My point of view on biotechnology

If you order your cheap custom essays from our custom writing service you will receive a perfectly written assignment on My point of view on biotechnology. What we need from you is to provide us with your detailed paper instructions for our experienced writers to follow all of your specific writing requirements. Specify your order details, state the exact number of pages required and our custom writing professionals will deliver the best quality My point of view on biotechnology paper right on time.

Out staff of freelance writers includes over 120 experts proficient in My point of view on biotechnology, therefore you can rest assured that your assignment will be handled by only top rated specialists. Order your My point of view on biotechnology paper at affordable prices with cheap essay writing service!

When people hear the word biotechnology, most of them immediately have various kinds of horror visions in their mind. For instance, they may think of the world which Aldous Huxley creates in his utopian novel "Brave New World". In this world, everything that concerns the human life is optimal arranged, so people "is given whatever they need to keep happy", and no one has to suffer pain (Introduction to the extract from Huxley, "Brave New World", 60). "But the cost of such comfort is an almost total loss of individuality, creativity, and freedom." (Introduction to the extract from Huxley, "Brave New World", 60) This is one of the horror visions that are in our heads, because we hear so many different and confusing things about biotechnology. Or is it the word itsself that has a bad tone, because "BIOlogy" and "TECHNOLOGY" are two different subjects which do not seem to fit each other well, and therefore the combination of them sounds a little bit strange? I find it difficult to judge the aspects I hear about biotechnology in the right way, because the public discussion is full of emotion and fear, and most of the time we are not given useful and informative scientific information. So I have only vague knowledge about the subject, and that is the reason why I was interested in the different articles about biotechnology.

While I had a closer look at them, I realized that the intention of the author determines the way he handles the theme and also the words he chooses to express something. I found out that two persons can describe the same subject very differently to give us the point of view they want us to have.

At the very beginning of the article "A Heretic's View on the Bioethics", Jeremy Rifkins describes the knowledge of genes and their basic elements as follows "Living things are no longer perceived as carrots and peas, foxes and hens, but as bundles of information. [...] All living things are drained of their aliveness and into abstract messages. [...] There is no longer any question of sacredness or inviolability."(66) He also speaks about "reducing all living things to information exchanges and flows"(664). Rifkins uses very strong words in his statement "bundles of information", "abstract messages" and in contrast to them "sacredness", "inviolability" and the concrete terms of the animal species. These words and the indirect expression „reducing" for the procedure of gene research create a very negative feeling in us, because we who love nature do not find it desireable to take away the sacredness of life. We get the urge to protect the animals and ourselves from being reduced and preserve the inviolability of life, which means to object the scientists and their work.

Help with essay on My point of view on biotechnology In "The Gene Hunt", Jeon Jaroff gives us a totally different impression of gene technology. He describes the human DNA not as desacralized information, but says "And what a wondrous string [...][DNA] is." He does not regard the DNA-string as a reduction of living things, but as a wonder itsself. Moreover, he describes the work of the gene scientists as follows "Like cartographers mapping the ancient world, scientists over the past three decades have been laboriously charting human DNA."

That sounds much more friendly than Rifkin's point of view. Jaroff paints a very peaceful picture by comparing the scientists with cartographers in the ancient time, but in my eyes the metaphor does not work, because the discovering of the human genome means much more than drawing a map. Genes are the key to our life, our outward appearance and our inward, to birth, growing and death. To handle with this key of living beings contains more meaning, chances and danger than drawing a map. But I agree with Jaroff that the DNA is "a wondrous string". I think, the scienists do not remove the sacredness of life by finding out how it works. Although they parted the whole living being in "a bundle of information", they still cannot explain how a such complex system has developed and how those little elements of the genes manage to regulate many aspects of our life. So I do not support Rifkin's way of describing the situation, either.

Some achievements of genetic research are already established in practice. One of those achievements is the production of proteins like insulin, which is needed by diabetics. As it is said in the article "Genetic Engineering Promise and Threat" (657) by Dennis Chamberland that "human insulin, now manufactured by genetically altered bacteria for tens of thousands of diabetics, replaces the beef- and pork based product against which many patients built up anybodies".

