Pisciotta 1
Diego Pisciotta
Writing 2010
Instructor: Brandon Alva
11/20/2013
Draft: Final
The Ethics, Goals, Ramifications, and Ideals Concerning Individual Genome
Mapping, Pre-Natal/In Utero Genetic Modification, and Genomics
In June of 2000, President Bill Clinton and Prime Minister Tony Blair announced to the
world that the Human Genome had been mapped. The project was a decade long, three billion
dollar undertaking by the National Institutes of Health (From this point on referred to as the
NIH) and the United States Department of Energy. Together they endeavored to map the entirety
of the Human Genome. A not so small feat considering the genome of human beings is three
billion base pairs long. The purpose of the project was to discover what --if anything-- makes us
unique genetically among other living organisms. This project was a major step in the field of
Genomics. What Genomics is, is the study of the human genome, with the hope to one day have
a level of understanding as to allow for the manipulation of entire genes/gene segments. The
applications for this are near limitless, ranging from glow in the dark ice cream (Harris), to the
eradication of genetic diseases such as Alzheimer’s, and many Cancers (NIH).
Genome mapping is essential to the survival of our species. Though there made be a few
downsides in the early stages, and many debates about what is to be considered “privacy”, it is
imperative to fully explore this burgeoning field of Biology. To deny it is to deny countless
generations of maximized health.
The question of ethics has been asked by many people. Both scientists, and average Joes
have raised concerns. Some argue that mapping an individual’s genome makes very private
Pisciotta 2
information too easily accessible. They say that by reading one person’s individual genome, you
can infer the health of their relatives. They argue that this information can be used to
discriminate against people seeking things such as health, or medical insurance. They push the
belief that it will raise premiums for people who have genetic markers for various ailments who
would have otherwise received the same rate. While this certainly is a possibility, it is a very
short sighted way to look at the issue. Allow me to set a scene for you. The year is 2052, a man
and a woman sit quietly listening to a doctor explain to them that due to advances in the field of
genomics, we are able to choose sperm and eggs, combine them in tubes, and run a genetic test
on the resulting zygotes and pick the zygote with the best genes. The Doctor chooses one zygote
in particular and says “here we have a very healthy girl. She does not carry the BRCA1 gene (the
gene for Breast Cancer), and has negligible mutations elsewhere in her Genome. It is my
professional medical opinion that if you choose to have this child, she will have the greatest
chance of having a long healthy life. However, if you would prefer, you can always roll the
genetic dice, and conceive naturally.” This level of understanding is not complete and utter
science fiction. For example: for a mere $99.00 you yourself can have your genome mapped
RIGHT NOW by the company 23andme. They will tell you what diseases you are at risk for, and
what you should keep an eye on. There is zero grounding in the belief that it will raise premiums
for at risk individuals because after a single generation, we will have selected for the healthiest
individuals, and insurance premiums will drop.
I used to work in the insurance business. My job was to meet with potential clients and
underwrite in the field whether or not they were of an acceptable level of risk to the company.
All insurance providence boils down to risk. High risk, high premiums; Low risk, low premiums.
If the issue is not raised premiums, what then is the real issue? The real issue becomes a matter
Pisciotta 3
of individual choice. A zygote (the name of what is formed by the fusion of sperm and egg), by
merit of being a zygote, cannot say whether or not it would like to have its genetic information
read out scrutinized, and even altered. Another issue pointed out by opponents is that is
dangerous to get a sample from the fetus while it is still in the womb because in order to get a
sample of DNA, you needed to get a physical sample directly from the fetus. Nobody is going to
argue that an approach that requires an invasive method is 100% safe. While this argument was
once valid, recent discoveries have shown that it is possible to get fetal DNA from the Mother’s
bloodstream. This is made possible with a test called “Aminocentesis” (Lauerman). By using
Aminocentesis you can eliminate all danger to the developing fetus, thus making mapping a
completely safe option.
