Introduction:
Bio-ethics is the study of the ethical issues relating to biology
and medicine. It is concerned with the ethical question that arises in relation
to biological developments. This is continuously developing with better ideas,
better technologies for better living. But with it comes great responsibility
of managing and using technological developments. When the probability of a
good result of a technology is high, so is the probability of its power of
destruction if it is misused. In this paper we will discuss in brief about the
advantages and disadvantages of bio-technology and genetic engineering/
manipulation in order to throw some light to the understanding of bio- ethics.
1.0 Bio-ethics :
The neologism ‘bioethics’ was coined in 1971 year the
biological scientist Van Rensselaer potter (1971-2011) who opened
his book, Bioethics : Bridge to the Future by explaining: “Therefore, I propose
the term bioethics to refer to the two most important aspects of achieving
intellectual diversity: knowledge about animals 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 research with humans was the first major issue that
stimulated bioethics. At the same time, however, a remarkable advance in
medical practice created a flurry of ethical questions. Transplantation of
human tissue and the replacement of organic functions by mechanical
substitutes appeared in the 1950s Kidney transplantation,
pioneered by John Murray in 1954 , posed the question whether a surgical
operation to remove a viable organ from a healthy person for transplant to
Hippocratic dictum of “do no harm” and violated laws against mutilation.
Other remarkable advances in medical treatment and diagnosis
that appeared in the second half of the twentieth century - such as
neurosurgery, antibiotic pharmacology, and chemotherapy for cancer - not only
saved lives but extended them. Often extended lives were filled with debility.
Successful methods to support compromised respiration pulled patients through
critical episodes but sometimes sustained them in sustained comas. The case
of Karen Ann Quinlan in 1975 brought the questions of how to define
death and when to allow an incurable patient to die to public attention.
2.0 Bio-technology:
Biotechnology is the field of biology that uses living processes,
organisms or machines to produce products or technologies designed to improve
the quality of human life. Biotechnology may overlap with molecular biology,
biomimetics, bioengineering, genetic engineering and nanotechnology depending
on the methods, tools and applications used. Biotechnology, like other advanced
technologies, has the potential for abuse. Concerns about this have led to
efforts by some groups to enact legislation restricting or banning certain
processes or programs, such as human cloning and embryonic stem cell research.
There is also concern that if biotechnological processes are used by groups
with nefarious intentions, the end result could be biological warfare. [2]
2.1 Types of Technology:
The science of biotechnology can be broken down into
sub-disciplines based on common uses and applications.
1. Red biotechnology: Red biotechnology is the process of using living organisms
to improve health and help the body fight disease. It is not limited to the
pharmaceutical industry but also includes healthcare as it helps reduce human
suffering and improve quality of life. It has become tremendous use in clinical
research and trials, gene therapy and in diagnostic of the gene. [3]
2. White biotechnology: it uses living cells- from yeast, moulds, bacteria and
plants and enzymes to synthesize products that are easily degradable, require
less energy and create less waste during their production. One of the key goals
of the White Biotechnology Agenda is the creation of biodegradable plastics. It
involves industrial processes such as the production of new chemicals or the
development of new fuels for vehicles. [4]
3. Green biotechnology: is a set of techniques used to create new varieties of
plants and animals that are adapted to meet the needs of farmers and consumers.
Its mission is to feed a rapidly growing human population, produce better crops
that use less water, fertilizers and pesticides, as well as help crops adapt to
climate change.[5]
4. Gold biotechnology: also known as bioinformatics is an interdisciplinary field
mainly involving molecular biology and genetics, computer science, mathematics,
and statistics, Data intensive, chemistry and biochemistry, artificial
intelligence to solve biological problems usually on the molecular level. The
most common problems are modeling biological processes at the molecular level
and drawing conclusions from the collected data.[6]
5. Blue biotechnology: is assigned to aquaculture, coastal and marine biotech. It
is associated with applications such as preservation of a variety of marine
species, restoring the aquatic wildlife to its original state of habitat, use
of marine species to develop new medicine genetic study of plants to engineer
other plants to become resistant to environmental extremes, etc.
6.Yellow biotechnology: or biotechnology with insects is analogous to the re
(animals) and green (plants) biotechnology. It is the use of bio-engineering to
make food better .It’s a modern agriculture branch related to food production
where active genes in insects are used for application in agriculture and
medicine. It includes minimizing environmental exploitation from meat
production, modification of plant toxins and extracting useful insects’
products.[7]
7.Violet biotechnology: is related to publication, invention, IPRs, and patents of
biotechnology. While all other forms of biotechnology aim at
increasing the number of inventions, violet biotechnology maintains them in a
rightful manner. It includes encouraging new biotechnology invention; analysis
and publication of biotech research, patent right in biotechnology invention
and ensure intellectual property rights.[8]
8.Dark biotechnology: it refers to the ability to use biotechnology as weapons or
for warfare. Biological weapons can be an effective tool for terrorists to
cause terror as it can cause widespread fear and panic to the society. With the
potentials of mass destruction, it can provide great power to anyone. Dark
biotechnology includes the intentional use and dissemination of harmful
microorganisms, pathogens or toxins to cause disruption of humans, crops and
livestock.[9]
2.2 PROS OF BIOTECHNOLOGY:
1. It offers medical advancement opportunities and makes it
possible to extend average human lifespan in certain cases. it also offers
higher resistance to diseases.
2. It can improve health and reduce hunger with the improvement of
cropland yields and nutritional density, so people can eat less and still
receive the same nutritional values which allow more people to have the food
they need.
3. It helps us minimize or eliminate waste products. The footprint
that humanity leaves on our planet from wastes is extensive. Biotechnology
enables us to produce waste with good biodegradable properties.
4. It can reduce infectious disease rates through vaccines and
treatments that reduce symptoms of diseases. It also helps us to know the modes
or nature of disease transmission which allows us to take preventive measures.
2.3 CONS 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 a field of research with many unknowns, should our
actions have an opposite reaction, and future generations could pay the price
for the research today.
3. It can damage the soil because many crops get their nutrients
from the soil and can fail if the soil is overloaded.
4. It turns human life into a commodity. Obtaining DNA to create
alter DNA sequences for profit minimizes human life to profit potential.
5. It can be use for destruction. All the benefit that
biotechnology can provide could also be turned into a weapon that is used for
mass destruction. Medicines can be made with biotechnology, but diseases can
also be weaponized .[10]
3.0 Genetic Engineering:
In the early 1970s scientists developed techniques known as
recombinant DNA technology for transferring genes between cells and organisms.
While this new technology was still in its infancy, scientists and citizens
began to be concerned about its safety. In thinking about the ethics of human
geneticengineering, it is important to distinguish two targets and goals.
First, genetic engineering techniques can be applied to somatic cells and to
germ cells (e.g., testes, ovaries, sperm, acolytes, and embryos). Second, the
goals of genetic engineering can be therapeutic or non-therapeutic. These
distinctions imply the following four types of human genetic engineering:
1. Somatic gene therapy (SGT),
2. Somatic genetic enhancement (SGE),
3. Germ-line gene therapy (GLGT),
4. Germ-line genetic enhancement (GLGE).
3.1 SOMATIC GENE THERAPY
SGT has not been as controversial as other forms of human genetic
engineering, because many view it as morally similar to conventional medical
treatments. The goal of SGT is to transfer gens into human somatic cells to
enable those cells to produce functional proteins in the appropriate quantities
at the appropriate times. Because SGT targets somatic cells, it probably will
not transmit genetic changes to future generations, because genetic inheritance
in human beings occurs through germ cells. However, there is a slight chance
that an SGT protocol will result in accidental gene transfer to germ cells, and
that chance increases the earlier in human development that one performs the
experiment.
3.2 SOMATIC GENETIC ENHANCEMENT
SGE is similar to SGT except that the goal of SGE in to
enhance human traits. For example, one might attempt to transfer genes to a
child to increase growth or strength. SGE has the same types of technical
difficulties as SGT and also raise concerns about enhancement.
3.3 GERM-LINE GENE THERAPY
The goal of GLGT is to transfer genes into human germ cells to
prevent the development of a genetic disease in a child who has not yet been
born. Because GLGT targets germ cells, it is likely to transmit genetic changes
to future generations; therefore it poses far greater risks than SGT. Children
could be born with severe genetic defects induced by GLGT. According to many
authors and organizations, GLGT is not morally justified, because it is too
risky. Many clinician-scientists who have seen the promise of SGT have
attempted to draw a firm moral boundary between SGT and GLGT.
