|
Chapter
9 - A Practical Response
THE GENETIC REVOLUTION by Dr
Patrick Dixon-1993/5
Is it Safe? Public
needs to Be informed The
Truth may Not Be Told Lessons
From The food industry Public
fear Leads to caution A
Possible Response Is it Right?
What is A Human Being?
A Personal view Pause
for Thought Scientific Faith
The Mystery Of Life Caring
for those With AIDS A
Life-Changing Experience Something
is Missing More to Life
Than Life Cloning
Destroys Individuality
Sexing Children affects a Nation Pre-Birth
Screening dilemmas Routine
testing in the womb A Right
to Life? Problems at Birth
How Big is a Risk? Pedigree
Humans Living in the
real World Personal Tragedy
Taking a Risk Problems
of infertility Children
for families Foetal Transplants
Intro + summary
Chapter 1 Chapter
2 Chapter 3
Chapter 4 Chapter
5 Chapter 6
Chapter 7 Chapter
8 Chapter 9
References HOME
40
videos on cloning etc.
AUTHOR's NOTE: PRESS
HERE FOR LATEST NEWS ON THESE ISSUES
Now we have seen what the new technology can
do and what it is likely to be able to do in the future we are now
in a position to consider urgently some of the issues involved.
There are two main questions we need to apply
to each area of genetic engineering and to each technique used.Firstly
is it safe, and secondly is it right?Having done this and decided
what regulations are necessary we need to see them introduced in
every country of the world, otherwise scientists and factories will
simply relocate and set up elsewhere.
Is it safe?
There is a real danger of an instant response
to the possible dangers of genetic engineering based on emotion
and fear rather than reason. The first thing that is obvious is
that there are a number of aspects of genetic engineering which
are merely direct extensions of long established practice.Cross-breeding
and propagating plants using cuttings are but two examples.
However as we have seen there are a large number
of new areas where massive strides forward are being made with very
littlecontrol particularly in the areas of food production, environmental
release of altered species, viral contamination and spread, and
biological warfare research.
Public
needs to be informed (Return
to top)
Most people have little idea of what is really
going on. Even when reports appear, they can be confusing to the
non-expert and be hard even for scientists in unrelated specialties
to understand.
The truth
may not be told
Almost the only sources of information about
the new technology from the very people who have the most to loose
from regulations, not just in limits on research, but also because
an increasing number of genetic engineers have large commercial
interests in the application of their technology, particularly in
the US. It is inevitable that risks will be played down, that accidents
will be kept very quiet and experiments likely to trouble the public
conscience will continue to be done quietly, without necessarily
publishing results.
Lessons
from the food industry
The food industry is an example where there
is great consumer sensitivity - especially in the West with an increasing
emphasis on "natural" foods.An example was the huge consumer
reaction seen recently over the proposed introduction of food irradiation.The
technique involves blasting pre-packaged foods with a large dose
of radiation using X-rays.The doses used are enough to kill any
bacteria so the food inside the sealed packet becomes effectively
sterile.
At first there were natural anxieties about
whether any surviving organisms might be likely to mutate into a
more dangerous form. That fear has been largely laid to rest by
extensive tests which show these germs cannot survive the process.The
next fear was that the treatment would be used to sterilise decaying
or contaminated food which would then be sold in supermarkets having
been passed as safe.
Public
fear leads to caution (Return
to top)
However the biggest problem has been that people
are afraid of radiation following such things as the contamination
of Welsh sheep by the Chenobyl nuclear disaster in the Soviet Union.Radiation
to the public means one thing: contamination with invisible particles
which can be absorbed into the body and which can cause cancer in
the future, for which there may be no cure.
Irradiation of food is probably completely
safe, and would probably have been in wide use by now if food manufacturers
had been able to introduce the technique without any publicity.Instead,
after big media coverage, manufacturers were forced to indicate
on the labelling if radiation was used. The regulation killed the
process stone dead as far as many suppliers were concerned.
Unless there is a regulation, you and I will
discover we have been buying genetically engineered foods after
we have eaten them rather than before. Who wants to advertise the
fact and risk a massive loss in sales ?
