Introduction:
Bioethics is the think about of moral issues related to science and medication. It deals with the ethical question that arises in connection with biological development. This is constantly evolving with better ideas, better technology for a better life. But with that comes great responsibility for managing and exploiting technological developments. When the probability of a good outcome of a technology is high, the probability of its destruction if misused is also high. In this article, we will briefly discuss the pros and cons of biotechnology and genetic engineering/manipulation to shed some light on the understanding of bioethics.
1.0 Bioethics: The neologism
“bioethics” was coined in 1971 by the biological scientist Van Rensselaer
Potter (1971–2011), who opened his book Bioethics: A Bridge to the Future by
explaining: Therefore, I use the term "bioethics" to refer to two of
the most important aspects of multiple intelligence acquisition: biological
knowledge and human values. The Encyclopedia of Bioethics, first published in
1978, defined bioethics as “the study of the ethical dimensions of medicine and
the life sciences,” expanded in 1995 to “the systematic study of moral
dimensions—including moral vision, decisions, behavior, and policies. life
sciences and health care using different ethical methodologies in an
interdisciplinary setting”. [1]
The ethics of human research was the first major issue that
stimulated bioethics. At the same time, however, remarkable advances in medical
practice have created a flood of ethical questions. Transplantation of human
tissue and the replacement of organic functions with mechanical substitutes
emerged in the 1950s. Kidney transplantation, pioneered by John Murray in 1954,
raised the question of whether surgery to remove a viable organ from a healthy
person for transplantation violated the Hippocratic maxim of "do no
harm" and violated laws against mutilation.
Other remarkable advances in medical treatment and diagnosis that
emerged in the second half of the twentieth century—such as neurosurgery,
antibiotic pharmacology, and cancer chemotherapy—not only saved lives, but
extended them. Long life was often filled with weakness. Successful methods to
support impaired breathing have carried patients through critical episodes but
sometimes kept them in a permanent coma. The 1975 case of Karen Ann Quinlan
brought to public attention the questions of how to define death and when to
let an incurable patient die.
2.0 Biotechnology: Biotechnology is an area of biology that uses living processes, organisms or systems to produce products or technologies designed to improve the quality of human life. Depending on the technology, tools and applications used, biotechnology can overlap with molecular biology, bionics, bioengineering, genetic engineering and nanotechnology. Biotechnology, like any other technology, has the potential to be misused. Concerns about this have led to efforts by some groups to create laws that limit or limit certain procedures or activities, such as human cloning and embryonic stem cell research. There are also concerns that the end result could be biological warfare if biotechnology is used by terrorists. [2]
2.1 Types of Technology: The
science of biotechnology can be divided into sub-disciplines based on common
uses and applications.
1. Red Biotechnology: The process of using living organisms to
improve health and assist the body's immune system. It is not limited to the
pharmaceutical industry but also to the medical sector as it facilitates the
alleviation of human suffering and increases the quality of life. It has become
a huge use in clinical research and studies, gene therapy and gene diagnosis.
[3]
2. White biotechnology: The use of cells and enzymes from yeast,
fungi, bacteria and plants to synthesize products that are easy to degrade,
require less energy and produce less waste during manufacturing goods. One of
the initial goals of the White Biotechnology program is to create biodegradable
plastics. It includes industrial processes such as the manufacture of new drugs
or the production of new fuels for automobiles. [4]
3. Green biotechnology: is a set of techniques used to create new
varieties of plants and animals that are adapted to the needs of farmers and
consumers. Its mission is to feed a rapidly growing human population, produce
better crops that use less water, fertilizer and pesticides, as well as help
crops adapt to climate change.[5]
4. Biotechnology of gold: also known as bioinformatics is an
interdisciplinary field including mainly molecular biology and genetics,
informatics, mathematics and statistics, data intensive, chemistry and
biochemistry, artificial intelligence to solve biological problems usually at
the molecular level. The most common problems are modeling biological processes
at the molecular level and drawing conclusions from collected data.[6]
5. Blue biotechnology: it is intended for aquaculture, coastal and
marine biotechnology. It is associated with applications such as the protection
of various marine species, the restoration of aquatic animals to their original
state, the use of marine species to develop new medicinal plant genetic studies
to engineer other plants to become resistant to extreme environmental
conditions, etc. .
