genetic engineering thesis statement

We use cookies to enhance our website for you. Proceed if you agree to this policy or learn more about it.

• Essay Database >
• Essays Samples >
• Essay Types >
• Argumentative Essay Example

Genetic Engineering Argumentative Essays Samples For Students

11 samples of this type

Do you feel the need to check out some previously written Argumentative Essays on Genetic Engineering before you begin writing an own piece? In this free directory of Genetic Engineering Argumentative Essay examples, you are given a thrilling opportunity to examine meaningful topics, content structuring techniques, text flow, formatting styles, and other academically acclaimed writing practices. Adopting them while composing your own Genetic Engineering Argumentative Essay will definitely allow you to finalize the piece faster.

Presenting superb samples isn't the only way our free essays service can aid students in their writing efforts – our authors can also compose from scratch a fully customized Argumentative Essay on Genetic Engineering that would make a solid basis for your own academic work.

Free Argumentative Essay About Genetically Modified Foods

The definition of genetically modified food (gmf), example of argumentative essay on gmos are a health risk to american consumers, the pros of genetically modified foods argumentative essays example.

Introduction

Don't waste your time searching for a sample.

Get your argumentative essay done by professional writers!

Just from $10/page

The Need To Regulate GM Foods Argumentative Essay Sample

Genetically modified food good or bad argumentative essay examples, genetically modified food: good or bad, free genetically modified plants argumentative essay sample, perfect model argumentative essay on “should scientists be allowed to conduct and publish research on engineering virulent flu, example of argumentative essay on genetically modified plants, genetic engineering should be supported argumentative essay examples, critique: optimized facility design for biotech facilities argumentative essay examples, argumentative essay on genetically modified foods.

Password recovery email has been sent to [email protected]

Use your new password to log in

You are not register!

By clicking Register, you agree to our Terms of Service and that you have read our Privacy Policy .

Now you can download documents directly to your device!

Check your email! An email with your password has already been sent to you! Now you can download documents directly to your device.

or Use the QR code to Save this Paper to Your Phone

The sample is NOT original!

Short on a deadline?

Don't waste time. Get help with 11% off using code - GETWOWED

No, thanks! I'm fine with missing my deadline

Please wait while we process your request

Writing About Genetic Engineering

Academic writing

Essay paper writing

Genetic engineering, being one of the main lines of scientific and technological progress, actively contributes to speeding up the solution of many problems concerning food, agriculture, energy, and environment. It’s no wonder that essays and research papers on genetic engineering are so frequently assigned in schools and universities. And if you want to make your paper stand out among other students’ work, read this article to find out the best writing tips and ideas.

What is genetic engineering?

Genetic engineering is an area of ​​molecular biology and genetics. It is aimed at creating genetic structures according to the previously prescribed plan as well as the formation of organisms with a new genetic program. Modern research makes a unique contribution to the study of the structural and functional organization of the genomes of various organisms. The methodology of genetic engineering is constantly being improved. More and more people use it in solving the most diverse problems of biology.

Genetic engineering essay topics

Struggling with the topic choice? Here is our top pick for your review:

• The concept of human genetic engineering essay
• Genetic engineering problems essay
• Essay on genetic engineering in food production
• Human cloning and genetic engineering argumentative essay
• Human genetic engineering essay
• Cloning essay
• Genetic engineering definition essay
• The benefit of genetic engineering essay
• Genetic engineering history essay
• Genetic engineering in agriculture essay

Genetic engineering persuasive essay topics

• Persuasive essay against genetic engineering: ethical considerations
• Should genetic engineering be legal persuasive essay
• Genetic engineering should be banned essay
• The dangers of genetic engineering
• Essay on why genetic engineering is bad
• Bioethics and genetic engineering 
• Are genetically engineered foods good or bad for us?
• Should parents be allowed to change the genome of their children?

Genetic engineering argumentative essay topics

• Argumentative essay on genetic engineering: should people be allowed to experiment under no supervision?
• Is genetic engineering ethical?
• Is genetic engineering harmful to agriculture?
• Should genetic engineering be permitted?
• Advantages and disadvantages of genetic engineering essay
• Essay on genetic engineering pros and cons
• Arguments against human genetic engineering essay
• Should it be a crime to clone people?

How to write an essay on genetic engineering?

It is not a secret that essay writing on genetic engineering is a challenging process. Despite the increasing popularity of such assignments, students do not know how to write it successfully. Let’s consider the main tips on how to write this type of work so that you will feel confident during the writing process:

• Mind the size of your paper. An essay usually ranges from one to seven pages. The most important thing in this case is not to make it too long and boring.
• Narrow your focus. Due to the small size of the paper, it is impossible to analyze many aspects of the phenomenon under consideration. So, focus your attention on one central thesis, which can be supported by secondary statements.
• State your own opinion. In fact, the whole essay is built on the views and ideas of the author. So make sure that apart from referring to ideas of experts in the field, you speak your mind and back up your claims using credible sources.
• Be careful with the style. Writing an essay, you do not need to use complex language. While you will have to use terminology, provide definitions to terms that are not widely known by people of your age. At the same

Genetic engineering essay outline

Making an outline is an important stage of any paper writing process. It helps you to organize your ideas and get a general understanding of what you are going to write about in each section of your work. Therefore, even if you are writing a short essay on genetic engineering, be sure to stick to the following outline:

• Genetic engineering essay introduction. Roughly speaking, this section consists of three parts: the sentence that is designed to catch the reader’s attention (which is called a genetic engineering essay hook), background info part, and a genetic engineering essay thesis statement. The main goal of your intro is to give a general overview of the issue you are going to consider in your paper.
• Main part. Here, you need to discuss all the ideas you have concerning your topic. Remember that each genetic engineering essay argument has to be reinforced by strong examples and evidence. Usually, a regular body of the essay consists of 3-5 paragraphs (depending on the length of your paper, with each paragraph covering one of the points you have made in a thesis.
• Genetic engineering essay conclusion. The final part of your essay comprises of three main parts: restated thesis, brief overview of the arguments made in the body of the paper, and some insightful sentence that ends your paper. Make sure that you restate your thesis by paraphrasing it instead of copying it from the intro. As for the final sentence, it is a good idea to put a rhetorical question or write some ideas that will give your readers some food for thought.

You may also review any genetic engineering sample essay to better understand how to outline yours. While a lot will depend on the chosen topic and the length of the paper, a sample will give you an idea of how your arguments can be presented in the text or how to section the paper.

Genetic engineering essay questions

Sometimes it only takes one question to write a brilliant text on some topic. As there are a lot of questions that people have today concerning genetic engineering, we have prepared the best ones for your consideration:

• Will genetic engineering change our society forever?
• Will there be genetic consequences in the future?
• Are the scientists just seeking to create an ideal human being?
• Does genetic engineering serve a higher purpose?
• What are the dangers of genetic engineering?

You can either use some of these as a topic for your paper or as a “food for thought” part in your conclusion.

How to come up with a creative title for a genetic engineering essay?

Interesting genetic engineering essay titles are 50% of the success of your paper. Despite the fact that the title consists of only a few words, students often encounter difficulties when trying to come up with any. What title will be good for the essay? Experienced specialists say that those are the ones that leave the readers wanting to learn more.

Here are some criteria for a catchy title:

• Intrigue the reader! Let him or her stop the glance at the title and feel the need to get acquainted with all the information.
• Target the right people. The correct title is always focused on a specific target audience. It makes it clear to the reader that the material is created for him or her and will be useful.

Genetic engineering research paper topics

Before moving to tips on writing research papers, it is crucial that you choose the topic that you are going to cover:

• Possibilities of genetic engineering research paper
• Genetics and its impact on human diseases
• Genetics and Parkinson’s disease
• GMO health risks
• Agriculture and land use policies in the United States
• The current goals of biotechnology
• Eugenics in the US
• Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer
• Ethical issues in genetic engineering and transgenics
• The persistence of genetically modified organisms in the environment
• The role of genetic engineering in the eradication of global hunger

How to write a research paper on genetic engineering

The main goal of such an assignment is to demonstrate a student’s academic knowledge of a subject. In this case, a student has to find and analyze a big number of credible sources in order to support his or her ideas with factual data from recent studies. In order to cope with a task successfully, it is also important to:

• Set goals for your research. Before starting the writing process, you need to understand the direction of the research and develop some research questions. Only then you can move to the literature review step.
• Make an outline. It’s an important aspect of any paper-writing process. A well-detailed outline helps to keep your ideas organized and your writing focused.
• Research carefully. Genetics is an exact science, and writing about it requires referring to accurate and credible sources. Moreover, as this field is constantly changes, the more recent the sources you use are, the better.
• Cite all the sources properly. Make sure that all the sources you use are referred to in the paper and put in the reference list in the end. Every genetic engineering research paper written by students is checked for plagiarism, and proper citations and paraphrasing techniques will allow you to avoid any potential issues with the originality of your work.
• Proofread your paper. It’s a good idea to proofread any piece of writing in general. Going through your research paper a few times after you finish it will help you understand .

Outline for a research paper on genetic engineering

Introduction. You have two tasks here: to put forward a hypothesis and develop a strong thesis statement that briefly describes what you are going to research. Before that, introduce the reader to the topic and provide some background info on it.

• Body. The body of your paper will be divided in a few sections such as methodology, literature review, results/findings section, and a discussion section. Basically, you will have to show how you have obtained factual information, what you have found, and what you can conclude based on those findings.
• Conclusion. The main goal here is to restate a thesis, explaining whether you have proved it in your paper or not. Additionally, it is necessary to make a quick overview of the body paragraphs and state your contribution to the research on the topic.

If it is hard for you to visualize the outline, try checking research paper examples on genetic engineering and the way information is presented there. As you will likely see, sections vary depending on the focus of the research, methods used, and quite a few other factors, which is why it is always best to have a rubric to follow.

Interesting ideas for a research papers and essays on genetic engineering

Genetic engineering has always been quite controversial and burning topic. There are various ideas in this field worth of your attention, but we have decided to present to you the most interesting ones. Perhaps, one of them will become your essay or research paper basis.

Animal cloning

• Cloning, in the most general sense, means accurate reproduction of an object any number of times.
• The creation of animals and plants with specific qualities, such as resistance to diseases and unpleasant climatic conditions, has always been a very tempting idea. As such specifies would be able to produce a huge amount of meat, milk, fruits, vegetables, and other products, it could become a solution to food crisis in a lot of regions.
• In combination with transgenesis, cloning of animals opens up additional opportunities for the production of valuable biologically active proteins for the treatment of various animal and human diseases.
• Scientists developed several methods for cloning animals:
• The method of parthenogenesis, in which the division and growth of an unfertilized ovum is induced. This method has certain limitations since it allows the cloning of only female individuals.
• The so-called ‘embryo splitting’ technology, which, according to scientists, can’t be identical to the ‘parent’ body.
• The most successful and promising method is ‘nuclear transfer’ or, as it is also called, a surgical method. It is based on replacing the haploid nucleus of the ovum with a diploid nucleus taken from the cells of the embryos. These cells are not yet differentiated, so their nuclei easily replace the function of the diploid nucleus of a newly fertilized cell.
• In 1928, the German embryologist Hans Spemann (1869-1941) cloned the salamander for the first time with the help of a nuclear transplant from one cell to another.
• Later successful experiments on the transplantation of the nuclei of the body cells into an ovum were carried out in 1952 by American scientists Robert Briggs and T.J. King. They received a genetic copy of the frog.
• A similar result was achieved in 1960 by John Gurdon in Great Britain. In 1983, geneticists managed to create clones of adult amphibians.