A possible response
So what response should there be? Firstly we
have to be realistic: although I am very doubtful about the ability
of any single government or group of governments to control this
technology effectively - even if they agree to do so, and how to
do it - nevertheless I think it is important to think through what
should happen,and highlight the biggest problems.
a) Food production safety
(Return to top)
1) The government should set up a licensing
authority to approve genetically engineered foods for human
consumption, including those derived from plants and animals.The
licence should cover not only where germ cells have been reprogrammed
but also where the organism contains a subgroup of infected cells.Particular
attention needs to be paid to the possibility of introducing substances
into the human diet on a large scale which could turn out to have
cancer inducing, foetus damaging or other toxic effects.Genetically
engineered foods should therefore be subject to a rigorous chemical
analysis to determine what new or unfamiliar compounds may now be
contained in the food. The ammount of analysis needed will depend
on the degree of reprogramming.
2) Genetically engineered foods should
be labelled clearly as such so that consumers can make a choice.
b) Environmental release of new organisms
(Return to top)
The government should introduce strict regulation
of the environmental release of new organisms.In some countries
such controls already been in existence for some time, albeit as
part of a voluntary code of practice (1860).These controls should
apply especially to micro-organisms, to plants, fish, birds and
animals which could survive quite easily if they escaped from a
contained area on a farm.Controls do not need to be so strict with
conventional farm livestock although such stock should be indelibly
marked in such a way as to make their origin and nature instantly
recognisable.Breeding of fish in a confined pond with no water outlet
from it might be a borderline area.
c) Viral contamination controls
Viral spread outside the laboratory as a result
of genetic research is a serious possibility - whether spread of
plasmids, of plant viruses, of animal viruses or of viruses infecting
humans. In the absence of effective anti-viral cures we have to
recognise the great vulnerability humans have to a second plague
like AIDS, but this time maybe of an even worse nature, spread -
say - by respiratory droplets rather than by sexual intercourse
or through the blood, and killing people in weeks or months rather
than years.
We need to acknowledge that many countries
of the world do now have all the resources to make by laboratory
accident even more dangerous viruses than HIV.
All procedures involving the reprogramming
or reassembling of viruses should therefore be strictly controlled.
In particular there should be some kind of licensing authority for
experiments where animals or plants are being infected by synthetic
viruses. Less controls are needed for test-tube infections except
where infected cells are replaced in plants or animals.It should
be recognised that there is already evidence that genetically engineered
viruses given to animals have the potential to mix uncontrollably
with other viruses already present with unpredictable and possibly
disastrous effects (1870).
d) Ban on biological warfare research
(Return to top)
There should be an immediate world ban on developing
biological weapons of any kind.All biological weapons stations owned
by the military or by secret services in different countries should
be closed and their supplies destroyed.
e) World monitoring of code of practice
At the moment it is too easy for those wishing
to avoid any controls to move the base of their operations from
one country to another.There needs to be a global consistency in
the regulations applied from country to country.The World Health
Organisation might be the appropriate vehicle to do this.
2) Is it right
? (Return
to top)
Having considered some urgent issues relating
to safety of this new technology we now need to turn to the more
subjective area and look at where some of the most difficult ethical
issues are. Broadly speaking they seem to fall into two groups:
those concerned with the development of humans from egg to embryo
to birth and those concerned with the radical changing of species.
Each of us has a view of the world which will
colour our response to these things - and I have my own.However
it is helpful first to establish a few common principles that a
large number of people would probably accept.The first principle
is an aesthetic dislike of creating the grossly unnatural, or monsters.In
the travelling fairs of some countries, for a small charge you can
enter a tent and see some of the strange wonders of the world: animals
with two heads stuffed in a glass box, or a baby with two heads
and four arms.The Elephant man of the last century was not a loved
or popular public figure.Going to the zoo to see cages full of animals
mutated beyond all recognition is hardly likely to be a money spinner
for the owners.
What
is a human being ?
(Return to top)
The second principle is a strong sense of what
a human is - we recognise other human beings instinctively without
necessarily being able to analyze all the reasons why.Our whole
civilisation rests on social interaction and respect between individuals
and groups of other people.Therefore a language speaking chimpanzee
with reasoning powers, will, personality and artistic ability, is
likely to be disturbing to most - especially if the chimpanzee talks
fluently, with a large vocabulary, dresses in human clothes and
adopts human mannerisms.
When it is realised that the cause of this
genius is that the human genetic code for the brain's development
was programmed into the developing embryo there may well be some
who begin to wonder if the creature is not in fact more human than
animal. After all, many owners of pets have similar feelings of
identity with their dogs or cats for example.
