A friend recently forwarded this article to me from the BBC. The article discusses a recent study that suggests we may be a step closer to linking specific genes with the development of diseases like diabetes and heart disease.
The potential ramifications for this discovery can be huge. After all, who wouldn't want a surefire way to know if they'll have an increased risk of disease later in life? The earlier they discover it, the more preventive measures they can take. This also opens the door for possible genome-specific cures to be created, effectively re-training a person's genes to reject disease.
Of course, as with any advancement in the genetic field, there's a flip side. My friend also included an article from the New York Times showcasing Dr. James D. Watson, whose entire genome was recently deciphered along with that of Celera Corporation's J. Craig Venter. At the same time, questions are being raised that the project might reveal their familial genetic "imperfections" to the public.
Say what now?
Obviously, there's a "creep factor" for anything as invasive as examining your own gene structure. And I too have innate fears as to what currently unknown horrors might face us when this technology regrettably (yet inevitably) ends up in the wrong hands. But if the only argument against genome-mapping for possible links to disease is the fact you might air your family's dirty laundry to the public, get over it. There's plenty enough to worry about with the future of genetics--say, biowarfare, for example--without being scared that people will laugh at me because one of my chromosomes looks funny.
I may not be the biggest supporter of genetic mapping, but I sure as hell know there's no stopping it. And I'd rather see it progress under the supervision of those scientists who have no ulterior motives than worry about my genes hanging out while someone deep underground makes those same scientific advances as they plot my destruction.
1 comment:
Interesting to know.
Post a Comment