Notion de progrès- In what extent the brakthroughs in genetics constitute real progress?

...

But, like for every genetic manipulation, there are negative points because the embryos which carried the defective gene were eliminated. It raises the issue of the status of the embryo: at what stage of development can an embryo be considered as a human being, and is it justified to dispose of it ? In my opinion, people should accept that an embryo isn’t perfect and to that extent I don’t think that it is necessary to eliminate the embryos with a defective gene. Indeed, I think that if it is know that in the family women are often damage by breast cancer, they will be follow by doctors and cured as soon as possible. In fact, breast cancer is one of the cancer which is the best cured today.

***

Then, the last document, called « The stark truth about doning » is a video which is an account of how a woman had her dog cloned.

Daniele is an American woman who was completely obsessed with her dog, Trouble, so before he died, she provided scientists with a DNA sample from the dog so he could be cloned. After his death, she was devastated and upset so she decided to have a South Korean company produce a clone of Trouble. South Korea is currently the only country where this procedure is possible. However, it is very expensive, around 100,000$;, as she had recently lost her job on Wall Street she agreed to have her story chronicled on a TV channel, and the Korean company offered her a 50% discount because of the publicity the hour-long special programme would make them.. Cloning a dog is possible in Korea because the ethical standards are lower than in Europe and America; furthermore, there are dog farms where dogs are raised for the dinner table; so it is very easy for scientists to get cheap female dogs to use in the labs as surrogate mother and eggs donors. So scientists managed to create Trouble’s clone by using his DNA sample; Daniele was lucky, as, the surrogate mothers do not always get impregnated; besides, the cloned puppies may not survive. Danièle watched the puppy’s birth over Skype, and was over the moon when Double Trouble arrived at her home a few weeks later. She even claimed that the puppy behaved exactly like Trouble but the scientist point out that « it would be a copy of the dog’s body and not of it personnality » Here again, what might be considered as a breakthrough in genetics has become a burning issue. As John Woestendiek, the author of a book about the dog cloning industry points out, once an animal has been cloned, how far is it to human cloning? He insists that this is a slippery slope, and strongly disapproves of it. I agree with his opinion, in fact, the cloning industry might go too far and fast. People should accept that every one die some day and that we shouldn’t try to play God and also clone animal or people. Another concern is the status of the animals used in the dog cloning industry: in fact, the surrogate mothers use are from dog farms and if they didn’t die after giving birth, they will return in the farm, be sold and eat. This cause many ethical and sanitary problems because of the treatment the dog have ingest during their pregnancy and still in their body when people will eat them.

Daniele’s story makes me wonder if the advances in genetics that made dog cloning possible are really a form of progress. I think that it is more like a whim than a form of progress. Science allowed to save lifes but it shouldn’t go that far and try to resurrect animal of poeple thank cloning.

As a conclusion, I would say that the documents I discussed show how controversial progress can be when it is related to genetic engineering; indeed, on one hand scientists and doctors can make the best use of genetic manipulations to cure people and improve their health. There can be no doubt that those people are grateful for such progress; on the other hand, we may wonder about the possible psychological and physical side effects of such techniques: doctors do not have enough hindsight to assess them, and there may well be a backlash some day in the future. Progress in genetic engineering is even more questionable when it is used to satisfy people’s whims, like in Daniele’s case.

[pic 1]

[pic 2]

[pic 3]