I think there is a natural curiosity about
such possibilities but a revulsion against having to live with the
consequences on a daily basis.
A personal
view (Return
to top)
However once we go beyond these basic areas
of intuitive agreement we quickly land up if we are not careful
in a sea without any bearings or boundaries at all.I am going to
share a personal view - not necessarily thinking that you will agree
with me, but partly to throw into sharper focus what you yourself
are comfortable or uncomfortable with.
Pause for thought
As I have gathered the material you have read,
gleaned from sources in many countries of the world I have at times
been stopped in my tracks by a particular discovery, piece of information
or application.Sometimes it has been because of surprise at some
remarkable piece or research, or a new piece of information that
had changed my perspective on things.
However at other times I have had to stop and
think not about what had been written about what had been done,
but about what lay between the lines of what I had read.The very
next chapter in the developing story seemed likely to contain huge
implications for our future world.I am sure you too have reacted
at times quite strongly to information here about what is already
happening and the obvious implications for the future.
Scientific
faith
(Return to top)
My own reactions have been very much influenced
by the experimental approach to science we were given at Cambridge,
where no fact was ever taught without describing the experiments
and the results on which this understanding was based, and then
by my experience completing medical training and practising as a
doctor.
My thinking has also been influenced as you
might expect by my Christian faith.I was brought up as an Anglican
but most of what I learned about the Christian faith as a teenager
and young adult came from those in the Free Churches, especially
from those taking the bible very seriously as an authority to be
trusted.
As I have studied the bible over the years,
and researched some of the enormous weight of archaeological and
historical evidence for it's accuracy, I have become more convinced
than ever of it's authority and authenticity as God's special message
to us written through the hearts and minds of his servants.So as
the book has developed I have been asking what the bible has to
say to the Christian about genetic engineering.
The mystery of
life
As a doctor with experience of caring for the
dying I find that my respect for human life continues to increase
over the years. There is an amazing mystery here which I do not
wish to tamper with.Having been present during the birth of all
four of our children and at the death of many people I feel privileged
to have witnessed profoundly moving events.The existence of an added
dimension is particularly obvious to me when caring for those who
are dying.
In 1987 I was asked to write a book about how
the church should respond to the AIDS epidemic.It's working title
was "AIDS in your Church" because it was obvious to me
that any church having a real impact on the local community was
going to find AIDS and HIV infection were important pastoral and
practical concerns. Concerns then needed to be channelled into effective
practical care and prevention.
Caring
for those with AIDS (Return
to top)
In the event the extensive research for the
book threw up so many things about AIDS few were aware of, that
the publishers retitled it "The Truth about AIDS".The
first print run sold out in months and US, Polish and other editions
followed as well as another book aimed more at young people.As a
direct result a new AIDS initiative was born in 1988 called ACET
(AIDS Care Education and Training).It was set up as a Christian
response to the AIDS epidemic, providing homecare and prevention
programmes both in the UK and overseas.
We use volunteers extensively alongside professional
full-time staff to provide whatever is needed for someone ill or
dying with AIDS to stay at home.After just three years we had grown
to the point where we were involved in visiting at home up to one
in four of all those dying with AIDS in the UK.
An increasing number of our volunteers are
being asked to help as night-sitters.Their job is often to stay
awake with the person who is ill, so that the main carer can go
to sleep. However for half of those we care for there is no-one
else with them in the home to care for them.
A
life-changing experience (Return
to top)
For a volunteer, to be present for the first
time at the moment of death can be a life-changing experience.However
much training and preparation has been given, nothing can take away
from the full impact of the event itself.Perhaps for several hours
the person has been very weak and sleepy - although orientated and
able to talk if roused by a visitor.
Maybe for the last hour or two the volunteer
has noticed how the breathing pattern has gradually changed.When
the ACET nurse visited she had confirmed that his pulse was becoming
weaker.
As the volunteer stays - perhaps holding the
person's hand or mopping the sweat from his brow - it seems at times
that his breathing is fading away altogether.Eventually the volunteer
becomes aware that the breathing has finally stopped. The house
is quiet and still.The person dying is still there - whatever they
say death is far from instant.After a further minute or two there
is another sharp intake of breath and then all is still again.
