Value: Quality of Life/Genetic Engineering 1. Jay Stuller, The American Legions, January 1984 "The growth of our understanding of genetics clearly is revolutionary, with an impact that in the near future may touch each and every one of us. For genes, simply, are the very basis of man." --Jay Stuller 2. Monsanto Company, "Genetic Engineering is Beneficial," Genetic Engineering: Opposing Viewpoints, cc.1990 "More recent discoveries in human genetics, coupled with recombinant DNA techniques, may provide new ways to identify, care, or prevent disease." --Monsanto Company 3. Christopher Delaney, www.bradley.edu/campusorg/scout/archives/032897/pro.html "Genetic engineering raises some fascinating...prospects. It ... offers advances that could benefit people tremendously. Technology is frequently part blessing, part curse, but this is no reason to shy from it. Genetic engineering can and should be pursued further." --Christopher Delaney 4. Christopher Delaney, www.bradley.edu/campusorg/scout/archives/032897/pro.html "Through genetic engineering, we hold the possibility of identifying and correcting genetic defects, in some cases eliminating certain diseases altogether." --Christopher Delaney 5. JAMES D. WATSON [FORMER DIRECTOR, HUMAN GENOME PROJECT], JANUARY 11, 1999, P. 91. "When they are finally attempted, germ-line genetic manipulations will probably be done to change a death sentence into a life verdict--by creating children who are resistant to a deadly virus." Criteria: Teleological Ethics 6. The International Thesaurus of Quotations, pg. 1970 "The only immorality is not to do what one has to do when one has to do it." --Jean Anouith 7. Brian Stableford, "Humans Should Be Genetically Redesigned," Genetic Engineering: Opposing Viewpoints, cc. 1990, pg. 71 "It is not sensible to refuse opportunities to do good simply because the tools and techniques we would need might also be used to do harm." --Brian Stableford 8. DAVID SHENK, HARPER'S MAGAZINE, DECEMBER 1997, PP. 37-43. "The potential medical benefits of genetic engineering are too great for us to let nebulous fears of the future drive policy," --Gregory Stock, director of the Center for the Study of Evolution and the Origin of Life at UCLA. Contention One: HGE increase QOL 9. Tom Wilkie, NEW STATESMAN, June 12, 1998, pg.14-15 "Similarly, there are more than 4,000 single gene defects know to afflict humanity. Many of them result in dieseases that inflict terrible suffering, usually upon children but also upon parents who have to live with the knowledge that the genetic constitution they passed on to their child was responsible. There is now real hope that in many instances this burden of human suffering may be alleviated." Tom Wilkie, Head of Biomedical Ethics, the Wellcome Trust 10. Ropbin Heing, http://www.geocities.com/~togald/ "Few people question the value fo correcting a gene for sickle-cell nemia, cystic fibrosis, or, should the relevant genes be found, Alzheimer's, heart disease or cancer. Once the technology is perfected, people will probably also not question making that correction at the earliest embryonic stage, or, more likely even before conception, to be certain that the healthy gene will find it's way into every cell in the body as the baby develops." --Ropbin Heing 11. JAMES D. WATSON [FORMER DIRECTOR, HUMAN GENOME PROJECT], JANUARY 11, 1999, P. 91. "In retrospect, recombinant-DNA may rank as the safest revolutionary technology ever developed. To my knowledge, not one fatality, much less illness, has been caused by a genetically manipulated organism. --James D. Watson Contention Two: We have a moral obligation to allow HGE 12. Ropbin Heing, http://www.geocities.com/~togald/ "Is it just to allow someone to die, even if you can save them, even if they want to be saved?" --Ropbin Heing 13. Leonard M. Fleck, Ph.D., Center of Ethics and Humanities in the Life Sciences, Michigan State University, "Genome Technology and Reproduction: Some Considered Moral Judgements" "We cannot escape our moral obligation to articulate a morally defensible conception of genetic responsibility both for individuals, and for society at large." --Leonard M. Fleck, Ph.D. at Michigan State University 14. DAVID B. RESNICK [CENTER FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF ETHICS, UNIVERSITY OF WYOMING], SOCIAL THEORY AND PRACTICE, FALL 1997, PP. 427-448. "It would be morally irresponsible to fail to take advantage of a technology that can be invaluable in promoting this goal. Our failure to use this technology would be paramount to a failure to use other medical technologies, such as new surgical procedures, drugs, medical testing devices, that could prevent harm to people or could benefit them immensely." --David B. Resnick 15. BERNARD GERT [PROFESSOR FOR THE STUDY OF ETHICS & HUMAN VALUES, DARTMOUTH COLLEGE], USA TODAY MAGAZINE, JANUARY 1999, P. 28. "In principle, there is no important moral distinction between injecting insulin into a