What are your views on genetic engineering, and the use of animals in scientific research?

Question

I would like an ethical approach and person views, what would the effect be?, the pros and cons

Answer 1

two different questions here:

Genetic engineering isn't as bad as people once thought it would turn out. It's used in a wide variety of beneficial products. Before GE, diabetics had to use pig insulin. Because insulin is such a complex molecule, it was impossible to create it using synthetic chemistry. Now they can synthesize insulin that is identical to human insulin using genetically engineered cells.

On the flip side, genetic engineering has produced some "super weeds" in the agricultural industry that are resistant to pesticides. It also hasn't been optimized for use as gene therapy without immune responses.

Animal testing is critical for assuring the safety and efficacy of new therapeutics. Without animal testing there would be virtually no reliable mechanism for determining if a therapy causes more harm than benefit. It also allows scientists to see if there are any unpredicted safety issues.

Animal testing also allows very complex biology found in humans to be simplified for better understanding. Using animal models with simpler, more controlled biology (a genetically identical mouse colony for example) scientists can more accurately and quickly discover and characterize previously unrecognized biological pathways. A better understanding of biology allows scientists to develop better therapies and preventitive medicine.

In contrast, animal studies can be painful and uncomfortable for the animals. Tremendous care is used by scientists in the developed world to make sure animals suffer the minimal amount of discomfort through the use of anesthetics and analgesics in their studies. This is a government requirement in North America, Japan and most of Europe.

Answer 2

Genetic engineering could possibly be the best and most valuable tool to the human race in the future, despite it's obvious dangers of 'playing god' and the danger of creating some unearthly horror.

It has already played a nice part in saving lives as Bacteria (not sure which ones though) are altered on the genetic scale so that they produce the protein Insulin (A protein that breaks down Glucose in the body) obviously without this, Diabetics can't control their blood sugars and some would obviously live a shortened life.

One part of genetic engineering I have no liking for is the so called 'designer baby', or having a child's sex and phenotypes changed to the preferences of the parents. The randomization of chromozomes and Chisimata of chromatids all provide plenty of variation and diversity in humans without the need of this technology. We do not want to start creating 'super' humans.

I'm torn on animal testing however as some examples, like using a 100 monkeys to preform experiments on that in the end save 100,000s of human lives, I consider that to be ethically viable. Many treatments that save lives today are from animal testing. While it may be unpleasant to watch and hear about, this from testing will be around until appropriate replacements can't be found.

Answer 3

Genetic engineering is not good for the animals, because they are being genetically modified by swapping genes with another species which is totally different from them. I was watching Animal Farm on Channel 4 the other night and it's really shocking what they do to the animals. There were glow-in-the-dark pigs and alcoholic mice. If you think they're shocking, there were more!!!

Answer 4

In general, it's a bad idea unless the stake of the human race is at stake (if it ain't broke, don't fix it), but it's going to happen.

However, if genetic engineering will save a person's child will you tell them that it is unethical or a bad idea? Have fun trying to sleep that night. If you sleep peacefully, you work for Exxon or a member of the Bush or Cheyney family.

Cons? Does anybody have the slightest clue what everything in our body does? How everything interacts? We haven't even figured out why some people like members of the same sex (I'm not saying it's wrong, just that it's obviously related to our DNA, but nobody knows why). Diabetes, schizophrenia, depression, age-related eye diseases, etc. Anybody know what exactly causes them? If you do, you would be a multi-billionare. So why would you think that genetic engineering will solve all evils? Did you ever wonder why you like blondes and somebody else like brunettes? Have you heard of Jesse Gelsinger. He's dead.

Where are we going to put all these people that we save? Mars? Atlantis?

As far as the use of animals, ummm, yeah, it does suck and I wish there was a better way. For all of those people who say use criminals. You just tortured a person who was wrongly convicted. Oooopppppps. Sorry about that. At least it was for good cause. While we are at protecting animal rights, let's give the U.S.A back to the Native Americans and move back to the U.K., Ireland, the Far East and Africa. Who's with me!!!! Didn't think so.

Answer 5

At the end of the day it comes down to 'what's more important, animals or humans?'. Before you jump to a conclusion think about if one of your closest loved ones, a parent or a child maybe, was critically ill in hospital and the only drug that can save their life is, as many are, tested on animals. Is it wrong then? Or if it was your own life? I love animals but I think there are some situations where we have to use them. But I do think it should be very carefully monitored and they should make sure they are using the fewest animals possible and harming them as little as possible. So yes I think they should be used. As for genetic engeneering, yes I think it should be explored. I dont really believe in God (well I definately dont think he created us if he does exist) so I dont have all those 'dont play God' issues. If it helps us, great!

Answer 6

I'm only 13 and don't understand 100% of it, but it is good and bad at the same time. it is good in the fact that we could discover how to grow back limbs, because they grew a human ear on the back of a mouse, but it is bad because this is all very cruel to animals. also say a animal was injected with some disease, then escaped, there would be another big emergency with the disease spreading. but this is my opinion, other people would have different opinions, i think it isn't that good.

Answer 7

Genetic engineering is a fast way of accomplishing what we were already doing the slow way with selective breeding. It holds the promise to increase crop yields and to help feed people in areas where non-GM crops cannot survive due to the harsh environment.

Animal testing is an unpleasant necessity. For a start, diabetics would be dead if dogs weren't involved in the production of their medicines. Once we have the technology to accurately simulate a complete life form and the effects that a medicine will have on it, then sure, we can drop the animal testing. In the meantime though, it's needed. I do however disagree with testing fripperies like cosmetics on animals. I think that they should only be used for research that will save lives.

Answer 8

Genetic engineering is very promising in the treatment of some presently uncurable diseases such as Duchenne's muscular dystrophy, a debilitating and often fatal disease, possibly even giving us a cure for such diseases. Genetic engineering should not be used for the creation of "designer" babies.

Unfortunately, the use of animals in scientific research is currently a neccessity, but British scientists adhere to the three R's: replace reduce refine, all designed to limit the use of animals for research and to maximise the results gathered from those which are used. Hopefully, in vitro techniques will develop and evolve to a point where the need to test of animals is eliminated.

And as for testing on paedophiles, murderers and rapists... don't forget miscarriages of justice still happen - innocent people may be subjected to inhumane practices in the name of science. Surely it's all a bit too similar to the "work" of Dr. Josef Mengele, the Nazi concentration camp doctor who carried out macabre experiments on the prisoners, many of whom had genuinely done nothing wrong but had been rubber stamped as a second class citizens and therefore were treated as lumps of meat. We have no authority to pass judgement on issues of this calibre when it comes to our own species.

Answer 9

I'm a bit confused on the topic. I mean, if it's saving people's lives then it's probably a good thing, but harming animals in the process is still incredibly, undeniably wrong. it's very much a question of do the ends justify the means, isn't it.

Answer 10

Genetic engineering has a lot of potential to treat genetic diseases, or diseases that have some kind of genetic component to them. It also has a potential to help reduce world wide hungar through the use of genetically modified crops.

Animals in scientific research are very important. I don't believe that any animal should be sacrificed in the name of science unless there is a potential benifit to mankind or the world. I don't believe that any animal should have to suffer because of scientific research.