The volunteer is still sitting quietly at his
side, now perhaps thinking about some of the things that may need
to be done and the people who need to be contacted.Being present
and involved at such a time is a special privilege and leaves a
deep impression.
Something
is missing (Return
to top)
Here is an individual bounded in space and
time, usually full of vitality, personality and fun.The previous
day he had been sorting out some of his personal affairs and had
appreciated visits from one or two close friends.Just an hour or
two ago he had been very much alive, but now he was gone.
His skin cells are still alive.His heart muscle
is still alive. His gut is still digesting food and his bone marrow
is still producing red blood cells.Almost all the cells in his body
will continue to live if they are removed quite soon and if they
are cared for appropriately.But he himself has gone.All the chemicals,
proteins, sugars, and gases are present still in each cell - but
something is missing.The conscious, caring, laughing, crying individual
person has gone, with echoes left vividly in the memory and reminders
of his life and activity all around the room.
More
to life than life (Return
to top)
This mystery has had a profound effect on the
way I view life. There is more to life than life.You and I are more
than the sum of our constituent parts.There is more to a human consciousness
and individuality than just a bunch of chemicals.There is more to
it than just a complex bio-machine driven by a few long strips of
genetic code.It is the experience of almost all those involved in
the care of the dying - whether the cause is cancer, AIDS or any
other illness - that approaching death tends to heighten spiritual
awareness in many people.So-called death-bed conversion is therefore
not surprisingly quite common, even in situations like the ones
our volunteers are involved in, where we are asked by hospitals
and clinics to go in to provide practical help on the understanding
that we will not abuse that privilege by seeking to use it as an
opportunity to actively promote the Christian faith.
This mystery is seen again in the study of
how a single fertilised egg develops so rapidly, so predictably
and so perfectly into a whole new being which is then born into
the world.
Whatever my own religious beliefs I then find
myself compelled to take human life seriously, to resist the temptation
to medical heroics when someone is reaching the end, and to be very
cautious indeed about interfering with someone's beginning.
So how does this all affect an approach to
the ethics of genetic engineering?The answer is that it lays a
context in which Christian beliefs can be more easily understood
in terms of how they relate to these issues.
Cloning
destroys individuality
(Return to top)
I feel very uneasy about any aspects of human
cloning that produce a twin where the twin will be born either at
a different time, or to different parents.The essence of being human
is our individuality.Identical twins or triplets are a special exception.They
are literally from one flesh - caused by cells splitting off after
fertilisation.Twins are usually very close and develop their own
individuality within a family.The most basic unit in any society
is the family, however that is defined.
The appearance of identical clones born into
many different households seems to me to be at great risk of undermining
what family is all about. To me, family is about the stable happy
partnership of a man and woman, who hopefully are able if they wish
to conceive and care for children they know are their own, part
of their own flesh and blood.
For those who cannot have children but are
fortunate enough to be able to adopt instead, at least they know
that the child they are adopting is unique and special to them.What
would the feelings of all concerned be to go on holiday and discover
there were three absolutely identical children - blood brothers
or sisters to your own adopted child, who were also i the area as
part of other families.
Sexing
children affects a nation (Return
to top)
I also feel very uneasy about the widespread
availability of sexing children - even if it does not involve the
selective destruction of rejected embryos.Even if it only involves
separating sperm in the laboratory so only the right sex genes are
used to fertilise, I do not trust society to make sure there is
a proper balance between the sexes. In many countries the result
could be more boys than girls being born.
I can see that parents who have had three boys
and really want a girl or the other way round, may make a very strong
case for interference.However for my wife and I the whole process
of conception has been tied up with seeing each child as a special
surprise and a unique gift from God.Neither of us wanted to know
the sex of any of our children until the moment of birth - even
when the information was clearly available from routine ultrasound
scan pictures.Looking back, each time it was a tremendous joy and
surprise.
Many think we are fortunate because we have
had two boys and two girls but I know we would have been just as
thrilled whatever sex they were.It is just such a tremendous relief
to find that the child is physically normal and not grossly disfigured
or malformed or mentally handicapped.I can see one big advantage
of knowing the sex before birth and that is reducing by half the
agony over choosing names.In all our married life I think the only
serious disagreements we have ever had have been over trying to
find names we both liked and felt would be good for our children!