diabetic's leg and injecting the insulin gene into a diabetic's cells." Contention Three: Alternatives to HGE 16. Tom Wilkie [Head of Biomedical Ethics, the Wellcome Trust], "New Statesman" June 12, 1998, pg.14-15 "Many other diseases are know to be more complex in their aetiology but genetics plays a significant role in those diseases such as diabetes, cancer, hypertension. Here, too, either the underlying cause of the disease will be clarified or targets for dru therapy may be identified. To reject the researches of the geneticists would be to adopt a position of indifference to human suffering." OTHER:Playing god, evolution, fate, natural selection 17. Brian Stableford, "Humans Should be Genetically Redesigned," Genetic Engineering: Opposing Viewpoints, cc. 1990, pg. 66 "Everything that makes us human... is... the product fo knowledge and not of genetic destiny." --Brian Stableford 18. David Baltimore, Nobel Prize Winner, Prof. of Microbiology at MIT. "The manipulations we're doing in the laboratory are minimal compared with what evolution has done." --David Baltimore, Nobel Prize Winner, Prof. of Microbiology @ MIT 19. Brian Stableford, "Humans Should be Genetically Redesigned," Genetic Engineering: Opposing Viewpoints, cc. 1990, pg. 66 "Modern man is not the product of nature, but the product of his own attempts to remake himself and to reshape his life. What we are today is the result of millions of choices made by millions of men over the last few tens of thousands of years." --Brian Stableford 20. Christopher Delaney, www.bradley.edu/campusorg/scout/archives/032897/pro.html "Opponents to genetic engineering raise predominately moral arguements, often claiming that the field is no more than scientists playing god. If this is the case, then we've been playing God for centuries. Everytime we make a scientific advancement or a political or economic decision, we decide others' lives." --Christopher Delaney 21. Christopher Delaney, www.bradley.edu/campusorg/scout/archives/032897/pro.html "Genetic engineering may seem more direct in deciding people's fate, but there is little difference between the impact that organ transplants have and the potential genetic engineering has of correcting defects and diseases." --Christopher Delaney 22. LEE SILVER [PROFESSOR OF GENETICS, PRINCETON UNIVERSITY], TIKKUN, JULY-AUGUST 1998, PP. 47-51. "I also believe that nature is very cruel. Most animals die violent deaths. What we humans have tried to do is to make life better for us and for our children. So, unlike those who feel that the kind of engineering we are talking about will be bad because it "goes against nature," I don't think it's such a bad thing to go against nature when it comes to reducing unnecessary pain. Polio is a natural phenomenon, and the polio vaccine is an attempt to go against nature. Every time we try to find a new cure to some disease we are going against nature. I don't think nature is always so great." --Lee Silver, Prof. of Genetics @Princeton University 23. LEE SILVER [PROFESSOR OF GENETICS, PRINCETON UNIVERSITY], TIKKUN, JULY-AUGUST 1998, PP. 47-51. "Jeremy Rifkin puts evolution on a pedestal, but evolution is random, there is nothing godly about it. We've already taken control of evolution by the way we have cured diseases and prolonged life, so I don't really agree with Rifkin's worries that we will be taking on too much responsibility if we shape the evolutionary future of the human race with regard to some of the specific problems that engineered genes might solve." Lee Silver, Prof of Genetics @ Princeton University Other: cloning, gene changed children, 24. PSYCHOLOGY TODAY, MARCH-APRIL 1998, P. 8. "A clone is essentially a delayed identical twin." 25. EDITORIAL, NEW SCIENTIST, JANUARY 17, 1998, P. 3. "After all, they can argue that nature already produces twins. And while identical twins of the same age catch the eye, would anyone notice that a middle-aged person's baby was really a clone?" 26. JAMES D. WATSON [FORMER DIRECTOR, HUMAN GENOME PROJECT], JANUARY 11, 1999, P. 91. "If appropriate go-ahead signals come, the first resulting gene-bettered children will in no sense threaten human civilization. They will be seen as special only by those in their immediate circles, and are likely to pass as unnoticed in later life as the now grownup "test-tube baby" Louise Brown does today. If they grow up healthily gene-bettered, more such children will follow, and they and those whose lives are enriched by their existence will rejoice that science has again improved human life." --James D. Watson Other: Mistakes in HGE 27. LEE SILVER [PROFESSOR OF GENETICS, PRINCETON UNIVERSITY], TIKKUN, JULY-AUGUST 1998, PP. 47-51. "But we've embarked on many new medical technologies in the twentieth century and as a whole the human race has benefitted. Mistakes may have been made along the way, but people will try to do their best and if mistakes are made they will be corrected." Lee Silver