineering and DNA work are to be thanked for enabling man to find solutions for common problems affecting the community. Therefore, to ensure continued social and economic development in the community, genetic engineering and DNA work should continue. This paper is written as a discussion on the pros and cons on genetic engineering and DNA work. The author also gives an argument in support of the practices as a tool for enhancing the quality of human life.
Pro genetic engineering and DNA work
Proponents of genetic engineering and DNA work have asserted numerous advantages. The first claim is based on the fact that the human community is eminently faced with food insecurity. According to available statistical information, an estimated over 40 percent of the world population are at constant risk of famine. Due to this reason, genetic engineering serves as a viable solution as it provides drought resistant and highly productive agricultural animal and crop products (Stewart, Kilner, 2004).
In addition, for proponents, the problem of food insecurity can never be resolved through the engagement of traditional agricultural practices. Based on this claim, proponents assert that the eminent global warming crisis is far from being mitigated. Just to be appreciated is the fact that the world is producing over thousand trillion tons of carbon dioxide, a major greenhouse gas, into the atmosphere annually (Stewart, Kilner, 2004). This production is predicted to increase over the coming years due to the nature of economic production competition brought by globalization. This has the implication that the effects of global warming on agriculture will continue to worsen, a factor that will compromise food security in the globe.
Another common claim by proponents of genetic engineering is that such products of the process have no harm to the health of human beings. The development of technology in the community is mainly driven by the desire for enhancing the quality of life. Such have increasingly found much influence in qualifying the composition and safety of manufactured products. According to the provisions of the laws in the United States, genetically engineered products must meet laid down qualities of health safety. Therefore, genetic engineering has checks to ensure human safety, thus it should be encouraged.
Still, genetic engineering and DNA work is found to be the source of human understanding of the nature and functioning of the human body (Thompson, 1997). It is rightly argued that the works of ancient scientists on the human body are the ultimate basis for the improvement of human health in the modern community. By nature, the world is marked with numerous types of diseases and human disabilities. On the other hand, proponents of genetic engineering and DNA work claim the fact that mankind is bound to find lasting solutions to such problems for his sustainable existence in earth .
Based on this reasoning, genetic engineering and DNA work is found to be the only solution to such human health problems. It is worth noting here that, most of the human disabilities are rarely curable through traditional medical practices. However, with DNA and genetic engineering works, mankind is able to develop tissues for replacing those causing human disabilities (Maurice, 2009). Therefore, failure to engage in genetic engineering and DNA work is found as a recipe for negating the underlying right of human beings to enjoy the gift of life. Indeed, such have been attributed to be a potential compromise of the social and economic development greatly needed in the modern community.
It has also been claimed that the realization of sustainable development in the community dictates for easy and highly profitable production of goods and services. According to proponents of genetic engineering and DNA works, the underlying essence of technology and other developments in the community is to make work easier for mankind. This is evident in the practice of genetic engineering particularly on animal and crop production. Statistical evidence indicate that the output level of genetically modified crops and animal products is far much high compared to the traditional ones (Maurice, 2009).
In addition to this, such products of genetic engineering are marked with low customer prices due to their low production costs. This has been explained by the principle of mass production in industries. According to this principle, high levels of production decreases the overall cost of production per unit product. Another claim is that genetically modified products boast the advantage of guaranteed profitable outputs regardless of the underlying climatic conditions (Stewart Kilner, 2004). This is quite important in safeguarding the economic interests of investors. This makes genetic engineering quite instrumental in meting the increasing sustenance demands for the ever increasing human population.
Opponents of genetic engineering and DNA work
According to proponents of genetic engineering and DNA works, the practices is unethical and a negation of the mission of humanity in the world. This is a common assertion by religious people who claim that man has no right to influence the natural cause of life. Another common assertion by opponents of genetic engineering and DNA works is that it negates the sustainable social and economic development of the society (Herring, 2006). This is basically based on the fact that genetic engineering serves to bring unfair competition to the traditional agricultural and medical practices.