Pre-birth
screening dilemmas (Return
to top)
The issue of pre-natal diagnosis is less easy
than many Christians think.Doctors are faced with difficult, complex
and agonizing decisions which appear to defeat the cut and dried
rulebook approach.Some aspects of pre-birth screening have been
going on for years and are a normal part of everyday medical practice.
For example, mothers can be screened to see
if they are immune to Rubella (German Measles).If not they can be
vaccinated prior to conception to avoid the possibility of infection
in the first three months of pregnancy with damaging results for
the child. Screening during pregnancy can avoid a rare but serious
complication where a particular immune response by the mother to
the babies red blood cells causes the baby to develop problems in
the womb, or in severe cases to die before birth.Giving the mother
specially prepared antibodies can prevent the problem (1880).
However the most sensitive issue is the detection
of genetic abnormalities for which there is no genetic "refit"
possible yet. As we have seen, the range of diseases for which genetic
screening of foetuses is possible is growing rapidly, whether for
Downs Syndrome, Tay Sachs disease, Thalassaemia, cystic fibrosis
or other illnesses (1880).
Routine
testing in the womb (Return
to top)
These tests are being used routinely already.
As a Christian couple my wife and I were appalled to find we were
being more or less told that blood taken while my wife attended
the ante-natal clinic was going to be used amongst other things
for genetic screening - in this instance to test for alpha-foetoprotein.The
only purpose of the test would have been to approach us with the
suggestion of an abortion if the test showed up a possible problem
(1880).In fact had my wife not objected the test would have been
carried out as a matter of routine.
The reason for the test is to detect if the
baby is developing with a problem known as Spina Bifida.This is
where the tissues forming part of the brain and spinal cord fail
to form properly. They form first as a dark coloured strip on the
outside of the embryo, running from the bottom of the back up to
the head.This strip forms in a similar way in all mammals and has
been studied extensively.It is known as the neural ridge or groove.In
the malformed baby, part or all of this strip fails to roll up properly
into a tube covered with skin.
When the baby is born, the part of the nervous
tissue which is exposed to the outside world is quickly damaged.The
severity of the condition can vary enormously from a pinhole at
the base of the spine which is so minor as to be missed by the midwife
and doctor at birth to a most severe malformation incompatible with
life.
The blood test works by picking up alpha-foetoprotein
circulating in the mother's blood, which has been released by the
abnormally exposed tissues in the womb and then has crossed the
placenta into the mother (1880).A high level indicates either defects
such as Spina Bifida or Downs Syndrome (1880).Unfortunately the
blood test gives little or no indication of the severity of the
condition and can be unreliable.
A right to
life ?
(Return to top)
We chose not to have the testbecause we had
already made a decision that any child of ours had a right to be
born and to live - even if it did not fit into our intolerant society's
views of what "normal" is.
For us then we would not welcome a massive
increase in the number of conditions or tendencies to disease which
could be routinely detected in blood tests offered to all pregnant
women. Unfortunately, knowing trends in my own profession, I suspect
that batteries of these tests will become as routine as testing
for anaemia and people will only find out after the event what tests
were done when a doctor asks to see them about a worrying result.
The reason I say this is because such screening
is standard practice in most other areas of medicine.For example,
someone admitted with a range of unexplained symptoms may well have
blood taken to be analysed for over a dozen different conditions.The
doctor taking blood will probably just comment that "we are
just checking your blood for any abnormalities and to make sure
you are not anaemic".A recent US survey of 295 geneticists
showed over 75% were in favour of carrying out pre-natal blood screening
even if the mother was not interested in having an abortion before
the test (1890).
Problems
at birth (Return
to top)
One of our children was born with a very rare
congenital malformation - one I had only read about in the textbooks
but had never seen.She was born with no connection at all between
her mouth and her stomach.At birth she was a normal beautiful baby
girl, but as soon as she tried to feed she choked.Twice she nearly
stopped breathing.I diagnosed what was wrong before those on the
maternity ward.
Within a few hours she had developed a near
fatal pneumonia, but the story had a happy ending.She was operated
on at Great Ormond Street children's hospital where they reconnected
the two ends of the tube after which with one or two small problems
since she has been effectively cured.For us there was a happy ending
to a condition not unlike one of the many genetic diseases where
routine testing may encourage people to abort a higher percentage
of pregnancies in the future.