Linda Bullard mentions this fact, too, but she focuses more on the business that goes with it than on the advantages. In her article "Killing Us Softly Towards a Feminist Analysis of Genetic Engineering" (685-686), she gives figures of biotechnology products that has been patented yet, and describes the estimated development of the market in the future. She comments "That means Big Business, and the Big Businessman are well aware of it". This comment contains a negative judgement on the "Big Businessman", and the capitalized letters of the expression attract our attention immediately. She also says that "many drugs and vacchines will be produced by living factories, drugs such as insulin, growth hormone, and interferon, which are alredy on the market". The author chose the expression "living factory", which clearly shows us the sceptical point of view she has on the subject.

"The Gene Hunt" (705-706) by Leon Jaroff deals with the production of human proteins like insulin in a different way. The author stresses the advantages of genetic research for fighting genetic diseases "The ever improving ability to read base-pair sequences of genes will enable researchers to speed the discovery of new proteins ... and use them ... for fighting disease. It will help them pinpoint missing proteins, such as insulin, that can correct genetic diseases". With the Words "fight" and "correct" he shows up the chances and advantages. He does not mention the big business that is tied up with it.

I am sure that money plays an important role in the business with biotechnology products, but I do not accept it as a reason for stopping the research. Before scientists knew how to produce human insulin in laboratory, the substance was more difficult to get and the patients had more problems with it than they have now. So I do not care of the profit, because the new method has a lot of advantages for diabetics, who are dependent on insulin. Besides, every product we buy means business for someone, and nearly everything in our world has to do with business. As far as the "living factories" are concerned, Bullard is right in a way. But though genetically altered bacterias are alive, I do not see a reason against using them, for there is a difference between them and so-called animals Bacterias do not have a nervous system, so they cannot feel pain. I would have a different opinion if they needed mice to do it.

I am sure that biotechnology offers a lot of chances for fighting and curing diseases, but people also have doubts and fear, because nobody exactly knows what the new achievements will involve.

Before I discuss the possible effects of those achievements on our world, it is necessary to realize some scientific facts. The main concern of the scientists is "the identification of all the human genes" (Watson, "The Human Genome Project A Personl View", 71). Until I read the article "The Human Genome Project A Personal View" ( 71) by James D. Watson, I had not known that scientists will probably succeed in decoding the human gene material in the near future, which I define with my life time. Watson, the director of the Human Gnome Project in the United States, says that they "want the program completed in roughly fifteen years", which astounded me. That means, in about fifteen years scientists will be able to decipher everybody's genetic material. That means also that they will perhaps be able to alter the genes in the fertilized egg cells to create babies with certain qualities. This is an important point for the opponents of biotechnology, who fear that the new knowledge may be abused to create "perfect humans" by manipulation.

Rifkin does not only fear, but is sure that this development will take place. In "A Heretic's View on the New Bioethics" (664), he says that "eugenics is the inseparable ethical wing of the age of biotechnology". He gives us some cruel and shocking information about eugenics in history and sees the danger of a "eugenic revival" (665). In addition, he tells us "While professional ethicists watch out the front door for telltale signs of a resurrection of the Nazi nightmare, eugenics doctrine has quietly slipped in the back door and is already stealthily at work reorganizing the ethical priorities of the human household" (665). This statement really causes a feeling of danger and insecurity, because he says that something has started in the past which we have not noticed up to now. I do not think it is helpful to start panic. I do not mean we can lean back and say that everything is going to be all right, but I do not see any solution in creating panic, because it leaves no space for objective and realistic thoughts. Rifkin does not work on the positive aspects of biotechnology at all, and he does not even try to find a solution or compromise. Therefore, I do not like Rifkin's argumentation, and I cannot identify with his point of view.

Although Robert Wright is an opponent of biotechnology, too, his argumentation in the article "Achilles Helix" is different from Rifkin's. He talks of "homemade eugenics", which means that "individual families [decide] what kind of kids they want to have" (718). He is of the opinion that only upper-class families would be able to afford the improvement of their children's genes, and he comes to the conclusion that "... the social pyramid would grow taller and steeper..."(70).

In my opinion, Wright is much more objective and realistic than Rifkin. Although language is never free from influencing the readers, Wright's article is not exclusively based on emotions, but on realistic thoughts. For instance, he tells us about "Luddites", who "will want a fairly thorough ban on the new technologies"(71). He shows a great problem with their plan "The United States can't, in the real world, do it alone"(7). In my opinion, this is an important point, because national laws are no solution to the international issue of biotechnology.

