Has Science Gone Too Far With Genetic Engineering?

I am all for the expansion and advancement of science but when it begins genetically altering and creating living animals then for me that is a bit much. Look at what is happening with the food industry. Chickens and cows are being treated with extreme growth hormones causing all types of abnormalities within those animals and harmful side effects to those consuming the meat. This is a mild example but this is where it all started.

I remember hearing some years back that scientists created a genetically engineered sheep. Needless to say that disturbed the hell out of me. Since then genetic engineering has advanced by leaps and bounds. My thing is with all this genetic engineering there has not been one reported "creation" that has gone off without a hitch. In other words there are ALWAYS some adverse side effects to whatever these guys create.

Do you see these experiments as a problem or not?

 

First of all, I would like to point out that your example of treating livestock with growth hormones have nothing to do with genetic engineering. That example is the literal equivalent of injecting steroids into them (in fact, steroids are generally testosterone, a hormone that regulates muscle growth in humans).

Neil deGrasse Tyson has this to say about genetic engineering:

I agree with what he has to say, and I believe that genetic engineering has a lot of potential. The scientific community almost unanimously believes that genetic modified food is not inherently dangerous, and there are actually many successful examples of genetically modified organisms without adverse side effects. One such example is Golden Rice. Golden Rice is a genetically modified strain of rice designed to produce beta-carotene, a form of vitamin A. It has been extensively tested on animals and humans, and we have yet to find any health risks or possible side effects. However, anti-GMO advocates are opposed to this, merely on principal. Golden Rice could have saved millions of people in third world countries from blindness and other disabilities caused by vitamin A deficiency, but the anti-GMO crowd refuse to come to the table with an open mind and look at the evidence.

 

Genetic engineering was bought about for the greater good, all scientific experiments and procedures have side effects. The genetic modification of crops has had a significant effect on many farmers across the world. However it does have its downfalls such as farmers in third world countries who cannot afford such modifications to their crops, lose out on their crops being sold to the wider markets abroad. Therefore I believe that such genetic modifications to crops which are most commonly sold in super markets across town do carry side effects with them, should either stop or be stored to be put into use if ever required. It would balance out the tables again and make things fair for everybody.

 

I agree that you sometimes genetic engineering can cause some foods to not be as nutritious as it should, it can also lead to benefits. I remember a while ago that scientists in New Zealand literally "grew" a burger patty. They took a single cell from a cow's neck and after exposing it a growth medium, it grew to a burger patty. Now, granted one patty costs upwards of $350,000, it isn't a viable solution right now. However, in 50 years when the population grows to almost 9 billion, there might not be enough cows, chickens, and pigs to feed the world. Hence, this is what will potentially save us.

 

We must realize that science is used to undo the damage that humans have caused by over using and abusing the Earths resources. Without these scientific experiments the Earth and the people on it would be in huge trouble. This genetic engineering is necessary to sustain life on earth because our resources and livestock are being depleted do to wasteful living. As a result we must settle for genetically enhanced and cloned livestock and produce to sustain life.

 

I don't think science has gone too far with genetic engineering. When done properly and ethically, genetic engineering is responsible for curing many diseases. Although there are many moral issues associated with it, there is not much to be gained by stopping a potentially life-changing avenue of research. Perhaps the rules should be changed, improved, or enforced further.

 

I am not a scientist nor a person with scientific background. This is just my opinion based on what I had read in magazines and newspapers.

Genetic engineering is like tinkering with the work of God, that's according to skeptics. But the so-called GMO - genetically modified organisms - particularl of plants that are resistant to diseases are actually gifts to mankind. The harvest is faster and more abundant with GMO. But then again, skeptics are afraid of the side effects. Sounds familiar? Those were similar to the skeptics when the vaccine was invented - that poison will get inside the body which will turn the patient into a monster.

Well? This is my first post. Don't I get any applause? Waheehee, just joking.

 

It freaked me out too when they were experimenting on animals and trying to clone them. However, I've read about these researches before and I learned that they were doing it so that they can find certain solutions to medical problems or future possibilities on how to handle diseases. There are certain setbacks to these I believe since these procedures aren't natural, there will be side effects. We have to weigh the pros and cons of genetic engineering.

 

The science community has been on steroids for the last 20 years. What on earth are they trying to procreate in their secret laboratories such as Area 51 and black project? There is more to what has been reported by the so called, "Network medias" and there needs to be more closures. Some scientific experts are taking science to such differentiated levels of genetic engineering that no one really cares anymore. Imagine only half of what some reported scientific experiments are true. What is actually going on behind closed doors? Science has superficially gone way beyond what it could imagine.