How big
is a risk ? (Return
to top)
Even if you take the position as many do that
in extreme cases of congenital malformations abortion is alright,
where do you draw the line?How severe is severe?Some of these future
tests might indicate - say - a twice than normal risk of breast
cancer or a doubled risk of a heart problem before the age of 65.
We have looked earlier at the form of bowel
cancer which is inherited with the polyposis gene.However this type
of bowel cancer is very rare compared to the main types.Overall,
cancers of the large bowel (colo-rectal) are the third most common
cancers worldwide.As our understanding of the different risk factors
has grown we have come to recognise that there may be a genetic
component in a great many cases.The genetic change alone is not
enough to form cancers without other nutritional factors as well
which may include fat, excess calories, the amount of fibre or calcium,
selenium and various vitamins in the diet (1900).
A recent report on bowel cancer by the World
Health Organisation says "recent studies in genetic epidemiology
and molecular biology have shown that inherited genetic factors
play an important role in colorectal carcinogenesis .... prevention
... should therefore be to all populations who are at risk because
of dietary and hereditary predisposition" (1900). We will have
a very long list of such mixed cause diseases before long.
Pedigree humans
(Return to top)
Before we know where we are we could have begun
a
serious process of transforming the genetic
pool of the human species. Incidentally if we were to do this extensively
then we would start to see other major problems from inter-breeding.We
would be developing a new pedigree human as much prone to recessive
gene problems as pedigree dogs we saw in an earlier chapter. So
having fought to eliminate one set of inherited conditions we might
land up with a stack more.
As a recently published report said: "for
many of these disorders, the ability to predict the risk of disease
will antedate preventive and therapeutic interventions by many years.
During this lag phase, issues concerning the validity of the tests,
the severity of the diseases for which screening is offered, the
safety of the interventions, and the autonomy of the pregnant woman
in deciding to be screened are important" (1880).
Living in
the real world (Return
to top)
You may feel that all abortion is wrong, whatever
the circumstances, and that in the words of the new Danish law
passed in 1988 establishing an ethical council " human life
takes as it's beginning the time of conception" (1910).Such
a rule may be simple but for those who have to work through the
consequences in terms of individual tragedy, life can often be far
less cut and dried.
Two different mothers my wife and I know well
gave birth over the last two years knowing that the baby being born
had a heart defect so severe that the baby was unlikely to live
for more than a few days.In both cases the parents were informed
of the problem during pregnancy following routine ultrasound, repeated
a few weeks later.Both couples were offered abortions which they
were very unhappy about - especially as by the time the baby had
grown large enough for the ultrasound to be accurate it was getting
quite late in the pregnancy.
Both families felt their babies were already
alive, and were already or about to be conscious.They felt their
babies were comfortable, moving around contented and secure inside
the womb, and had an existence of their own.In both instances the
birth itself was relatively straightforward and mother and baby
were quickly home.Some two or three days later the babies became
weaker and died quite quickly.
Personal tragedy
(Return to top)
Another friend of mine came up to me recently
to tell me some sad news.I knew his wife was expecting another baby
and had been delighted for them both.He is an evangelical church
leader and has supported the pro-life anti-abortion campaign.With
tears in his eyes he described how doctors had detected a major
problem on the scan - a very severe form of spina bifida affecting
the development of the brain.There was it seemed no chance of anything
approaching a normal life for the child.Faced with the situation
after much consideration, thought and prayer both he and his wife
felt it right to have an abortion. When the baby was delivered at
around 20 weeks, gross abnormalities were obvious affecting the
brain as well as the spine.
Taking a risk
(Return to top)
These are difficult areas.In a way life was
much simpler before pre-natal screening.What about the couple who
have an inheritable disease which is so serious that they will not
consider having any children unless some guarantee is there that
the child will not be affected?Two friends of ours got married some
years ago.Amongst many other things they have in common, they share
a common problem: both of them walk with a limp because of a congenital
malformation of the hip joint so that the hip is dislocated.For
them both it was incorrectly diagnosed and treated when they were
children.
Their first child inherited the same condition,
and has already had to spend some weeks in hospital with the prospect
of possible operations in the future.Perhaps our friends would welcome
some way of ensuring that their next child has normal hips, although
at least here the condition is not life threatening and is treatable.Unfortunately
genetic engineers are a long way from being able to test sperm or
eggs genetically before conception so the only option likely to
be available in the near future is an embryo test accompanied by
the offer of an abortion, or perhaps looking further ahead the offer
of embryo reprogramming (1920).