Another one of the great upsides to genetic modification is that it should in theory
eliminate any issue of racism. There have been many times throughout history when a group of
people has been targeted for genocide, or second class citizenry based entirely off of the color of
their skin. One such instance of this was slavery in America. Black individuals were forced to
work long hours for no pay. They were raped and tortured by white people all because they were
perceived to be inferior due to the color of their skin. That’s it. Centuries of oppression over
something as stupid as the color of one’s skin. I am of Mediterranean descent. On college apps I
have to check off “Caucasian”. So in the interest of racial equality I will use an example of
people who are not “white”. Between 1988 and 2001, the Iraqi Ba’ath party, led by Saddam
Hussein, slaughtered as many as One Million Kurds by means of poison gas (Filkins). The
cleansing of the Northern Iraqi Kurds by Saddam’s regime was not an issue of border dispute.
They were not competing over resources (not that either of those are good reasons for genocide).
No, the reason was that the Kurds were of a different race than those in Southern Iraq. One that
Pisciotta 4
Saddam viewed as a drain, and deserved death. Now imagine a world where skin color could be
picked and chosen like you were buying dental floss. Nobody, and I mean nobody has killed
someone over their differing choice of dental floss. I have spent a more time than I would care to
admit scouring the internet for an instance of this sort of crime. But because of its nature, it just
does not occur.
My opponents may say “you have used many hypothetical examples in your argument.
While it is nice to dream up a Utopia in which we can all lead long healthy lives, you are simply
picking and choosing the best possible outcomes to push your agenda.” While it is true I have
painted a beautiful portrait of tomorrow, allow me to put to rest the issue of “hypotheticals”.
There is a Nova documentary called Cracking Your Genetic Code. In the documentary, we are
shown two twins. A young boy, and a young girl. Their genetics are strikingly similar to each
other, but the girl suffers from a genetic mutation that makes her very sickly. In the documentary
we see how this girl’s life changed drastically due to gene therapy. All she had to do to overcome
her debilitating mutation was take a pill. Without genome mapping, it is certain she would have a
lower quality of life. Before she began her regimen, she would fall ill and lose the ability to take
part in some of the most basic joys that we take for granted as children. She could not play
outside. She could not jump about on the trampoline. She had to sit out from hopscotch, and
jump roping, and all manner of things that make childhood magical. That was until a veritable
wunderdrug came into her life, changed her genes, and thereby gave her a new lease on
childhood.
Currently our understanding of the Human genome is in its infancy. We are at a
crossroads where we can choose to go no further and snuff out this ember. Or we can nurture it
until it becomes a fire of understanding, lighting our way to tomorrow.
Pisciotta 5
Through this assignment, I feel as though my belief that all people should be
mapped, and modified has only strengthened. This is because the more I learned about it, the
more I learned how very safe it has become (See instance of anminocentisis) There will be some
road bumps to get to that point. Because this is not my area of stuy, I do not think that I will ever
find myself in a position where I will get to address this issue to a broad number of people.
However, what I can do is bring it up with new people in the hopes of sparking a spirited debate
that will ultimately lead to them believing as firmly as I do that this is the best course of action to
preserve our species.
Pisciotta 6
Bibliography
Cracking Your Gentic Code. Dir. Sarah Holt. Perf. Jaime Effros. 2012. Doctumentary.
Filkins, Dexter. New York Times. 7 October 2007. 13 November 2013.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/07/magazine/07MAKIYAt.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0&ei=5088&en=310195565a77e9ff&ex=1349409600&partne
r=rssnyt&emc=rss>.
Harris, Jenn. Glow-in-the-dark jellyfish ice cream -- for $225, you can have a scoop. 06
November 2013. 09 November 2013. <http://www.latimes.com/food/dailydish/la-ddjellyfish-ice-cream-20131106,0,3061843.story#axzz2kCabwQ4A>.
Lauerman, John. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-10/dna-in-mother-s-blood-can-spotgenetic-mutations-in-fetus.html. 10 January 2013. 15 November 2013.
NIH. 4 11 2013. 09 November 2013. <http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/handbook/therapy?show=all>.