6. Yellow biotechnology: or insect biotechnology is analogous to
re (animal) and green (plant) biotechnology. It is about using bioengineering
to improve food. It is a modern branch of agriculture related to food
production where active insect genes are used for agricultural and medical
applications. It includes minimizing environmental use in meat production,
modifying plant toxins, and extracting beneficial insect products.[7]
7. Purple biotechnology: related to biotechnology publications, inventions, intellectual property rights and patents. While all other forms of biotechnology aim to increase the number of inventions, purple biotechnology sustains them in a legitimate way. It includes the promotion of new biotechnological inventions; analyzes and publications of biotechnological research, patent rights for biotechnological inventions and securing intellectual property rights.[8]
8. Dark Biotechnology: refers to the ability
to use biotechnology as weapons or for warfare. Biological weapons can be an
effective terror tool for terrorists because they can create general fear and
panic in society. With the potential for mass destruction, it can provide great
power to anyone. Dark biotechnology involves the deliberate use and
dissemination of harmful microorganisms, pathogens, or toxins to disrupt
humans, crops, and livestock.[9]
22.2 ADVANTAGES OF BIOTECHNOLOGY:
1. It offers opportunities for medical progress and, in certain
cases, makes it possible to extend the average length of human life. it also
offers greater resistance to disease.
2. It can improve health and reduce hunger by improving crop
yields and nutrient density, so people can eat less and still get the same nutritional
values, allowing more people to have the food they need.
3. It helps us minimize or eliminate waste products. The waste
footprint left by humans on Earth is huge. Biotechnology enables us to produce
waste with good biodegradable properties.
4. It can reduce the rate of infectious diseases by using vaccines
and treatments that reduce the symptoms of the disease. It also helps us to
know the modes or nature of disease transmission which enables us to take
preventive measures.
2. 2.3 THE INNOCENCE OF BIOTECHNOLOGY:
1. It creates an all or nothing approach. If
something unforeseen were to happen, the entire crop or the possibility of
medical treatment could go to waste or even threaten the survival of certain species.
2. It is an area of research with many unknowns,
should our actions backfire, and future generations may pay the price for
research today.
3. It could destroy agricultural land because many
crops get their nutritional content from the soil and if the soil is overloaded
it can lose its viability.
4. It turns human life into a product. Collecting DNA
to make modified DNA groupings for benefit minimizes human life to benefit
potential.
5. It can be used to destroy. All the benefits that
biotechnology can give seem moreover be turned into a weapon that's utilized
for mass pulverization. Medicines can be made using biotechnology, but diseases
can also be used as weapons. [10]
3.0 Genetic Engineering: In
the early 1970s, scientists developed techniques known as recombinant DNA
technology to transfer genes between cells and organisms. While this new
technology was still in its infancy, scientists and citizens began to worry
about its safety. When considering the ethics of human genetic engineering, it
is important to distinguish between two goals and objectives. First, genetic
engineering techniques can be applied to somatic cells and to germ cells (eg,
testes, ovaries, sperm, acolytes and embryos). Second, the goals of genetic
engineering can be therapeutic or non-therapeutic. These differences include
the following four types of human genetic engineering:
1. Somatic gene therapy (SGT),
2. Somatic Genetic Enhancement (SGE),
3. Germline gene therapy (GLGT),
4. Germline Genetic Enhancement (GLGE).
3.1 SOMATIC GENE THERAPY
SGT has not been as controversial as other forms of human genetic
engineering, as it is considered by many to be morally similar to conventional
medical procedures. The objective of SGT is to exchange qualities into human
substantial cells so that these cells can create utilitarian proteins within
the suitable sums at the fitting time. Because SGT targets somatic cells, it is
unlikely to transmit genetic changes to future generations, as genetic inheritance
in humans occurs through germ cells. However, there is a small chance that the
SGT protocol will result in accidental gene transfer to germ cells, and this
chance increases the earlier in human development the experiment is performed.
