Replies

Scientists would like for the world to consider them neutral, above the 'pettiness of religion, uninterested in social engineering', but the greed/power-lust of some significant scientists (mischaracterized as compassion for those in need of cures NOW) is exposed in the stem cell debates and cloning controversies. Ask yourself why the scientists wishing to do human cloning for stem cells and body tissues, now, have abandoned the past methodology of animal models until more exact understanding is found, before going into human experimenting. I wonder, if the energy expended on stirring up public chaos regarding human embryonic stem cell exploitation had been used to study more fully the higher mammalian models, would the scientists now know how to take adult stem cells or cord blood stem cells and 'back them up' to bring them forward again developing tissue specific categories?

This is very complicated and no one person has all the answers. But most agree that technology can be used for good or evil and there must be some way to maintain human dignity.

I'll give you a case in point.

Dr. Bernard Nathanson, for the last few years has been sounding an alarm bell with regard to genetic enginnering.

He explains that there is a group of engineers who already plan to create two new races: a "Master Race" and a "Worker Race". Dr. Nathanson explains in great detail the plans to have a master race with all the perfections that they can imagine, and a race of people that are genetically part horse. They will be genetically dumbed down, have super human strength and stamina to do manual labor and will be housed in human barns. They will be as disposable as old horses as well.

Another one. Embryo farms. They've been here in some capacity for decades. Some scientists are trying to develop artificial wombs to completely concieve and bring to term people in what will amount to human parts factories.

The movie "Logan's Run" and others like it will be a reality. Someone has to draw the line somewhere, because some will not stop anywhere.

Our technology is FAR outpacing our ethics/morality.

We are in essence building a "New tower of Bable"

So if we could use technology change our genes to stop cancer, I think the author would be on board, but if we used the same technology to increase longevity or brain function it then becomes evil? The criteria seems so subjective to be absurd.

The death of Jesse Gelsinger during a 1999 gene therapy trial reverberated through the scientific community and the public at large. It was the end of our innocence about gene therapy. I believe that we should definitely continue to pursue gene therapy at the basic science level with maximum intensity because it does have a lot of promise; however, we also have to be realistic in recognizing that some of the scenarios portraying gene therapy as a panacea have been ahead of actual reality.

Certain questions have to be addressed if we are going to see a beneficial outcome of genetic research for the health of all. We have to be sure that misuses of this whole set of advances do not eclipse the benefits. If we are not vigilant, something that should have been a wonderful revolution will be turned into something harmful. There are a number of potential worries here, and it would benefit all of us involved in this discussion to keep Proverbs 19:2 in mind: "It is not good to have zeal without knowledge, nor to be hasty and miss the way." Will we prevent people’s genes from being used against them? When is the right time for a genetic test to leave the research lab and move into clinical practice? Will medicine and science take the initiative in this decision, or will it be driven solely by the marketplace? Is the general public ready to incorporate genetic information into its medical care? The prospects for genetic medicine are complicated by the fact that access to health care is not universal. Zeal for doing God’s will and for a good outcome need to be combined with a clear commitment to understanding all of the intricacies of these issues.

Given the complex concerns raised by genetic research, some have asked why we are doing this at all. The New Testament book of Matthew serves as a powerful reminder of how much time Christ spent healing people in His very short time on this earth: "Jesus went through all the towns and villages, teaching in their synagogues, preaching the good news of the kingdom and healing every disease and sickness" (Matthew 9:35). Perhaps because they are called to be Christ-like, Christians feel a particular responsibility for reaching out and healing the sick. That is one of the reasons why studying this aspect of our biology and trying to apply it medically is not merely a good idea, but a moral necessity. It is an ethical requirement of us. If we can develop the ability to heal, if genetic research holds out hope and promise and can prevent suffering in our fellow human beings, then we have to do it. However, we must also shoulder the responsibility of making sure that these powerful tools are used for good purposes and not for unethical ones.

Francis S. Collins, MD, PhD is Director of the National Human Genome Research Institute in Bethesda, Maryland. CBHD: Reflections from the Director of the National Human Genome ...