Can genetic engineering advance civilization?

kir 2012/07/16 20:00:55
Add Photos & Videos
There are a lot of examples of how genetic engineering has already helped advance civilization; all the people who would die from diabetes without insulin are examples of this fact. But can genetic engineering really allow us to make strides in the future?

Okay because so many people fail to read the article and because I am getting sick and tired of the uneducated responses, let me make this clear; I do not mean HUMANS!

On a related post, would you eat GMO foods?

Read More: http://politicoid.blogspot.com/2012/07/genetic-eng...

Add a comment above

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest

  • T. James H 2013/03/10 14:04:46
  • Kingarthurup 2012/08/03 07:06:38
    Genetic engineering is beneficial and worth it
    Unless George Soros is in charge like he is now.
  • Nilam 2012/07/31 21:30:12
    Genetic engineering is beneficial and worth it
    extremely, however im one of those devils who believe the medical industry has gone too far and are one of many to blame for over population. too many people are hooked to machines or stuck into a room just waiting to die........
  • Michelle 2012/07/31 18:02:48
    Genetic engineering is beneficial and worth it
    We already genetically engineer things, don't we? As long as new things are kept in the lab until they are determined to be safe, the risk in minimized.
  • kir Michelle 2012/07/31 18:33:36
    Indeed we do; every single diabetic who needs insulin is alive today because of genetic engineering.
  • Lord Emperor Kami Guro Bage... 2012/07/31 17:19:19
  • V~POTL~PWCM~JLA 2012/07/31 16:26:53
    Genetic engineering can advance civilization, but a lot depends on how we choose to let companies market their technological innovations. This will determine which technologies are developed and also the risk of adverse consequences. So far, government protection against abuse has ranged from inadequate to nonexistent.

    Consider "Terminator Gene" technology:

    A farmer buys GMO seeds, plants them, and later harvests the crop. But the seeds from the harvest are useless. This protects the manufacturer who claims to "own" that life form.

    What could possibly go wrong? In what universe would it make sense to grant a patent (or even allow) such a thing?

    This technological wonder is brought to you by your friends at the US Department of Agriculture and Delta and Pine Land Company. Believe it or not, your tax dollars paid for this.
  • JMCC 2012/07/31 16:24:24
    There is an inherant danger in playing with forces that we do not truly understand.

    for example the mechanism used for gene splicing is by using mRNA a protein virus much like the one responsible for CJD and Mad Cow Disease (BSE). Not a true virus but a self replicating protein that might have unknown consequences in the wild.

    There is recent evidence to suggest that one mRNA protein developed by Monsanto to splice a gene that produces pesticides within GM wheat can jump species and perform the same function within the organs of humaniform mice until the pesticides reach toxic levels within the host. Added to the apocraphal reports of illness coming from India and South America where this wheat has been deployed and it all adds up to one big CAUTION sign...
  • kir JMCC 2012/07/31 17:08:24
    We have a good idea of the basics and can utilize it for many beneficial technologies immediately. For instance, we use it to produce insulin.

    Yes; we need to be cautious but genetic engineering has already advanced out civilization.
  • JMCC kir 2012/07/31 17:13:57
    I believe that the greatest danger occurs when the research is conducted outside of universities and in the realm of privately invested companies as there is a huge temptation to skimp long term testing in a bid to recuperate research costs and turn a profit.

    A tendency that is all too prevalent in the world of drug and software development leading to the sale of products that are far from ready to be unleashed on the general public....
  • kir JMCC 2012/07/31 17:15:08
    So are you saying that universities should be producing insulin? I thought it was the job of pharmaceutical companies to produce medicine.
  • JMCC kir 2012/07/31 17:24:06
    Not at all, what I am suggesting is that private corporations use the same rigorous testing protocols that are required by universities and peer review,

    Wasn't the insulin research originally conducted through Universities?

    The work that Alexander Fleming conducted on penicillin certainly was (St Mary's Hospital Medical School - a university college hospital),,,
  • kir JMCC 2012/07/31 17:55:38
    Responsibiltiy is really the key in general.
  • Bingo's Faddah 2012/07/31 16:19:50
    Bingo's Faddah
    Rough question whether you include humans or not. As with anything new, the possibilities for trouble are numerous. If things really go awry, you might end up with:



  • kir Bingo's... 2012/07/31 17:09:33
    Yeah I never was considering humans and have since edited my post to exclude them specifically. However we already have eugenics through selective abortion so the idea that "Gattaca" is science fiction or something that might be in the future is wrong.
  • Bingo's... kir 2012/07/31 17:13:54
    Bingo's Faddah
    Yeah, we live in interesting times. But I'm glad I'm old; I've seen enough "progress".
  • Azazyel's Dragon 2012/07/24 02:05:51
    Genetic engineering is beneficial and worth it
    Azazyel's Dragon
    I believe genetic engineering is the future, though there are a number of ethical issues I grapple with as a Christian. We are truly living in extraordinary times, and I feel we have the self discipline as human beings to utilize this responsibly.
  • KarenInKenoshaWisconsin 2012/07/23 23:25:00
    Most definitely but it also can depend on how and why it's done and if it's never forgotten that EQ (emotional or social intelligences) is a concern too and we can't get that from genetic engineering. Ethics will continue to be of great concern in the related fields but that doesn't mean we should through the baby out with the bath water and ban genetic engineering.