Human cloning

• 200 years ago, human cloning was an unattainable fantastic idea. Science is constantly progressing and, perhaps, in a few centuries, cloning will become as common as the so-called test-tube babies now.
• In the second half of the last century, genetic experiments were conducted quite regularly. In 1978, the first test-tube baby was born in England. Thanks to such experiments, people who have problems with getting pregnant can also have children.
• On January 4, 1985, another female child from a test tube was born in London to the world’s first surrogate mother. Since then, it became clear that the child can be carried and given birth to not only by the biological mother.
• In December 1998, the world was shocked by the news about the creation of the first human clone of a resident of South Korea. The shocking experiment was interrupted at the prenatal stage.
• Experiments in human cloning began to take place in many countries of the world since then. In 1998, the Chicago scientist, Richard Seed, said that he intended to create a whole laboratory for human cloning. According to his opinion, in the future, there will be many people wanting to have their own clone.
• It’s worth writing that in 1999, the US issued a law banning such experiments. A little later, most European countries signed the Paris Convention on the prohibition of genetic cloning of humans.
• At the end of February 2000, scientists began to view the clone as an identical twin of a certain person whose birth was delayed in time. Preliminary legislative acts were considered, according to which clones should officially have the same legal rights and responsibilities as any other human being.
• In the end of February 2000, a group of Canadian scientists began to conduct experiments on growing organs of the human body.
• In March 2000, the press reported that Russian scientists illegally started secret experiments to create clones of people. At that time, the whole world officially refused to try to clone humans. Despite this, underground research is still conducted.
• In April 2000, the British government canceled the ban on cloning embryos. According to scientists, this should help to create perfectly healthy human organs necessary for transplantation. The benefits are obvious, and the probability of rejection of such organs is minimal.
• In early 2002, scientists of PPL Therapeutics reported that they were able to create several clones of pigs, whose organs were ideally suited for transplantation to humans.
• In January 2003, the birth of another cloned child was announced. This time the experiment was conducted by Dr. Severino Antinori.
• At present, cloning of human embryos is prohibited in many countries of the world.

Background information for a genetic engineering essay or research paper

The basis of genetic engineering methods is the ability of restriction enzymes to divide DNA into nucleotide sequences. They can be incorporated into the genes of bacterial cells in order to obtain hybrid or chimera forms. These hybrid forms consist of their own DNA and additionally embedded fragments of DNA that is not characteristic of them.

Genetic engineering is divided into gene, genome, and chromosome types. The essence of the first (gene) type is the purposeful rearrangements of the natural genome to change the genetic characteristics of viruses and cells. For example, cellular genes that confer the properties of oncogenicity on viruses can be moved to the viral genomes.

The essence of genome engineering lies in a purposeful reorganization of the genome of prokaryotes for the creation of new species. With the help of genome engineering, a large amount of additional genetic information may be introduced, and a hybrid organism, which differs from the original one in many ways, may be created.

Chromosome engineering is focused on the chromosomes of cells of higher and lower microorganisms (prokaryotes, eukaryotes). It became one of the reasons why the treatment of hereditary diseases, as well as breading of animals and various plant species is currently possible.

Your email address will not be published / Required fields are marked *

Try it now!

Calculate your price

Number of pages:

Order an essay!

Fill out the order form

Make a secure payment

Receive your order by email

Writing about Romeo and Juliet

On September 16th, Verona residents celebrate the birthday of their most beloved and popular resident: Juliet Capulet. Moreover, the whole city considers Juliet to be its guardian angel. On that day,…

29th Jul 2020

Report writing

What is a formal report and how to write it?

A formal report is a document that discusses a certain subject or a problem and is written for a specific audience. Let’s consider the definition of report writing. Such a paper presents…

26th Oct 2022

How To Write Papers About Veterans

Nowadays, there are many important topics that need to be discussed. The world is full of events, and some of them change our lives in the most unpredictable and terrifying way. War is the most…

27th Jul 2020

Get your project done perfectly

Professional writing service

Reset password

We’ve sent you an email containing a link that will allow you to reset your password for the next 24 hours.

Please check your spam folder if the email doesn’t appear within a few minutes.

Home — Essay Samples — Science — Genetic Engineering — The Ethics of Genetic Engineering in Human Enhancement

The Ethics of Genetic Engineering in Human Enhancement

• Categories: Genetic Engineering

About this sample

Words: 457 |

Published: Jan 25, 2024

Words: 457 | Page: 1 | 3 min read

Table of contents

The promise of genetic enhancement:, the ethical dilemma of designer babies:, unintended consequences and the unknown:, societal inequality and access:, conclusion:.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof. Kifaru

Verified writer

• Expert in: Science

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

3 pages / 1139 words

2 pages / 1005 words

3 pages / 1487 words

3 pages / 1570 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Genetic Engineering

Genetic engineering is the process of altering the genetic makeup of an organism by adding, deleting or changing its DNA. The process involves the manipulation of genes and their transfer from one organism to another, thereby [...]

In Gattaca's dystopia, the dangers of a society obsessed with genetic perfection are exposed. The film challenges viewers to reflect on the implications of genetic determinism, the erosion of personal identity, and the ethical [...]

As genetic engineering continues to advance, the controversy surrounding its potential benefits and ethical considerations has become increasingly prominent. This essay aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of genetic [...]

Genetic Engineering is a powerful and potentially very dangerous too. To change the sequence of nucleotides of the DNA that code for the structure of a complex living organism, can have extremely ill effects although the [...]

Genetics is the most interesting part of science because it explains how certain traits are passed down by parents to their offspring. Gregor Mendel is considered the pioneer in explaining this theory of the genetics within [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

University student reflection: Let’s take a balanced ethical and scientific look at genetic engineering

Although the idea of engineering genes has been on the minds of science fiction writers, ethicists, and biochemists alike for decades, only recently has gene-editing science fully entered the glare of the public spotlight. This is, in part, due to a recent successful account of gene editing: the modification of a single DNA strand in multiple human embryos. As a result, fear of the impending race of designer human beings has been trickling into the public psyche. But how warranted is this fear? And, more importantly, what are the ethical implications of any of this?

To me, genetic engineering is as fascinating as it is complicated. Although I understand why people would pick different sides when it comes to supporting progress in the field, I am a fan (to a certain extent). Yes, it is ethically and scientifically complex, but if utilized intelligently and responsibly, it ultimately has the capacity to do more good than harm.

In order to explore the ethical dimensions of genetic engineering, it’s important to give a bit of background on how far along we are in terms of gene editing at the moment. The New York Times has a handy and fun way to  test your knowledge of modern gene editing  and the internet can certainly conjure up more than a few examples, but the gist is this: we’re not particularly advanced at gene editing, especially when it comes to humans.

Genetic engineering was first developed in 1973, and since then it has undergone a multitude of advancements and changes. Many of these have been applied to food and agriculture: for example, scientists at Pennsylvania State University have recently developed a  type of mushroom  that doesn’t turn brown after slicing, and they’re currently working on doing the same for potatoes. The market for genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is  expected to grow  from 112 million tons to 130 million tons by 2021, especially in countries in need of larger, more nutritious or drought-resistant food. Gene editing has also been  applied to diseases , such as diabetes in mice (for the eventual application to humans).

Don’t get too nervous or excited though: The process remains arduous and difficult, mostly because there are so many genes that influence a given plant or animal. For example, the number of genes influencing something like height is incredibly vast—some estimates go as high as 93,000 genetic variations. With our current capabilities (which, again, have only allowed for the modification of one genetic mutation in humans), there is no way that we could modify and test each of those different genes for height enough to make a significant difference. Even though it can take very little time to alter a single gene, altering thousands, and figuring out which thousands to alter, is incredibly time-consuming. So if you’re worrying that non-designer children will have to compete with a generation of Michael Jordans and Marie Curies, that fear, at least, should be assuaged.

What is more complicated is the potential uses of gene-editing technology for repairing genetic diseases, such as cystic fibrosis, some cases of early-onset Alzheimer’s, and even blindness. Because, as great as it is to make such astounding scientific advancements, access to such tools will likely be extremely limited, and thus extremely expensive. So, as with so many other things, genetic engineering could lead to an increasingly large economic divide. The best healthcare is already privileged to those of greater economic means, and this could be extended to genetic engineering for disease eradication. This is the source of a lot of fear—warranted fear—for a lot of people.

It’s extremely important to keep the social impact of genetic engineering in mind, especially when it comes to disease eradication. But this does not mean we should halt all scientific inquiry into the field. It’s a little scary to imagine banning scientific studies on the basis that results could be exclusive. With this mentality, any once-expensive cure that has been subsidized or improved so as to make more widely available wouldn’t exist. So while the socioeconomic implications are incredibly important, I don’t believe they should be the reason for the demise of gene-editing research.

And I don’t think too many people are arguing that we shouldn’t continue to research on the sole basis that the results could be really expensive and unavailable to most people. I think the main concern about genetic engineering has to do with the other potentially radical consequence: designer babies.

There’s something that feels wholly wrong about the idea of parents choosing how to make their children act and look, giving their offspring an advantage stemming not from the randomness of genetics but from deliberate choice, the cutting-and-pasting of genes. Follow the trajectory of this idea into the future, and you find yourself looking into the face of a terrifying potential reality: the divide between “designed” people and “natural” people strict and cutting, with economic, gendered, and racial consequences. This idea is terrifying.

I will note though, that as I mentioned before, trains of thought like this one are still much closer to science fiction than science, not least because no one has any idea how to deliberately design a child. Also, the  number and size of conferences  covering the ethics of genetic engineering in the past half-decade are reassuringly large—scientists are aware of the ethical considerations and are taking them into account. This is not to say that we should remove attention from the issue and let the scientist handle it. We should continue to pay attention and we have to hold scientists accountable—just without deterring work that has the capacity to do real good.

Natural selection takes millions of years. From the point that life first evolved on this planet—some three billion years ago—the process of mutation, diversification, evolution, and extinction has taken so long, it’s physically impossible to comprehend. And humans have only been around for 200,000 years of that history of life. So if you’re wondering why you still have an appendix or a tailbone, or you’re not well-suited to the really hot climate in which you live, it’s because evolution essentially takes forever. Given enough time, humans will adapt and change to suit our environments, it just takes a really, really long time.

But what if we could speed up the process of adaptation?

Adaptation is rooted in socio-biological trends, and this is demonstrated by the subtle, but nonetheless prevalent, adaptive differences in humans from a variety of regions. National Geographic described this in an  article about the process of self-evolution, noting that the ancestors of modern Australian and Tasmanian Aboriginals developed adaptations allowing them to survive in freezing temperatures at night, in addition to blistering temperatures during the day. The ancestors of Sherpas living near the Himalayas adapted greater lung capacities that allowed them to climb extreme heights. Across the continents, human genetic variation is based on changes that have happened over thousands and thousands of years.

Through decisions ancient humans made and the ones we make today, our species has self-evolved. Although these improvements were not through technological means, self-evolution is nothing new to our species. As such, taking it to the next level may not be as large a jump as we think.

With climate change as a looming force on the horizon, what if we could self-adapt to survive in warmer temperatures or wetter environments? With rising sea levels, what if we could adapt towards better lung capacity? As humans, we could bypass the long and random process of evolution—which will happen to us anyway, whether we like it or not—and choose ways in which we can meet the demands of our environment. If the focus of genetic engineering was not on making humans into perfect beings, but rather allowing humans to survive in harsh environmental conditions or remain free of life-threatening diseases, it could be the exact tool we need.

While this is only a hypothetical solution for the future, it nonetheless has implications for the present. It is more important than ever that we continue responsible and ethical research into genetic engineering. To put it bluntly, genetic engineering isn’t just about potentially advancing the species: it’s about saving us from ourselves.

Emmy Hughes is a sophomore at Wesleyan University, where she studies English and Earth and Environmental Science. She’s the Assistant News Editor for The Argus, Wesleyan’s student newspaper. Follow her on Twitter @emmyughes .

A version of this article was originally published on the Wesleyan Argus’ website as “ The Case for Responsible Genetic Engineering ” and has been republished here with permission from the author.

GLP Podcasts & Podcast Videos More...

GLP podcast: China bans ‘irresponsible’ germline editing; losing weight causes cancer? Modern culture could drive mental health issues

Glp podcast: medicinal psychedelics in california ‘lead-soaked tampons’ debunked; why prescription drugs are so costly, videos more....

Video: Organic, non-gmo, gluten-free, keto? How food labels mislead us about health benefits

Bees & pollinators more....

Mosquito massacre: Can we safely tackle malaria with a CRISPR gene drive?

Are we facing an ‘Insect Apocalypse’ caused by ‘intensive, industrial’ farming and agricultural chemicals? The media say yes; Science says ‘no’

Dissecting claims about Monsanto suing farmers for accidentally planting patented seeds

Infographics more....

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Gmo faqs more....

Why is there controversy over GMO foods but not GMO drugs?

How are GMOs labeled around the world?

How does genetic engineering differ from conventional breeding?

Alex Jones: Right-wing conspiracy theorist stokes fear of GMOs, pesticides to sell ‘health supplements’

IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer): Glyphosate cancer determination challenged by world consensus

Most popular.

Newsletter Subscription

• Weekly Newsletter (Wed)
• Daily Digest (Mon, Tue, Thu, Fri)
• Weekly Top Six (Sun)
• Featured Articles Only
• Human Articles Only
• Agriculture Articles Only
• All Types of Content

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.

• Search Menu
• Sign in through your institution
• Volume 12, Issue 1, 2024 (In Progress)
• Volume 11, Issue 1, 2023
• Advance articles
• Editor's Choice
• Virtual Issues
• Clinical Briefs
• ISEMPH Prizes
• Author Guidelines
• Submission Site
• Open Access
• Calls for Papers
• Why submit?
• About Evolution, Medicine, and Public Health
• About the International Society for Evolution, Medicine and Public Health
• Editorial Board
• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Journals Career Network
• Self-Archiving Policy
• For Reviewers
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

Introduction, human enhancement, genetic engineering, conclusions.

• < Previous

Human enhancement: Genetic engineering and evolution

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

Mara Almeida, Rui Diogo, Human enhancement: Genetic engineering and evolution, Evolution, Medicine, and Public Health , Volume 2019, Issue 1, 2019, Pages 183–189, https://doi.org/10.1093/emph/eoz026

• Permissions Icon Permissions

Genetic engineering opens new possibilities for biomedical enhancement requiring ethical, societal and practical considerations to evaluate its implications for human biology, human evolution and our natural environment. In this Commentary, we consider human enhancement, and in particular, we explore genetic enhancement in an evolutionary context. In summarizing key open questions, we highlight the importance of acknowledging multiple effects (pleiotropy) and complex epigenetic interactions among genotype, phenotype and ecology, and the need to consider the unit of impact not only to the human body but also to human populations and their natural environment (systems biology). We also propose that a practicable distinction between ‘therapy’ and ‘enhancement’ may need to be drawn and effectively implemented in future regulations. Overall, we suggest that it is essential for ethical, philosophical and policy discussions on human enhancement to consider the empirical evidence provided by evolutionary biology, developmental biology and other disciplines.

Lay Summary: This Commentary explores genetic enhancement in an evolutionary context. We highlight the multiple effects associated with germline heritable genetic intervention, the need to consider the unit of impact to human populations and their natural environment, and propose that a practicable distinction between ‘therapy’ and ‘enhancement’ is needed.

There are countless examples where technology has contributed to ameliorate the lives of people by improving their inherent or acquired capabilities. For example, over time, there have been biomedical interventions attempting to restore functions that are deficient, such as vision, hearing or mobility. If we consider human vision, substantial advances started from the time spectacles were developed (possibly in the 13th century), continuing in the last few years, with researchers implanting artificial retinas to give blind patients partial sight [ 1–3 ]. Recently, scientists have also successfully linked the brain of a paralysed man to a computer chip, which helped restore partial movement of limbs previously non-responsive [ 4 , 5 ]. In addition, synthetic blood substitutes have been created, which could be used in human patients in the future [ 6–8 ].

The progress being made by technology in a restorative and therapeutic context could in theory be applied in other contexts to treat non-pathological conditions. Many of the technologies and pharmaceutical products developed in a medical context to treat patients are already being used by humans to ‘enhance’ some aspect of their bodies, for example drugs to boost brain power, nutritional supplements, brain stimulating technologies to control mood or growth hormones for children of short stature. Assistive technology for disabled people, reproductive medicine and pharmacology, beside their therapeutic and restorative use, have a greater potential for human ‘enhancement’ than currently thought. There are also dual outcomes as some therapies can have effects that amount to an enhancement as for example, the artificial legs used by the South African sprinter Oscar Pistorius providing him with a competitive advantage.

