Re: Science - enemy or friend? : Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:49 pm
McClennan wrote: It's a light entertainment TV programme and all he's doing is putting up an argument to get some ratings. However, there is a serious issue there up for debate and on genetics I don't think we've really had any sort of in-depth discussion as to where this should go. I can't see how we can just dive into genetic research without establishing guidelines, processes, ethical responsiblities etc., about the issue. Perhaps there's somebody on here who is involved in this area who can give us an insight as to what the issues are. I'm not skeptical about the case for genetics but I'm not that aware of the risks/dangers that need to be considered especially when you start getting into patents and the like. It's not dissimilar to the work that Craig Venter does, in that is prompts question which require detailed discussion and resolution before it gets out of control. There is constant debate regarding the course and ethics of genetic research. Scientists are acutely aware of the implications and many are uncomfortable progressing work like this without an ethical framework in place, which there usually is. The same can be said for stem cell research. There is a growing perception (in my opinion) that scientists are heartless and will simply perform any experiment they see fit if they believe it advances their research regardless of the feelings of anyone else or the use to mankind as a whole. This simply isn't true. There are always mavericks or publicity hunters in any walk of life who will try and make personal advantage by being "controversial" etc. That's just the way people work. They shouldn't be seen as representative of established science and their potential actions should not be used as an excuse to restrict the mainstream from doing extremely valuable work. |
McClennan wrote: It's a light entertainment TV programme and all he's doing is putting up an argument to get some ratings. However, there is a serious issue there up for debate and on genetics I don't think we've really had any sort of in-depth discussion as to where this should go. I can't see how we can just dive into genetic research without establishing guidelines, processes, ethical responsiblities etc., about the issue. Perhaps there's somebody on here who is involved in this area who can give us an insight as to what the issues are. I'm not skeptical about the case for genetics but I'm not that aware of the risks/dangers that need to be considered especially when you start getting into patents and the like. It's not dissimilar to the work that Craig Venter does, in that is prompts question which require detailed discussion and resolution before it gets out of control. There is constant debate regarding the course and ethics of genetic research. Scientists are acutely aware of the implications and many are uncomfortable progressing work like this without an ethical framework in place, which there usually is. The same can be said for stem cell research. There is a growing perception (in my opinion) that scientists are heartless and will simply perform any experiment they see fit if they believe it advances their research regardless of the feelings of anyone else or the use to mankind as a whole. This simply isn't true. There are always mavericks or publicity hunters in any walk of life who will try and make personal advantage by being "controversial" etc. That's just the way people work. They shouldn't be seen as representative of established science and their potential actions should not be used as an excuse to restrict the mainstream from doing extremely valuable work. |
|