The discussion of biotechnology should not only be a international one, but it should also take place between scientists and eticists, healthy people and people who suffer pain, because they or their friends have a genetic disease. The scientists maybe do not consider the effects that their achievements could have on our world, because they are so enthusiastic about the identification of the human genome. Normal people might have fear of things that are totally unrealistic, for instance that scientists establish dinosaurs like they did in the film "Jurassic parc". Discourse is needed to differentiate between fear and realistic consequences, but that is exactly the point I missed at the articles by Jaroff and Watson, who work at the "Human Genome Project".

Jaroff is very enthusiastic about the project, and he gives a lot of scientific information, but he pays no attention to the ethical consequenses at all. He just mentions the effect on medicine "Once you can make a profile of a person's genetic predisposition to disease, medicine will finally become predictive and preventive" (Jaroff, "The Gene Hunt", 704).

Watson is concerned with the immediate ethical problems that will occur "If someone can go look at your DNA and see that you have a deletion on one of your anti-oncogenes and that you will be more lieable to die of cancer at an early age, then you might be discriminated in, say, employment or insurance coverage"(Watson, "The Human Genome Project...", 715). The scientist tries to find a solution to this problem, and he says that "laws are needed to prevent genetic discrimination ..."(715). Although this is a start of paying attention to the ethical problems that might occur, it is still not enough from my point of view.

To come to a conclusion at the end, I want to quote Dennis Chamberland, who says in "Genetic Engineering Promise and Threat"(660) "There is only one certainty The river that is the knowledge of life has been crossed, and we cannot go back again". I think that is true. If I am right, we won't be able to stop genetic research, because there is so much hope to find the causes for serious diseases like aids and cancer. For that reason, many people support research in the field of biotechnology, and I understand and support them on the one hand. On the other hand I think it is necessary to think about the consequences. It is very difficult or maybe impossible to avoid that somebody abuses the knowledge of the human genome, and for that reason I have difficulties in deciding whether I should support or object the research. However, I suppose that the door that is the detailed knowledge of the human genome will be opened one time, and we should be prepared to handle and the consequences that are on the other side of it.

Everybody has to decide for himself whether he is a opponent or a proponent of biotechnology, but I think it is important and necessary to get enough information about the subject, because otherwise we may forget or simply do not know relevant aspects. It is also very interesting to have a look at the language that the different authors used to explain their point of view, because it can help to judge and order the various statements.

Works Cited And Consulted

Bullard, Linda. "Killing Us Softly Toward A Feminist Analysis of Genetic Engineering". Writing and Reading across the Curriculum . Ed. Laurence Behrens and Leonard J. Rosen. New York Harper Collins, 14. 685-60

Chamberland, Dennis. "Promise and Threat". Writing and Reading across the Curriculum . Ed. Laurence Behrens and Leonard J. Rosen. New York Harper Collins, 14. 65-660

Greenough, Beverly Sills. "Why I Support Gene Therapy". Writing and Reading across the Curriculum . Ed. Laurence Behrens and Leonard J. Rosen. New York Harper Collins, 14.

Huxley, Aldous. "Brave New World". Writing and Reading across the Curriculum . Ed. Laurence Behrens and Leonard J. Rosen. New York Harper Collins, 14. 60-64

Jaroff,Leon. "The Gene Hunt". Writing and Reading across the Curriculum . Ed. Laurence Behrens and Leonard J. Rosen. New York Harper Collins, 14. 65-707

Rifkin, Jeremy. "A Heretic's View on the New Bioethics". Writing and Reading across the Curriculum . Ed. Laurence Behrens and Leonard J. Rosen. New York Harper Collins, 14. 66-67

Watson, James D.. "The Human Genome Project A Personal View". Writing and Reading across the Curriculum . Ed. Laurence Behrens and Leonard J. Rosen. New York Harper Collins, 14. 708-716

Wright, Robert. "Achilles Helix". Writing and Reading across the Curriculum .

Ed. Laurence Behrens and Leonard J. Rosen. New York Harper Collins, 14. 717-7

Please note that this sample paper on My point of view on biotechnology is for your review only. In order to eliminate any of the plagiarism issues, it is highly recommended that you do not use it for you own writing purposes. In case you experience difficulties with writing a well structured and accurately composed paper on My point of view on biotechnology, we are here to assist you. Your cheap research papers on My point of view on biotechnology will be written from scratch, so you do not have to worry about its originality.

Order your authentic assignment from cheap essay writing service and you will be amazed at how easy it is to complete a quality custom paper within the shortest time possible!