Share:
Interventions in the genome And nobody gets away with it!
"What have you done?"
Peter Dabrock asks: "Will we someday (...) have to ask ourselves the question:" Where were you, what did you do when scientists were preparing to (...) change the human genome? "
The German Ethics Council fears: Scientists intervene in human evolution without an ethical debate on where the limits of accountability lie. (Image: denisismagilov / fotolia.com) Systematic changes of the human genome
Dabrock does not question that humans should and should intervene in nature, but this must be done responsibly. At the moment, however, we are "slipping into irreversible, systematic changes in the human genome."
Questions of fundamental importance
He opposes that issues of "as fundamental as the manipulation of our biological basis are left to the knowledge community alone." This is happening right now.
Germline changes
Scientists in the US would successfully research to change the germline that would allow potential offspring to pass on hereditary diseases.
Intentional control of evolution
This means that humans deliberately wanted to control their own evolution, as opposed to mutations that always occur in nature. But then people would have to take responsibility.
A question for the United Nations
The following questions were addressed to the United Nations: "Do we want such changes? Can (...) the treatment of serious diseases remain morally good if the way there is morally questionable? "
Questionable way
Dobradt outlines "health-endangering experiments on later humans who can not consent." He asks: "Do we want to venture such genetic testing interventions, even though the disease-preventing effects can also be detected by a pre-implantation diagnosis?"
Open questions
Dobradt fears a genetic brainwashing that will not be discussed: "Do we want this kind of manipulation, even if it provides a template for further purported perfections of man? What risks do we want to impose on future generations, even though we know from the findings in systems biology and epigenetics (...) that some consequences of genetic changes can only occur in grandchildren? "
No political debate
Dobradt criticizes that the controversial positions on these issues in global politics are not an issue.
people breed?
Concerns about an unrestrained interference with the human genome come not only from the Protestant theologian Dobradt. The protagonist of "new atheism", evolutionary biology
Richard Dawkins also warned against doing anything that would be biologically possible.
Dairy cows and muscle limbs
Dawkins considers it possible to manipulate the human genome so that people with extreme muscle mass or outstanding mathematical gifts are just as "bred" as are GM bulls. To refrain from this is not a question of biotechnical possibility, but of human ethics.
A door opener?
Dobradt fears that unquestioned control of the human genome in hereditary diseases could also result in unquestioned interventions in the human genome. So we have to fear that rich parents will get a "genetic wish list" for their child in the future?
Criticism of Gendeterminismus
Profound interventions in the genome to prevent disease are also critical from the point of view of the present state of evolutionary biology.
Thus, the biologists Jablonka and Lamb consider it necessary to supplement the synthetic evolutionary theory. Inheritance would not only take place in the genome, but also in three other dimensions.
Behavior, symbols and language
According to this information, body cells pass on information through epigenetic distribution, and animals through behaviors. In humans, symbolic inheritance, language and writing play an essential role. Molecular, developmental and behavioral biology showed that inheritance also takes place outside the genes.
Consequences for the practice
For medical practice this means that if a person has a particular genetic predisposition to a disease, extra-genetic factors will help determine whether or not the disease breaks out. Genes, social environment, mediation through language, individual learning, biology and life story relate to each other.
Networks of genes
There is, according to Lamb and Jablonka, not the one gene that decides on a disease, and the average increased risk in a genetic system says nothing about the individual. Therapy may be useful for one person with the specific genetic disposition, but harmful for another with the "same" attachment, because the networks of different genes are related to extrinsic factors.
Extragenetic factors
The interplay of genes and extrinsic factors is so complex that social and cultural behaviors that are transmitted in education and family influence "genetic predisposition" and grandchildren seem to inherit psychological distress. An example: genetic material can be changed by overweight, while overweight is a consequence of eating behavior.
Consider extragenetic factors
In this respect, "hereditary diseases" can only be prevented if genetic, extra-genetic and symbolic-cultural aspects are included in the therapy. (Dr. Utz Anhalt)