3.4 GERM-LINE GENETIC ENHANCEMENT
In genetic enhancement the goal of the intervention is not treat
or prevent a disease but to achieve another result, such as increased height,
intelligence, disease resistance, or musical ability. Many authors argue that
there is a difference between the ethical application of gene therapy and the
ethical rejection or questioning of gene enhancement.
According to an influential approach, disease is an objective
concept that is defined as a deviation from normal human function that causes
suffering and places limitations on 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 nations, because it interferes with reading, but it
does not cause that problem in a non-literate society. In some societies people
who have visions are regarded as prophets, but in others they may be treated
for schizophrenia. If social and cultural factors influence the definition of
disease, then what counts as genetic therapy may vary across societies and
cultures.[11]
3.5 PROS OF INHERITABLE GENETIC MODIFICATION
1. IGM benefits patients by preventing genetic diseases and
the disability,pain, and suffering associated with those diseases.
2. IGM benefits couples by enabling 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 CONS OF INHERITABLE GENETIC MODIFICATION (IGM):
1. IGM harms mother who carries a genetically modified child. For
example, IGM increases the risk of complications during labor and delivery.
2. IGM degrades the gene pool by reducing genetic diversity, which
is important for the survival of the human species.
3. IGM violates the rights of children, including the right not to
beharmed, the right to an open future, and the right not to be the subject of a
genetic experiment.
4. IGM is the vain pursuit of human perfection.
5. IGM causes social injustice by increasing the gap between the
genetic haves and have not.[12]
Theological Reflection :
We need to make sure we create a strategy that leaves room for
serious debate about the ethics of stem cell research and therapy, PGD, and
gene therapy, where the focus is 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 are not to rush in the direction of enhancement technologies,
but neither are we to reject all of them out of hand. It may be right to be
suspicious of the grandiose claims, and even of some of the more moderate
ones.Important theological stands are provided by wisdom and prudence,
alongside humility and weakness. It is right to be cautious, but this by itself
does not lead to outright opposition to all forms of exploratory therapy and
the modest categories of enhancement. While theological consideration do not
provide specific answers concerning what is or is not acceptable, they serve to
provide a framework by which it is possible to accept our finiteness and
mortality. While acceptance of realities like these could lead to fatalism, it
is balanced by an awareness of the magnificence and grandeur of human beings
that is also internal to the Christian faith. Enhancement technologies can be
assessed and critiqued, utilizing those that appear to advance human welfare
and arguing against those whose aspirations appear to be counter
–productive.[13]
The ethical issues addressed under the heading of 'bioethics'
should logically coincide with the scientific and technological issues covered
by 'biotechnology'. However, the breadth and diversity of the territory covered
by biotechnology is rarely matched in the field of bioethics where discussions
are usually restricted to a much narrower are relating specifically to the
treatment of the human person. Some factors that should be considered in
dealing with ethical issues are beneficence (requiring action which promote the
good of the patient), non-maleficence (prohibiting action which will cause
harm), patient autonomy (practitioners should not interfere with the effective
exercise of patient autonomy), justice and confidentiality. Value is derived
from the fact of divine creation and from God’s evaluation of the world as the
‘good’Gen 1:31. This provides the basis for valuing all species and forms life
which supports their care and conservation. [14]
Conclusion:
with the advancement and development of better technologies,
humans have gained access to better equipments to solve different kinds of
problems, but it also has led to the tendency of people to misuse various
developments. It has led to the degradation of human values and the probability
of causing destruction. Human body is not electric circuit that can customize
according our wishes but it created by God with His own design. He knows better
about balance of human life for these reason there are different kind of people
some are weak, some strong, some intelligent and some not so etc. As a human
its ethical duty to ensure moral rights for everyone but bio-technology and
genetic engineering can bring curse for weak and abnormal people.
Bio-technology may be blessing for human kind if we can use this technology
with morality, it can bring revolutionary in human society.Therefore, it
becomes essential to think ethical value of using technology for better of
human kind.
Bibliography
Edgard ,Brian.”biotheology:theology,Ethics and the new biotechnologies”. InChristian 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.
[6]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/24272431/retrieved on 22-07-19 8:58 pm.
[7]https://explorebiotech.com/about-yellow-biotechnology/ retrieved on 22-07-19 9:11 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.
[10]https://vittana.org/11-biotechnology-pros-and-cons retrieved on 23-07-19 8:20 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