    I like whole, organic, non-GMO foods because that field is entirely too wonky at the moment and driven by the worship of profit and leverage.
  • Philo® ~PWCM~JLA ✩ 2012/07/23 14:10:56
  • Danaman117 2012/07/23 12:14:37
  • Danaman117 Danaman117 2012/07/23 12:15:38
  • kir Danaman117 2012/07/31 16:04:10
    I do not mean human genetics; we utilize genetic engineering for many things already such as production of insulin. http://politicoid.blogspot.co...

    As for eugenics; genetic engineering isn't needed for that and eugenics is occurring in current society through selective abortion. http://politicoid.blogspot.co...
  • Dan ☮ R P ☮ 2012 ☮ 2012/07/23 05:49:40 (edited)
    Dan ☮ R P ☮ 2012 ☮
    Like all science and technology, it can be used for good an evil. But with the current use, and current methods, I'd take a huge step back. The current methods are reckless, and can easily produce unintended results (well, what would you expect when they take "gene gun" and randomly fire dna into a cell). We also have the issue of the FDA (which ignored all concerns from their scientists) and other official organizations not performing proper safety testing and corporations like Monsanto skewing and rigging their own tests. For example, when testing rBGH, Monsanto pasteurized their milk far longer than normal to garentee that the hormone would be destroyed, when normal pasteurization would not. We also have the issues of independent scientists coming up with shocking results in their GMO studies.

    I unfortunately have far too many concerns to accept the technology as is. But if we do use it, at the very least label it to give the citizens a choice.
  • Reichstolz 2012/07/23 05:42:06
    It is dependent on what the goal of the engineering is. For every positive in messing with God's handiwork there is a consequence. We have far to little knowledge to think we could engineer a human in a positive way.
  • kir Reichstolz 2012/07/23 11:17:11
    Why does everyone assume I mean human engineering? I even mentioned GMO and diabetics.
  • cancled 2012/07/23 05:27:16 (edited)
    Genetic engineering can rid the body of disease and other harmful birth defects if used as a preventive medicine. But i doub't that is what is in mind of some, who want it to make people more advanced in intelligence and other things making the human race unbalanced, unfair and over populated with too many geniuses.
    Remember genetic engineering is what Hitler tried to do by preforming medical tests on hundreds of thousands of Jews, horrible, painful medical tests that killed most of them, so he could have the master race. Wonder what he was planning on doing with the normal people if his plan had worked Hmmmmmmmm, nothing good that's for sure.
  • Don Leuty 2012/07/23 05:15:54
    Genetic engineering is too dangerous to attempt
    Don Leuty
    We've come a long way, but there are still more questions than answers. This has the potential of making the nuclear Pandora's box seem like a Sunday picnic.
  • Marissa Garreffa 2012/07/23 05:06:39
    Genetic engineering is beneficial and worth it
    Marissa Garreffa
    There are risks to genetic engineering but everything has risk and I think the benefits of genetic engineering outweigh the risks.
  • Altering_Minds. 2012/07/23 05:04:23
    Genetic engineering is beneficial and worth it
    or...you could mutate it and kill it...
  • kir 2012/07/23 05:02:40
    Genetic engineering is beneficial and worth it
    There are so many advancements to civilization that have already been created using GMO. Every person who suffers from diabetes and similar conditions should be aware of this fact. We're only starting to scratch the surface of what we can do with genetic engineering. Of course it's important to proceed with caution.
  • Panda Kitty 2012/07/17 20:00:10
    Genetic engineering is beneficial and worth it
    Panda Kitty
    Not all but i believe a lot of genetic engineering now in days have started to help many people so i think it can advance civilization and in fact help us in new studies and a future with more people safe of some deadly diseases or sicknesses.
  • merlinskiss 2012/07/17 19:59:00
    I ask myself how far as a species we have progressed since the Greeks, Romans, Egyptians Inca's, etc. And the answer frightens me... We haven't! So why would genetics do anything for minds that can not as a civilization get out of their rut?
  • kir merlins... 2012/07/17 20:07:08
    I dare you to go up to a diabetic and tell him or her that standing there alive rather than dying of blood sugar poisoning is not an advancement to civilization.
  • merlins... kir 2012/07/17 21:31:12
    No Prob! Diabetes is the current rage brought on by choices. Type II is totally preventable except for what you shove down your gullet. As far ass the other? Call it natural selection. Just went through that process in my family. Totally preventable but she chose to do nothing... And it was curable cancer...
  • kir merlins... 2012/07/17 21:35:24
    Actually many people are born with it; there are many factors that cause diabetes including genetic predisposition. Alright; go up to people with diabetes and tell them that they should be dead because genetic engineering shouldn't be used to save their lives because it's their own fault.

    Have fun with that.
  • merlins... kir 2012/07/17 21:41:31 (edited)
    No prob! Let nature take it's course. It will in the long run anyway.
  • kevracer 2012/07/17 19:00:13
    Genetic engineering is beneficial and worth it
    I read an interesting article this morning about the genetic modification of mosquitoes in the New Yorker


    thought provoking- makes one wonder about the unintended consequences
  • kir kevracer 2012/07/17 19:19:06
    Thanks for the added info. I plan on doing a sort of future-tech article involving genetic engineering so that might be useful to add.
  • kevracer kir 2012/07/17 19:23:09
    so far as I know mosquitoes serve no useful purpose (like say bees) other than to serve as food for frogs, etc. and they carry disease.

    However, if mankind eliminates one variety of mosquito, what other impacts might there be?
  • kir kevracer 2012/07/17 19:26:00
    Unfortunately that's a real problem; it's not so much the issue of genetic manipulation in this case, but the manipulation of the whole biosphere. We don't know enough to be doing this.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.


2016/02/09 13:52:17

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals