The creation of Green Fluorescent Protein (GFP) mice represented a revolution in gene therapy technology. Regular mice were given a jellyfish protein that allowed fluorescence – the engineered mice glow naturally (1). Virtually every animal research laboratory in the United States has handled Green Fluorescent Protein (GFP) mice. GFP mice offer laboratories more techniques for studying mouse physiology and metabolism, making research more effective.
GFP mice are examples of positive genetic alteration – humans gave certain desirable traits to other organisms. Genetic therapy, when applied to other human beings, can be considered as two types – positive eugenics (giving desirable traits like intelligence) and negative eugenics (removing undesirable traits like disease). The fairness of positive gene therapy is questionable; since positive gene therapy gives desirable traits, there are concerns of who should receive treatment (2). Negative gene therapy is a eugenic issue that improves fairness, however.
Negative gene therapy effectively addresses the same medical issues as standard health care – diseases should be treated in individuals to better both the individuals themselves and the population. If modern health care is valid, negative gene therapy seems valid as well. However, just like positive gene therapy, negative gene therapy has fairness concerns. The population which receives therapy would be advantaged, in comparison to the untreated population. Eugenics can fix this – application to the truly disadvantaged population would better the overall population without conferring a great advantage to any group. Negative eugenic application of gene therapy would sidestep this inequity in treatment distribution.
Current health care is already unfair to a large amount of the population; negative eugenic gene therapy would better this fairness issue. According to a Gallup poll, sixteen percent of United States adults do not have health insurance. In contrast, about twenty-nine percent of people with incomes less than thirty-six thousand dollars have health insurance (3). American adults with lower incomes cannot afford insurance, often. Negative eugenics directly addresses those disadvantaged individuals.
The first step of negative gene therapy – detection of diseases – is already common in American hospitals (4). Once gene therapy can safely treat diseases after detection, it seems unjust to not allow gene therapy. Negative eugenic application of gene therapy would level inequities in health care, performing medicine's final goal – bettering the quality of life of as many as possible.
References:
No comments:
Post a Comment