 

I think that, genetic-engineering may provide some good results but the costs for farmers and people in countries who are struggling to make money will find it hard to afford this technology and will miss out on the benefits. I reckon that, lab grown food will benefit us one day when we run 0ut of the solid food we eat and at this time the costs would be higher and not a lot of people will be able to afford it and only the ones with money can afford it which will be sad for the ones who miss out. When a animal is cloned, it may show different moods and also not act the same as the real one and there is a lot of ethics involved in these sort of experiments which need to be monitored.

 

I could start with the difference between science and engineering, but the real problem is what does BUSINESS do with the results of science. We should also include politicians as part of business, especially since the disastrous "citizens (a.k.a. Koch Brothers) united" court ruling.

The science behind the "atomic bomb" was used in Hiroshima and Nagasaki (and far too many bomb tests) because of decisions by politicians and military leaders (I imagine there was input from some business people). Humans have been modifying foods for many millenia (just consider the banana). The problem seems to be with the insertion into foods of genes that produce insecticides and antibiotics. Many people prefer organic foods because they cannot tolerate these toxic substances.

At the very least, we need to know when these toxins are included in our foods.

 

I am making this quick post because I realized that I had failed to complete subscribing to Gateway. I made my 10 posts for rating, and waited. Please rate the above post, not this one.

 

I largely agree with Zacker-150. What makes a procedure unacceptable or not is not whether it is genetic modification or not. It is whether doing or applying the research is, overall, for or against the common good.

This research will lead to babies not having or being cured of congenital illnesses that cause immense suffering and early death. So that, to me, is clearly good. I have worked with kids with cystic fibrosis and I pray for the day that disease is eradicated.

 

Genetic engineering involves taking a gene that contains deoxyribonucleic acid from an animal into the cell of another animal, bacterial or yeast. The outcome is a genetic species. It cannot be bred naturally or through artificial insemination.

Science has gone too far with genetic engineering. These days, science is getting the power to alter the fabric of nature, not only animals and plants but human beings too. Without ethical limits, genetic engineering will have a negative impact on the environment in the near future. All this started when man decided to make a superhuman being who could withstand disease and natural calamities.

Genetic engineering is violating the laws of nature. Animals as well as human beings have got the right to live with their original generic structure just as they were created. The scientist has altered the genetic structure of animals by making them produce more meat, to give out more wool when it comes to sheep and in organ transplant. By the year 2050, the world will became of unnatural species and this might bring vampires and other evils. Generic engineering must be controlled.

 

I do agree that at the outset genetic engineering was for the greater good. Science has a way of diminishing the need for God or higher being and therein lies the problem. Scientists are naturally driven by questions, such as, "What would happen if...?" and "How can we prove that...?" Mistakes will be made and ethics issues will arise, but the real question rests on our need to advance. Can we really advance without applying our creative nature? If we stop testing and experimenting, can we survive as a species?

 

Genetic Engineering involves the changing of the genes that are the building blocks for any living organism. I beleive science has helped man tackle lifes problems in health using Genetic Engineering.

 

The Answer is No. The fact is that nature have doing the same for million years. We only have developed a technique to transfer the desired qualities or trait of an organism to another one via a lateral transfer. Nature and natural selection have been in work for millions of years, why can't we improve on that? Most of the criticism in public media is unfounded and is not based on facts or supported by scientific research.

 

As long as the science of genetic engineering is used to produce better food and better health for the domestic animals, I have no issues against it. But when they start modifying anything and everything under the guise of 'science for humanity', it becomes quite suspicious. eg. cloning a sheep or some other animal, to what purpose? The sheep that we have already seem quite fine to me. Genetically modified seeds for producing fruits and vegetables that may contain carcinogens? Totally not done.

It is an old cliche, but now when someone mentions such things, I get a vision of the typical mad scientist we see in the movies. Has anyone read The Island of Dr. Moreau by H. G. Wells? I cannot help but feel that it might come to that, in the end, if we haven't blown ourselves up by some kind of super-destructive atomic or hydrogen bomb by that time.

 

I have no problems or whatsoever with Science as long as it is used for the better of mankind. Greed is innate among us humans, and that same exact greediness is what drives us to develop or evolve Science as we know it. We want more food? We make genetically-modified organisms to help crops yield more food. We want more energy/power? We build different energy sources (both with the use of renewable and non-renewable resources).

But when Science is used to kill other people, that's when we'll have a problem. People using Science to bomb away countries that do not agree with what you believe in? Using Science to take advantage of some people? That's when I believe Science has gone too far.

 

Yes I feel science has taken things a little to far, it has come to the point where we are modifying and genetic engineering everything food, animals even humans. We are interfering with the natural process of life and nature.

I feel this is not good and we should let things take there natral course.