NIH awards grant to look into modern eugenics

Friday, May 5. 2006

NIH awards grant to look into modern eugenics

Okay, I find this way too scary. From Medical News Today:

A Case Western Reserve University law professor has been awarded a $773,000 grant from the National Institutes of Health to develop guidelines for the use of human subjects in what could be the next frontier in medical technology - genetic enhancement.

Maxwell Mehlman, Arthur E. Petersilge Professor of Law, director of the Law-Medicine Center at the Case Western Reserve University School of Law, and professor of bioethics in the Case School of Medicine, will lead a team of law professors, physicians, and bioethicists in a two-year project to develop standards for tests on human subjects in research that involves the use of genetic technologies to enhance "normal" individuals - to make them smarter, stronger, or better-looking.

Yeah, I have one standard. How about no way, never, ever should we allow experiments into "genetic enhancement" in humans. I'll take that $773,000 now.

It gets better:

The project's specific aims are to:

Identify the differences between genetic research performed for therapeutic purposes and research performed for enhancement purposes.
Determine the conditions under which it would be ethical to conduct genetic enhancement research using human subjects.
Determine whether existing rules meet the ethical conditions for performing genetic enhancement research, and if they don't, recommend changes to the existing rules.

What are these people thinking? "Conditions under which it would be ethical to conduct genetic enhancement research using human subjects"?!?!?!?! How about NEVER!

This is the modern eugenics which mean "good genes". Eugenics used to be about getting rid of "bad genes" to make the human gene pool "healthier." Eugenics resulted in the forced sterilization of many mentally disabled Americans in the early 20th century and was taken up by the Germans and found its logical end in the gas chambers of the Holocaust.

Eugenics isn't just about aborting babies with genetic defects anymore. Now eugenics is about making "normal" genes better; making the human gene pool more than good. Dr. Lee M. Silver, professor of Molecular Biology at Princeton, in his book Remaking Eden predicted with genetic enhancements, a new class of human would emerge, the GenRich. The GenRich are those who can afford to enhance themselves and their offspring. Eventually, the GenRich would out perform the average human. First, it would result in two classes of humans, the GenRich and the "unenhanced" or Naturals, and eventually, the GenRich would stop breeding with the Naturals and two species will result. Sounds like a great future huh? Can you say "Gattaca"?

I have one more point to make on genetic enhancements. I often hear the argument that genetic enhancement is no different than steroid use in athletes or even piano lessons or private tutoring to help your children get ahead. Here it is again from the above article:

He noted that substances such as human growth hormone and erythropoietin (a substance which controls the body's production of red blood cells and can be used to enhance athletic performance) are already available. "Given that these technologies are already being developed, if we don't have legitimate, approved ways of conducting research it will just go underground, like steroid use in baseball, where players are essentially acting as their own guinea pigs," Mehlman said.

Genetic enhancement is totally different for one very simple reason. We can't pass our steriod use or our piano lessons to our children. Depending on whether the genetic modification is incorporated into the germ cells, you have no choice but to pass your genetic enhancement to your children and their children and their children. Or God forbid, you enhance your child while they are an embryo, they then have no choice but to be "enhanced" and then pass their "enhancement" on.

I have to ask the obvious question about all this. What happens when a "genetic enhancement" isn't an enhancement? How do you fix that? Answer: you can't, without more "genetic enhancing."

Read a great analysis of this NIH grant at Bioethics.com.

Posted by Rebecca Taylor in Genetic Engineering at 14:48 | Comment (1) | Trackbacks (2)

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

Genetic Enhancement of Human Subjects
A Case Western Reserve University law professor has been awarded a $773,000 grant from the National Institutes of Health to develop guidelines for the genetic enhancement of human subjects. Researchers will determine whether there are any conditions under which it...

Weblog: ProLifeBlogs
Tracked: May 05, 17:55

Speculative Catholic takes me to task on genetic enhancements
It is not often that another blogger takes me to task on any of my entries. (I think Mary Meets Dolly may intimidate people just a bit.) So when I saw this entry from the Speculative Catholic, I said, "Bravo!" It was well written, and I am ve

Weblog: Mary Meets Dolly
Tracked: May 15, 20:06

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

Yes, it was an interesting challenge from SC.

But you are right, the surgery analogy most definitely does not apply.

And yes, you are also right to distinguish enhancement from gene therapy. Even if there were some medical benefit to be had, we can be sure that they will exlude people with genetic syndromes and defects from genetic "enhancement", just as they very often attempt to exclude them from basic surgeries and other life-saving therapies.

I think the possibilities for gene therapy are really wonderful (provided the research and applications remain within morally good parameters, of course). Recently I read about the use of gene therapy (using cadaver tissue) for babies diagnosed with Canavan disease in utero.

Anyway, interesting topic!

#1 monica (Homepage) on 2006-05-16 06:50 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. Standard emoticons like :-) and ;-) are converted to images.
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry