Llabres, Krisha Mae M.

March 25, 2019

DENT 1-J

Ethical issues concerning Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering

With regards to the development of Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering, certain

ethical issues are being raised. Such issues are tackled and discussed in what we call
Bioethics: a field which main thrust is to have an “ethical framework for understanding
and acting (regarding the living world, including human beings)” as well as establishing
“ethical norms for health care and biomedical research.”
It’s concern with Biotechnology deals to where its developments are taking us,
developments such as organ transplantation, genetic modification and therapy,
implantations in the brain, etc. There is the skepticism of their safety and caution for the
possible repercussions and consequences of such developments. There are also the
issues dealing with the artificial replacing the natural, “playing God”, and the control that
we should have. In detail, much of the current development in biotechnology results from
a greatly enhanced understanding of the nature of genetics and the consequent ability to
perform manipulations in the genomes of plants and animals. This power to intervene in
what might be thought of as 'the fabric of life' raises the question of whether or not this, in
itself, is an ethically questionable activity. Some feel that 'respect for life' implies that there
should be no interference with it in this basic way. Conversely, the issue of the integrity
of nature is itself complex and open to interpretation in an evolutionary world in which
there is natural genomic plasticity. Moreover, the ethical does not simply equate with the
natural. Heart transplants are as radically unnatural as gene transplants, but most people
consider them to be ethically acceptable. Another issue would be that the pace of
discovery in genetics-based biotechnology is very rapid and there is anxiety that a kind
of technological compulsion ('if we can do it, let's do it') will drive developments ahead of
proper ethical consideration of their propriety. Not everything that can be done should be
done but, once technology is 'on the shelf', it is hard not to take it off. The moratorium on
human germ-line therapy is an example of the recognition that there must be ethical
restraints on the use of what is technically feasible. Part of the reason for this restriction
is uncertainty about the long-term effects of such interventions. There is also considerable
uncertainty about the environmental consequences of the genetic manipulation of plants.
These issues are scientific questions that need to be answered before we have an
adequate basis of knowledge for reaching final ethical decisions. Furthermore, advanced
technology involves processes that are only well understood by the experts who develop
and use them. This places considerable power in the hands of the companies that employ
these experts. Currently, there is much public suspicion about the reliability and
independence of this 'expert' advice. Some of this suspicion derives from a difficulty in
understanding that absolutely certain answers often cannot be given to complex
questions and that every element of risk can seldom be eliminated. It is also exacerbated
by memories of unfortunate incidents, such as the bovine spongiform encephalopathy
(BSE) crisis in the UK. Lastly, there is also much suspicion of transnational corporations,
which are perceived by many as wanting to maximize their profits by making users
dependent on their products and then controlling availability. The ethical use of
biotechnology clearly includes it being provided on a fair and just basis, neither denying
reasonable reward to those who have undertaken the considerable expense and risk of
R&D nor putting small scale users in thrall to large-scale suppliers. In the Philippines, one
of the developments of this biotechnology and genetic engineering that has a more direct
impact is the issue regarding Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO’s). There have been
much arguments regarding the issue of GMO’s per se, but in the Philippines, the concern
boils down to two: 1) the importation of GMO products and 2) adopting its technology in
the Philippines. In both cases, there is the issue of precaution and the possible
unforeseen, unknown adverse effects of GMO’s in our health and to the environment.
Pro-GMO advocates stress on the advantages and benefits of such technology, such as
increased yield, longer shell life, and others. Environmentalists on the other hand argue
that the keyword there is it “could” be safe and we should know first whether such
innovations and developments would really be beneficial given a longer period of time.
With regards to GMO products the issue of Labeling is always brought up. Accordingly,
consumers should be given the opportunity to decide whether they would want to take
food products that contains GMO’s or not. They have the basic right to know what they
buy and what they eat. They have such right to make an informed choice and by not
labeling foodstuffs properly, it is considered as a form of deception. As with bringing and
adopting the technology here in the Philippines, such as the case of BT rice and BT corn,
many disagree so as not to have once again the blunder with regards to the Golden Kohol.
This Golden kohol at the onset was considered a “scientific milestone” and supposedly a
solution to food shortage for the farmers but later on became pest just after one year,
gradually decreasing the yield. Environmentalists argue that with BT rice and BT corn, its
possible effects are still to be known, and they should not use the Philippines as “testing
grounds” as it were of such biotechnology for such environmental consequences may be
as adverse as what happened before.

Citation:
Calosa, K.J. (2010). Ethical Issues concerning Biotechnology and Genetic
Engineering. Metro Manila. Retrieved from
file:///C:/Users/BRASSTACKS/Downloads/biomedethics.pdf