The sequencing of the genome is the most important scientific advance of the 20th century?

Question

in what ways could the study of genetics hinder the advancements of medicine?

Thank you so much for all your help

sorry there isn't supposed to be a question mark after century, i'm not asking if it is the most important advancement i just want to know whether it can hinder future advances

Thanks xXx

Answer 1

The Human Genome Project pandered to the reductionist view of biology. The idea that we are simply the product of our 'selfish' genes is now starting to lose favour a little, but not until after billions of dollars/pounds was poured into sequencing the human genome. Most of the money that funded the project in Europe was public money that might have been better spent on general cancer research (for example).
It was assumed that once we had the 'book of life' then we could cure all known genetic disease, but it's not that simple. Life in general is a massively complex system of interdependent processes and those processes at every level (not just the genetic level) need to be understood. Check out the book below.

Answer 2

I would take issue with your statement that the sequencing of the genome (the human genome presumably) is the most important scientific advance of the 20th century.

However, if this is a given...

I'd say that knowledge of the genome sequence could possibly delay research into new diseases caused entirely by environmental (i.e. non-genetic) factors as time may be wasted by avid geneticists searching through the genome trying to find a gene that wasn't there.

However, this seems unlikely as there are tests that you can do (e.g. with twin pair studies) to test genetic elements of diseases. These were available before genome sequencing.

It's difficult to see how an advance can hinder anything to be honest. Knowing more can only help, surely?

Anyway, I think the invention of the polymerase chain reaction or Watson & Crick's discovery of the double-helix structure of DNA are better candidates for best genetic discovery of the 20th century.

Answer 3

There are essentially two ways to sequence a genome. The BAC-to-BAC method, the first to be employed in human genome studies, is slow but sure. The BAC-to-BAC approach, also referred to as the map-based method, evolved from procedures developed by a number of researchers during the late 1980s and 90s and that continues to develop and change.

The other technique, known as whole genome shotgun sequencing, brings speed into the picture, enabling researchers to do the job in months to a year. The shotgun method was developed at the Institute for Genomic Research.

Now that the human genome sequence is nearing completion, the next phase which is understanding the meaning and function of genes, can begin.

This will result in great advances in medicine and other fields. In no way can scientific research hinder any advancement in medicine or any other field of civilised endeavour.

Answer 4

I doubt whether the sequencing of the genome will hinder medicine, as it should move to a new level of understanding the working of bodies and future generations of drugs should be better able to tackle disease at a more fundamental level. Ideally, some drugs will be made-to-order to deal with illness at the individual level.

I do forsee one problem though. The training of medics will continue to focus on treatment at the physiological level and these doctors to be are largely untrained in the rigours of genetics and molecular biology. I suppose there will be a 'black hole' in which molecular-based treatments will come available but there will be no clinicians with the knowledge to treat patients appropriately.

Answer 5

It can hinder scientific advancement because research using some of the coding is patented. I think it is within the intron area of the genetic material (originally though to be useless). Unless all the information is available without restriction, science could clearly be hindered by financial constraints as labs need to pay for the privilege of working with some areas.

Answer 6

hinder future advances? no.

The actual sequencing of the genome is a fantastic achievement of scientific endeavour.

The popular notion of potential 'misuse' of this technology is not the result of the advance, but the hypothetical malpractice of some form of genetic engineering. Totally different ball park in my opinion.

Answer 7

playing around with genetics to create "super humans" (people born or implanted with a gene that prevents illness) sounds appealing at first but we only get more "Super bugs" (germs that are resistant) all the time and money wasted on trying to develop the so called good gene would limit the time and money that should have been spent researching and developing practical treatments.
The "super germs" and new diseases we have now have already set us back substantially, We are all waiting for the "new" penicillin to be invented.

Answer 8

NO. The invention of the computer might be more significant.

Answer 9

Science will be used for the evil as well as the good just because they can do it.

Answer 10

Thats one of the BMAT questions which I am deperately trying to answer could people please post sensible answers please. Apart from sexy me for ur answer I am truely grateful