3.2 SOMATIC GENETIC IMPROVEMENT
SGE is similar to SGT except that SGE aims to improve human
characteristics. For example, we may try to pass genes to a child to increase
growth or strength. SGE has the same types of technical difficulties as SGT and
also raises concerns about improvements.
3.3 GENE THERAPY OF THE GERM LINE
The objective of GLGT is to exchange qualities into human germ
cells to avoid an unborn child from creating a hereditary infection. Since GLGT
targets germ cells, it is likely to transmit hereditary changes to future eras;
in this manner, it postures a much more prominent chance than SGT. Babies can
be born with severe genetic defects caused by GLGT. Agreeing to numerous
creators and organizations, GLGT isn't ethically advocated since it is as well
unsafe. Many physician-scientists who saw the promise of SGT attempted to draw
a firm moral line between SGT and GLGT.
3.4 GENETIC IMPROVEMENT OF THE GERM LINE
In genetic enhancement, the goal of the intervention is not
to cure or prevent disease, but to achieve another result, such as increasing
height, intelligence, disease resistance, or musical ability. According to many
authors, there is a moral difference between genetic therapy, which is morally
acceptable, and genetic enhancement, which is morally unacceptable or
questionable.
According to the influential approach, illness is an objective
concept that is defined as a deviation from normal human functioning that
causes suffering and limits a person's range of opportunities. Social and
cultural factors play an important role in defining the normal range of values
that define illness. For example, dyslexia is recognized as a disease in
developed countries because it disrupts reading, but it does not cause this
problem in an illiterate society. In some societies, people who have visions
are considered prophets, but in others they can be treated for schizophrenia.
If social and cultural factors influence the definition of disease, then what
counts as genetic therapy may vary in different societies and cultures. [11]
3.5 ADVANTAGES OF INHERITABLE GENETIC MODIFICATION
1. IGM benefits patients by preventing genetic diseases and the
disability, pain and suffering associated with these diseases.
2. IGM benefits couples by allowing them to have healthy children
who are genetically related to them and prevent genetic diseases.
3. IGM benefits society by increasing human intelligence,
productivity, athletic performance, and other social goals.
3.6 INNOCENT INHERITABLE GENETIC MODIFICATION (IGM):
1. IGM harms the mother who carries the genetically modified
child. For example, IGM increases the risk of complications during childbirth.
2. IGM degrades the gene pool by reducing the genetic diversity
that is important for the survival of the human species.
3. IGM violates the rights of children, including the right not to
be harmed, the right to an open future and the right not to be the subject of
genetic experimentation.
4. IGM is a futile pursuit of human perfection.
5. IGM causes social injustice by widening the gap between genetic
traits and non[12].
Theological reflection: We need to ensure that we create a
paradigm that leaves room for serious discussion of the ethical issues
surrounding stem cell research and therapy, PGD and gene therapy, focusing on
possible clinical applications (either now or in the future). ). Whether one
labels any of these as enhancements or therapies is of little consequence to
medical treatment, where the focus is on patients who can benefit from these
procedures.
We shouldn't rush towards enhancement technologies, but we
shouldn't reject them all at once either. It may be right to be suspicious of
grandiose claims, and even of some of the more moderate ones. Important
theological positions are secured by wisdom and prudence, along with humility
and weakness. It is right to be cautious, but this does not in itself lead to
outright opposition to all forms of exploratory therapy and modest categories
of enhancement. While theological considerations do not provide concrete
answers to what is or is not acceptable, they serve to provide a framework
through which to accept our finitude and mortality. While the acceptance of
realities such as these can lead to fatalism, it is balanced by an awareness of
the magnificence and nobility of human beings that is also intrinsic to the
Christian faith. Enhancement technologies can be evaluated and critiqued using
those that appear to benefit human well-being and argued against those whose
aspirations appear to be counterproductive.[13]
The ethical issues addressed under the heading of
"bioethics" should logically coincide with the scientific and
technological issues that are included in "biotechnology." However,
the breadth and diversity of the ground covered by biotechnology is rarely
matched in the field of bioethics, where discussions are usually confined to
the much narrower subject matter of dealing specifically with the human person.
