genetic engineering and human cloning fears

[ranchodeluxe]

there are many fears about genetic engineering and human cloning mainly from religious groups and some atheists may also view this type of science dangerous as well for the reason that this type of science could potentially lead to body harvesting and unnatural human mutations. personally i have not formed an opinion about whether this morally right or wrong. i would be very interested to hear what other lor members think about the subject. :ugeek:

 

[Anachronous Rex]

I suppose it could result in body harvesting... in the sense that a school's financial referendum might result in embezzlement, or my deciding to go on a mid-afternoon stroll in the park might result in a mugging. We should all just live paralyzed in fear then I guess.

As for "unnatural human mutations..." what? That's sort of the point of genetic engineering. Unless you're reffing to some sci-fi technobabble bullshit-magic monster movie style thing? In which case I suggest you get an education in biology.

 

[CommonEnlightenment]

Or you could steal some genetic material from an ancient mosquito and create an army of slightly modified Velociraptors to rule the world.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[ranchodeluxe]

i could think of a few women i would like to clone.

 

[kenandkids]

I personally see nothing wrong with genetic manipulation to help us adapt to things like water or space life. I'm opposed to cloning for reason of genetic diversity but for it in situations like organ growth.

 

[Francis]

I have not problems with genetic engineering in laboratories but I have moral issues with it when it is not done in isolated conditions and could contaminate the environment. The main problem that I have with it is that I simply don;t like the idea of humans influencing Evolution, it would make nature itself artificial.

But I also have some practical issues with Genetic engineering, since it changes an organism in no time giving it an advantage in survival. I often like to compare this with grasshoppers, who in times of drought cluster together at the few places left where vegetation is present. however, when some species of grasshoppers cluster like this they often rub in to one another which causes them to develop larger wings, become more aggressive and start to swarm. To me, locust swarms are an excellent example of the dangers which come with rapidly changing an organism into something which its surroundings can't handle.

I also have a problem with Monsanto.


I have no outspoken opinion on cloning except that we shouldn't use it as a justification for letting species go extinct with the "we could always bring them back" argument.

 

[Dora]

I do not have any degrees in this so if I say something scientifically incorrect, the paddle is over there in the corner !

I have not problems with genetic engineering in laboratories but I have moral issues with it when it is not done in isolated conditions and could contaminate the environment. The main problem that I have with it is that I simply don;t like the idea of humans influencing Evolution, it would make nature itself artificial..

So you have a problem with humans influencing evolution
Do you have a problem with this genetic modification? =>http://dels-old.nas.edu/plant_genome/images/corn_and_teosinte.jpg
This plant has been genetically modified over several generations, in a time where there were no isolated conditions, nobody even cared about contamination (both your standard contamination as well as the genetic type) and we had generations of farmers "cherry-picking" and breeding the ones yielding bigger and more produce to eventually end up with the plant we all know
still, humans influencing evolution, so what is your point?

But I also have some practical issues with Genetic engineering, since it changes an organism in no time giving it an advantage in survival. I often like to compare this with grasshoppers, who in times of drought cluster together at the few places left where vegetation is present. however, when some species of grasshoppers cluster like this they often rub in to one another which causes them to develop larger wings, become more aggressive and start to swarm. To me, locust swarms are an excellent example of the dangers which come with rapidly changing an organism into something which its surroundings can't handle.

I also have a problem with Monsanto.

well, living in Belgium where a bunch of green fundamentalist just destroyed a field experiment with GM potatoes I do have one question. They see Monsanto as the big bad evil corporation that is killing our world also.
Could you site the source that proves your grashopper anecdote?
And please do not link me back to any of these green fundamentalist websites: (added after edit)
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/GMCIPU.php
http://gmwatch.org/
http://www.responsibletechnology.org/gmo-dangers/health-risks

I have no outspoken opinion on cloning except that we shouldn't use it as a justification for letting species go extinct with the "we could always bring them back" argument.

I for one have never seen that used as an excuse, citation please.

 

[Francis]

I do not have any degrees in this so if I say something scientifically incorrect, the paddle is over there in the corner !

So you have a problem with humans influencing evolution
Do you have a problem with this genetic modification? =>http://dels-old.nas.edu/plant_genome/images/corn_and_teosinte.jpg
This plant has been genetically modified over several generations, in a time where there were no isolated conditions, nobody even cared about contamination (both your standard contamination as well as the genetic type) and we had generations of farmers "cherry-picking" and breeding the ones yielding bigger and more produce to eventually end up with the plant we all know
still, humans influencing evolution, so what is your point?

genetic modification and selective breeding are 2 very different things. the 2 work on a completely different time scale and you can't get jellyfish DNA into a tomato with selective breeding, there is a difference between breeding individuals which already share a desired trait and making the desired trait yourself

and I don't think that you can even call your example genetic modification, at least not according to wikipedia :"Genetic engineering alters the genetic makeup of an organism using techniques that introduce heritable material prepared outside the organism either directly into the host or into a cell that is then fused or hybridized with the host."

Also, I do not agree with every form of selective breeding , given that we started talking about Belgium, I do not like their genetically modified cows which are so fat that the can't be born without a c-section.

well, living in Belgium where a bunch of green fundamentalist just destroyed a field experiment with GM potatoes I do have one question. They see Monsanto as the big bad evil corporation that is killing our world also.
Could you site the source that proves your grashopper anecdote?
And please do not link me back to any of these green fundamentalist websites: (added after edit)
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/GMCIPU.php
http://gmwatch.org/
http://www.responsibletechnology.org/gmo-dangers/health-risks

lol, I'm not a green fundamentalist, and I don't pull GM potatoes out of fields, I just have my principles and concerns.

on the grasshopper anecdote : http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1469-185X.1999.tb00038.x/abstract

"The ability to change phase between solitarious and gregarious forms in response to population density is a key feature of locusts and is central to their occasional yet catastrophic impact on humans."

I have no outspoken opinion on cloning except that we shouldn't use it as a justification for letting species go extinct with the "we could always bring them back" argument.

I for one have never seen that used as an excuse, citation please.[/quote]

Its used as an argument against people who want to clone extinct animals, because it is very likely that people won't care once you can bring extinct species back to life. I've seen the argument used a couple of times on national geo graphic regarding the cloning of the Tasmanian wolf or the moa but I cant seem to find this exact argument written down anywhere since most criticism is directed to the shortcoming of the technology.

anyways, I don't really see why I would need to present a source for this, its widely known that there are many projects on bringing back extinct animals (they even succeeded with one in 2009 (until 2 minutes after birth that is). and I don't think that the idea of people not caring weather or not species go extinct when they know that we have the technology to bring them back is to far fetched.

 

[CosmicJoghurt]

I'm for, for, for, for genetic engineering. As long it's done and applied carefully.