It has been common agreed that the sustainable social and economic development in the society dictates for economic independence of the individual members of the community. Traditionally, small scale agricultural practices formed a crucial source of income to members of the society. However, due to the increasing engagement of mankind on production of genetically modified foods, large scale agricultural production have taken the course, a factor that compromises the sustainable existence of small scale productions. This is has been closely attributed to the high levels of unemployment, thus poor social and economic establishments in the society.
Genetic engineering and DNA works have also been blamed for their negative effects on the health safety of the human beings. It is commonly claimed that genetically modified products are generally qualified by testing their composition and short term safety effects on human health (Stanley, 2000). It is however, established that such products have eminent potential long term negative effects on the health of the victims. This observation is based on the scientific fact that different things have different genetic composition characteristics. Still, it is claimed that the combination of different genes in the genetic engineering leads to formation of new, likely different, genes, a factor that risks the naturalness and thus safety of the product.
As evidence in support of the negative effects of genetic engineering and DNA work is the increasing problem of obesity across the global (Stanley, 2000). According to federal government reports, an estimated over 40 percent of the American population is having or at risk of sustaining obesity. This has been closely attributed to the problem of increased use of fast foods and other genetically modified products among Americans (Stanley, 2000). According to some scientists, such products are marked with low nutritional values and fiber contents as well as having high levels of energy. Just to be appreciated is the fact that fiber contents in food are quite instrumental in ensuring efficient digestion and absorption of food.
Personal opinion on genetic engineering and DNA work
The problem of food insecurity in the world can only be resolved through innovative agricultural practices in the community. According to scientists, global warming is the main cause of food insecurity due to its effects on climate changes. In addition, this global warming problem is a direct result of human activities that cause increased production of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. It is worth emphasizing here the fact that industrialization forms the backbone of most economies in the world. This has the implication that the question of mitigating global warming causes can evidently compromise the social and economic development of mankind.
As an example of this, the American nation alone is claimed to be producing an estimated 25 percent of the worlds carbon dioxide due to its industrial processes. This does not only cause global warming, but serves has a crucial economic stand for the huge economy of the American nation. Therefore, engaging in migration practices in resolving climate changes can significantly negate the economy of our country and its people. Indeed, this is the reason why the world is emphasizing on adaptive measures to reduce the effects of global warming. Such can only be best realized through genetically modified food productions.
Another point on why genetic engineering should be encouraged is that it increases productivity. Genetic engineering has over the past decades witnessed an increase in the production of food products in the community. It is rightly claimed that the ultimate purpose of an investment is to maximize profits while meeting the demands of the customers. Based on this, genetic engineering has found its importance in producing highly robust animal and crop products. These are important in reducing the production costs by farmers, a factor that not only increases their profits but also reduces the end product prices.
Through genetic engineering and DNA works, the human community has benefited from reduced incidences of fatal diseases. According to available scientific information, the development of vaccines is mainly through genetic engineering (Maurice, 2009). Just to be appreciated here is the fact that vaccines are quite instrumental in mitigating the occurrence of terminal diseases such as tetanus. They also serve the important role of controlling the occurrence of health compromising disease like tuberculosis and polio. Therefore, genetic engineering and DNA works are important in enhancing the quality of human health.
Opponents of genetic engineering and DNA works claim of its unqualified safety on the long term health effects to the users. Despite these claims, there has been no tangible scientific evidence linking genetic engineering and DNA work products to such health effects. This means that the process of genetic engineering does not harm the health of the human body. It only serves to provide sustainable solution to problems affecting the human community. In addition, unlike religion beliefs, man is bound by nature to seek improvement of their life as a means of enjoying the beauty of the gift of precious gift of life.
Conclusion
It is established that the question on whether genetic engineering and DNA work should be continued is a controversial issue. Proponents have it that it is the only viable solution to the sustainable social and economic development in the human community. On the contrary, opponents perceive the practice as a real risk to the long term health safety of mankind. However, given the eminent problems of foods insecurity and diseases facing humanity, the practice of genetic engineering and DNA work remains an important tool for safeguarding the sustainable existence of mankind.
0 comments:
Post a Comment