Some factors to consider when dealing with ethical issues are beneficence
(requiring action that promotes the good of the patient), nonmaleficence
(prohibition of actions that cause harm), patient autonomy (practitioners
should not interfere with the patient's effective exercise of autonomy),
fairness and confidentiality. Value is derived from the fact of divine creation
and from God's evaluation of the world as "good" Gen 1:31. This
provides a basis for valuing all species and life forms, which supports their
care and protection. [14]
Conclusion: with the
advancement and development of better technology, people have gained access to
better devices to solve different kinds of problems, but it has also led to the
tendency of people to abuse various developments. It has led to the degradation
of human values and the likelihood of wreaking havoc. The human body is not
an electrical circuit that we can adjust according to our wishes, but was
created by God with His own design. He knows better about the balance of human
life, for the reason that there are different kinds of people, some are weak,
some are strong, some are intelligent and some are not so etc. As a human
being, he has an ethical duty to ensure moral rights for everyone except
biotechnology and genetic engineering can bring curses for weak and abnormal
people. Biotechnology can be a boon to mankind, if we can use this technology
with morality, it can revolutionize human society. Therefore, it is necessary
to think about the ethical value of using technology for the betterment of
humanity.
Bibliography
Edgard
,Brian.”biotheology:theology, Ethics and the new biotechnologies”. In Christian
perspectives on science and technology,2009.
Resnik
,David B.BIOETHICS VOLUME 1. edited
by Bruce Jennings.Michigan:Gale Cengage Learning,2014.
Resnik
,David B.BIOETHICS VOLUME 3. edited
by Bruce Jennings.Michigan:Gale Cengage Learning,2014.
Jones
,Gareth. Bioethics. Adelaide:
Australasian Theological Forum Ltd,2007.
Web-bibliography
https://whatis
.techtarget.com/definition/biotechnology
https://explorebiotech.com/everything-need-know-red-biotechnology/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1326365/
https://explorebiotech.com/about-yellow-biotechnology/
https://vittana.org/11-biotechnology-pros-and-cons
[1]
David B. Resnik,BIOETHICS VOLUME 1(edited by Bruce Jennings.Michigan:Gale
Cengage Learning,2014)331-333.
[2]
https://whatis .techtarget.com/definition/biotechnology retrieved on 22-07-19
8:26 pm.
[3]
https://explorebiotech.com/everything-need-know-red-biotechnology/ retrieved on
22-07-19 8:29 pm.
[4]
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1326365/ retrieved on 22-07-19
8:30 pm.
[5]
https://explorebiotech.com/introduction-tools-and-applications-of-green-biotechnology/
retrieved on 22-07-19 8:51 pm.
[8]
https://exploretech.com/know-about-violet-biotechnology/ retrieved on 22-07-19
9:20 pm.
[9]
https://explorebiotech.com/dark-biotechnology-bioterrorism
-and-bioweapons retrieved on 22-07-19 9:52 pm.
[11]
David B. Resnik,BIOETHICS VOLUME 3(edited by Bruce Jennings.Michigan:Gale
Cengage Learning,2014)1271-1273.
[12]
David B. Resnik,BIOETHICS VOLUME 3(edited by Bruce Jennings.Michigan:Gale
Cengage Learning,2014)1274-1275.
[13]
Gareth Jones,Bioethics(Adelaide: Australasian Theological Forum Ltd,2007),54-56.
[14]
Brian Edgard,”biotheology:theology, ethics and the new biotechnologies”, in
Christian perspectives on science and technology, 2009, 1-6.
0 Comments