You are welcome. I am surprised that there has been little discussion of this in
the US. But then, genetic modification seems much more accepted in the US than it
is in many other parts of the world, so in places like Britain, Germany, and here
Australia (where there is widespread opposition to GM crops, even amongst farmers)
there is quite a bit of interest. It was front page news in the local paper today
and a lead story on the TV news last night, for example.
Interestingly, the German ban on genetically modified organisms means that these
children will probably not be allowed into that country, should their parents wish
to take them there or they later wish to themselves. I understand that this ban
has already resulted at least one child, who had undergone a different form of
germ line therapy, to be denied an entry visa.
This illustrates the very complex ethical issues that arise not only from the
technology but also our attempts to control it. Is it right to deny people the
right to travel to a particular country for example, because they are classed as a
genetically modified organism through a decision made by their parents? People
worry about unforeseen consequences of technology, but laws to control that
technology can also have unforeseen effects. The implication of the German
legisation (one would hope unintended) is that genetically modified humans have
less rights than genetically pure humans. Now where have I heard something
similar?
It would be interesting and valuable to see more discussion on the theological and
ethical issues of various current biomedical issues such as cloning, stem cells,
genetic screening (and descrimination), and genetic modification of organisms
(including humans) through means other than selective breeding on the ASA list.
The world of GATTACCA may be closer than we think.
Jon
george murphy wrote:
> Jon -
> Thanks to you & Harry for info. This doesn't seem to have gotten much
> play in the US. As for my expression of doubts on political grounds, maybe
> this just shows how effective bans on government funding for such work are.
>
> Shalom,
>
> George
>
> George L. Murphy
> http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
> "The Science-Theology Interface"
>
> Jonathan Clarke wrote:
>
> > Hi George
> >
> > It is all on the BBC (or course)
> >
> > Genetically altered babies born
> > (http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1312000/1312708.stm)
> >
> > Follow up stories include
> >
> > Q&A: GM babies
> > (http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1314000/1314147.stm)
> >
> > Couples warned over GM baby hopes
> > (http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1314000/1314055.stm)
> >
> > Hope this is what you are after
> >
> > Jon
> >
> > george murphy wrote:
> >
> > > Someone has told me about hearing something on NPR yesterday
> > > about work having been done on artificial replacment of mitochondria in
> > > a fertilized human ovum. This does not sound very plausible to me (from
> > > a political, not a technological, standpoint) & if it had been done I
> > > would expect it to have been a significant news item. Has anybody heard
> > > of anything that might have led to such a report?
> > >
> > > Shalom,
> > >
> > > George
> > >
> > > George L. Murphy
> > > http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
> > > "The Science-Theology Interface"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat May 05 2001 - 23:08:39 EDT