Bioethics

Are modern medical practices weakening the human gene pool and adversely affecting the possible future of our entire race' Are our advancements in the fields of genetic research and manipulation simply allowing those who would not otherwise have survived to reproduce' Should we instead let Darwin's theory of natural selection run free and stop this impediment of the most basic of natural laws' These questions and many others like them have fueled bioethical debates for years, especially as our advances in science and medicine grow rapidly. As with any debate, there are those who lie far on either side of an opinion and the answer may be found somewhere in the hazy middle ground. In this paper, I will be exploring the different views on this topic from both sides. Charles Darwin made famous the idea that members of a species that either possess certain advantageous traits or lack certain disadvantageous traits have a better chance at surviving and reproducing than less fortunate members of the species. This natural selection theory has stood up to the test of time and continues hold merit over one hundred and fifty years later. Medicine, however, has changed immensely in the past one hundred and fifty years. Diseases that Darwin would have seen as a fatal are now treatable and curable. He may have seen current medical advances (such as organ transplant) as a weakening of the human gene pool, which in the end will lead to the extinction of our race. By helping the weaker members of the species survive and reproduce, we create a weaker species as a whole. The extinction of a race can come from many different factors, including environment, predators and genetic factors, but for our purposes I will simply look at the genetic factors. Genetic pollution can lead to a weaker form of the species that cannot cope with the environment and natural predators that it previously withstood. As medical science evolves and enables us to make changes to our genetic material, humans are slowing acquiring the ability to become more and more alike genetically as we strive to eradicate genetic mutations that harm us. This manipulation of genes to make us a more homogenous race (shown in extremes by science fiction works such as Gattaca and Brave New World) may be the most detrimental thing we can do and may make us vulnerable to be wiped out easily by a single strand of a disease or environmental adaptation that we cannot make if we become too much alike genetically. These are all arguments put forth by those who support the idea that we are weakening our race by advancing in the genetic fields. Perhaps the most famous example of society trying to create a homogenous race of only the most “perfect” would be the eugenics movement by the Nazis. On the other hand, how can we be for certain that these changes in our genes will have a negative effect' One study I read mentioned a particular species of moth prevalent in Britain in the 18th century. A black variation of the normally gray moth began to emerge as some genes mutated. At first, this variation of moth almost became extinct because, compared to their lighter kin, they were very easy to spot and be eaten by birds but eventually (as a result of the industrial revolution and the immense pollution that accompanied it) the darker moths blended into the environment better and outlasted the gray variation. The author continues to draw a parallel between the moths and humans, saying that if the darker color moths had been suppressed or eradicated genetically because of this difference as human doctors strive to do, the moth population probably would not have survived at all (Shafer, 2006). However, shouldn't every person be entitled to live their life to the fullest potential that they are capable' The Christian faith certainly supports the idea that we must help all people to the best of our ability and value all human life equally. Medical doctors are always striving to ease the pain of human suffering with new advancements and cures. Our society is centered on the idea of saving every life, no matter the cost, evidenced by the many people who are currently living on life support or as “human vegetables” in hospitals all over the world. Almost everyone has experienced the suffering or loss of a loved one from an incurable disease or irreversible situation and wished that there were some way to have prevented that death. It is our duty to advance science and medicine to find cures and solutions to our medical ailments. It is difficult to argue that medical advancements are completely negative. In countries that are advanced, no child is born without a great deal of medical attention that previous generations lacked (vaccinations, vitamins, pre-natal treatments, screenings, etc). We live our lives in considerably less pain and with less suffering than our ancestors and we live them considerably longer than them, too. The medical and scientific fields continue to advance more rapidly every day, with new discoveries into our genetic make-up and new insights into diseases and ailments. To some people, worrying about the future of our race is an abstract idea similar to worrying about global warming or holes in the ozone layer that may or may not affect us for hundreds of years, at which point you (as an individual) will be dead anyway. How do we balance this abstract idea of the future of humanity against the value of a human life at this very moment' I think this is the most basic question in this bioethical debate. We must be aware of the implications that we may have on our genetic future, but I believe that it is our duty to advance the medical fields as much as we can to ease suffering and help eradicate the diseases. Works Cited Shafer, A. (2006). Ask a geneticist. Understanding Genetics, Retrieved from http://www.thetech.org/genetics/ask.php'id=169 Gene therapy. (1990). Briefings in Medical Ethics, 16(4). http://www.jstor.org/pss/27716962 genetic pollution. (n.d.). Dictionary.com's 21st Century Lexicon. Retrieved from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/genetic pollution Aleccia, J. (2008). Pass it on: sons of infertile men may be next. MSNBC Health, Retrieved from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26680088 Vaknin, S. (n.d.). Racing down eugenics and the future of the human species. Retrieved from http://samvak.tripod.com/eugenics.html