However such action could introduce a new mutation
and a new disease or condition.The risk of doing this may be much
less acceptable to correct a defect in someone as yet unborn, rather
than in someone who is already born and ill.The simpler and more
predictable alternative is always likely to be testing of foetuses
and selective abortions (1930).
Problems
of infertility (Return
to top)
Infertility is a particularly common problem
these days for two reasons: the first is that many people are delaying
getting married or thinking about starting to have a family.Fertility
drops quite steeply from the age of around 28 onwards so many couples
who would have had slight difficulties conceiving a child in their
early twenties are now faced with a much greater problem.The other
reason is related to the steadily rising numbers of cases of sexually
transmitted diseases each year - over 560,000 new cases in the UK
alone.
One complication can be Pelvic Inflammatory
Disease which is often caused by a tiny organism called chlamydia.This
can be very hard indeed to get rid of.Over a period of years, chronic
infection leads to fibrous thickening in the pelvis, which damages
the delicate fallopian tubes used to carry the egg from the ovary
to the uterus.
In some cases the eggs can no longer travel
down, nor can sperm travel up.In other cases eggs become stuck as
they are gently propelled along the tiny tube, but sperm still swim
up the other way with the result that an egg becomes fertilised
in the tube where it remains as it divides.The developing ball of
cells implants in the tube instead of in the womb.
The tube has no thick muscular lining to implant
into and there are no large blood vessels to feed the developing
placenta.The pregnancy that results is highly dangerous and is a
common cause of a medical emergency in women, with acute pain and
massive internal bleeding caused by the burrowing of the embryo
through the tube wall and bleeding from large blood vessels.
Children
for families (Return
to top)
With increasing infertility, and a low threshold
for abortion there are very few babies available for adoption these
days - certainly nothing like enough to meet the hopes of over five
infertile couples in every hundred.Therefore the pressure is on
to use every available method to provide children for people. It
is a strange irony that many who don't want babies are conceiving
and aborting them while many others desperate to be pregnant continue
to be childless.
I feel genetic techniques designed to enhance
the ability of a couple to have a child inheriting largely or completely
their own genetic code, are fine.I would not even have a major objection
to reprogramming an embryo so long as it was absolutely necessary
to avoid - say - death in early adult life, and the procedure was
known to be safe.I would distinguish here between a genetic repair,
almost like micro-surgery on a chromosome, and a genetic adaptation
introducing genes that would never have been part of the code of
those parents, to improve physique or intelligence for example.
Foetal transplants
(Return to top)
I am very unhappy about the use of foetal tissue
in transplants. It seems there are pressures enough on people these
days to have abortions and the odds are more and more stacked against
the survival of the embryo.Regulations state that there must not
be any relationship between an abortion clinic and those doing research
to try and avoid abuses that could arise in times of pressure to
complete research.I do not feel happy about any kind of experimentation
on embryos, although some could say straight away that without it,
we will never make any progress in areas I have said earlier would
be ethically fine to use as proven treatments.
AUTHOR's NOTE: PRESS
HERE FOR LATEST NEWS ON THESE ISSUES
Is it Safe? Public
needs to Be informed The
Truth may Not Be Told Lessons
From The food industry Public
fear Leads to caution A
Possible Response Is it Right?
What is A Human Being?
A Personal view Pause
for Thought Scientific Faith
The Mystery Of Life Caring
for those With AIDS A
Life-Changing Experience Something
is Missing More to Life
Than Life Cloning
Destroys Individuality
Sexing Children affects a Nation Pre-Birth
Screening dilemmas Routine
testing in the womb A Right
to Life? Problems at Birth
How Big is a Risk? Pedigree
Humans Living in the
real World Personal Tragedy
Taking a Risk Problems
of infertility Children
for families Foetal Transplants
Intro + summary
Chapter 1 Chapter
2 Chapter 3
Chapter 4 Chapter
5 Chapter 6
Chapter 7 Chapter
8 Chapter 9
References
Press
/ TV | Lectures |
Dr Patrick Dixon
| Future of Banking |Digital Consumers
Genetics and Cloning |
Life & Health
| Global Change | Search
our site |
