Germ-line engineering and late-onset diseases: the ethics of self-evolution.
While some claim that germ-line engineering is a definite possibility, the law in Israel and in most countries states that it should be avoided. This paper suggests that using GLE in order to 'self-evolve' (when it becomes safe) is not only inevitable but also morally justified. This paper argues that, The great achievements of healthcare during the last century, enabling longer life, have made almost everyone prey to late-onset diseases. The conundrum of healthcare allocation is worsening, partly due to late-onset dysfunctional genes that have escaped the barriers of natural selection, Trying to free future generations from late-onset diseases (such as Alzheimer's for instance) may be considered as 'eugenics' but, if pursued freely and justly, is a noble goal. We will be affecting future generations whether or not we use GLE. By definition, GLE might be reversible; it follows therefore that GLE may not necessarily represent the dramatic change inserted in the germ line forever--as is usually suggested. Reproductive freedom and justice are paramount in this scenario. These values are not necessarily incompatible if the right policies are in place.
Simonstein
Frida F
FF
The Center for Women's Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel. fridafux@netvision.net.il
D017668:Age of Onset; D000375:Aging / Q000235:genetics; D026688:Bioethical Issues; D005053:Eugenics; D005818:Genetic Engineering; D005826:Genetics, Medical; D005854:Germ Cells; D006801:Humans; D040841:Resource Allocation; D012935:Social Justice