Although developing genetic engineering is seemingly imperative for society in the future, boosting excessive hope on it could be precocious and unacceptable involving multilayered issues such as scarcity of moral, up-front cost and occasional unhealthy and ill-intentioned application of the technology.
Rather than seeking genetic engineering, scientists should focus more on innate power of organisms such as immunity. Genetic technology normally has propensity to aim at modifying and forcibly strengthening the nature of organisms to commodify more lucrative products such as GM food. However, such technological application requires protracted process supported by meticulous consideration before seeing the light of day. If we eat GM food invented without sufficient clinical testing, our bodies will suffer from inexplicable side-effects in the long term.
Laboratories and universities working on genetic engineering are receiving prohibitive amount of subsidies from governments. This means other sciences and public services, citizen's welfare for example, cannot see steady monetary support distributed to them. As these latter fields are not so lucrative themselves, securing sufficient financial aid is a real struggle. If only genetic engineering is valued from governments, this could cause unbalanced, harmful atmosphere in academics neglecting the humanities and social sciences.
Additionally, most citizens remain opposed to utilisation of genetic engineering applied to organisms -animals and plants alike- since nothing has been elucidated about risk of genetic modification and it would even be a violation of God's domain. However, scientists and governments contend that genetic engineering be safe enough but often don't want to reveal the truth in case of accident.
Considering several concerns such as moral, financial and healthy issues, viewing genetic engineering as a cure-all policy for improvements could be questionable in today's world as well as for the upcoming times.
Commentaires
Enregistrer un commentaire