Genetic engineering is a destroyer

By Yohanes Agung Riono

DENPASAR (JP): Bob Phelps, the coordinator of the Australian Gen-Ethic Network, in his article entitled Fast Track For False Promises (in Habitat Australia February 1994), defined genetic engineering as "a set of techniques for changing the DNA within living cells by adding to or removing parts of the genetic code to create organisms which are different in some way from their natural counterpart".

Moreover, Patsy Hallen, a lecturer in environmental philosophy at Murdoch University in Australia asks how genetic engineering can be considered a miracle when we know so little about it.

I think genetic engineering reduces biodiversity because genetically engineered organisms have only one genetic code. Research in India has shown that through genetic engineering, the number of rice varieties has been reduced from 30,000 to just 12 since 1950. In the U.S., the "ice-minus" mutant bacterium, which was developed to reduce frost damage in crops like strawberries and potatoes, can impair human beings' immune systems. These microbes have already been released into nature, making the risk of genetically engineered organisms real. Biosafety protocol is essential to prevent genetic engineering from getting out of control.

There has been a huge amount of research on genetically engineering animals. The research has been carried out all over the world without control from institutions such as ministries of health, food and drug associations, environmentalists or ministries of agriculture. Without controls, biodiversity may be threatened. Although genetic manipulation can create super-cows or super-sheep which can produce four times the amount of milk or meat, little is known about the physiology and anatomy of these animals.

Rice production has been increased 10 times during the green revolution. There isn't a world food crisis, even though cultivated land is being taken over by increased populations. Genetically engineered crops, however, are more prone to diseases. Some scientists also state that consuming genetically engineered crops can trigger cancer.

Human genetic engineering should be restrained by a code of ethics, ensuring that all research related to humans is approved by medical associations. As Pete Moore mentioned in New Scientist, creating super-humans with extraordinary strength and intelligence could lead to identical twins and transgenic men. A disaster might strike if these creatures are allowed to exist in the world.

Proponents of genetic engineering claim that through genetic manipulation many inherited diseases, like hemophilia and cystic fibrosis, could be treated by inserting new genes to replace diseased genes. The opponents say this technique could produce transgenic humans because the exact genetic patterns of human beings are not known.

The proponents claim that genetic engineering can limit infertility. Men who cannot produce mature sperm cells, or have genital infections, are usually treated with hormones and antibiotics. Women with reproductive canal infections or the inability to produce mature egg cells are usually treated with the same methods as applied to men. The drugs often don't work. Genetic engineering offers other solutions: vitro fertilization and test-tube embryos.

With these techniques fertilization takes place outside the body, in the petri dish. Doctors remove immature egg cells and sperm cells, and culture them until maturity. At maturity, an egg is fertilized and placed in the womb of a surrogate mother.

Opponents of genetic engineering argue that the vitro fertilization technique and the test-tube embryos can produce abnormal babies. They say the abnormality will emerge in adolescence. In addition, because egg and sperm cells can be cultured, abortion rates might increase because aborted fetuses are a potential source of primary egg and sperm cells. This might lead to an increase in the trade of fetuses. The United Kingdom, Australia and the U.S., prohibit embryo research for this reason.

I believe the disadvantages of genetic engineering outweigh the advantages. Genetic engineering is not a miracle. Regulations must be formulated to prevent genetic engineering from becoming a problem. The regulations should be drawn up by biologists, chemists, agriculturalists and theologians. By doing so, I believe that humans and nature will be safe from the destructive power of genetic engineering.

Yohanes Agung Riono is a lecturer at the School of Veterinary, Udayana University, Denpasar, Bali.