This commentary will provide general ethical considerations on human enhancement, and within the several forms of so-called human biomedical enhancement, it will focus on genetic engineering, particularly on germline (heritable) genetic interventions and on the insights evolutionary biology can provide in rationalizing its likely impact. These insights are a subject often limited in discussions on genetic engineering and human enhancement in general, and its links to ethical, philosophical and policy discussions, in particular [ 9 ]. The rapid advances in genetic technology make this debate very topical. Moreover, genes are thought to play a very substantial role in biological evolution and development of the human species, thus making this a topic requiring due consideration. With this commentary, we explore how concepts based in evolutionary biology could contribute to better assess the implications of human germline modifications, assuming they were widely employed. We conclude our brief analysis by summarizing key issues requiring resolution and potential approaches to progress them. Overall, the aim is to contribute to the debate on human genetic enhancement by looking not only at the future, as it is so often done, but also at our evolutionary past.

The noun ‘enhancement’ comes from the verb ‘enhance’, meaning ‘to increase or improve’. The verb enhance can be traced back to the vulgar Latin inaltiare and late Latin inaltare (‘raise, exalt’), from ‘ altare ’ (‘make high’) and altus (‘high’), literally ‘grown tall’. For centuries human enhancement has populated our imagination outlined by stories ranging from the myths of supernormal strengths and eternal life to the superpowers illustrated by the 20th century comic books superheroes. The desire of overcoming normal human capacities and the transformation to an almost ‘perfect’ form has been part of the history of civilization, extending from arts and religion to philosophy. The goal of improving the human condition and health has always been a driver for innovation and biomedical developments.

In the broadest sense, the process of human enhancement can be considered as an improvement of the ‘limitations’ of a ‘natural version’ of the human species with respect to a specific reference in time, and to different environments, which can vary depending on factors such as, for example, climate change. The limitations of the human condition can be physical and/or mental/cognitive (e.g. vision, strength or memory). This poses relevant questions of what a real or perceived human limitation is in the environment and times in which we are living and how it can be shifted over time considering social norms and cultural values of modern societies. Besides, the impact that overcoming these limitations will have on us humans, and the environment, should also be considered. For example, if we boost the immune system of specific people, this may contribute to the development/evolution of more resistant viruses and bacteria or/and lead to new viruses and bacteria to emerge. In environmental terms, enhancing the longevity of humans could contribute to a massive increase in global population, creating additional pressures on ecosystems already under human pressure.

Two decades ago, the practices of human enhancement have been described as ‘biomedical interventions that are used to improve human form or functioning beyond what is necessary to restore or sustain health’ [ 10 ]. The range of these practices has now increased with technological development, and they are ‘any kind of genetic, biomedical, or pharmaceutical intervention aimed at improving human dispositions, capacities, or well-being, even if there is no pathology to be treated’ [ 11 ]. Practices of human enhancement could be visualized as upgrading a ‘system’, where interventions take place for a better performance of the original system. This is far from being a hypothetical situation. The rapid progress within the fields of nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology and cognitive science has brought back discussions about the evolutionary trajectory of the human species by the promise of new applications which could provide abilities beyond current ones [ 12 , 13 ]. If such a possibility was consciously embraced and actively pursued, technology could be expected to have a revolutionary interference with human life, not just helping humans in achieving general health and capabilities commensurate with our current ones but helping to overcome human limitations far beyond of what is currently possible for human beings. The emergence of new technologies has provided a broader range of potential human interventions and the possibility of transitioning from external changes to our bodies (e.g. external prosthesis) to internal ones, especially when considering genetic manipulation, whose changes can be permanent and transmissible.

The advocates of a far-reaching human enhancement have been referred to as ‘transhumanists’. In their vision, so far, humans have largely worked to control and shape their exterior environments (niche construction) but with new technologies (e.g. biotechnology, information technology and nanotechnology) they will soon be able to control and fundamentally change their own bodies. Supporters of these technologies agree with the possibility of a more radical interference in human life by using technology to overcome human limitations [ 14–16 ], that could allow us to live longer, healthier and even happier lives [ 17 ]. On the other side, and against this position, are the so-called ‘bioconservatives’, arguing for the conservation and protection of some kind of ‘human essence’, with the argument that it exists something intrinsically valuable in human life that should be preserved [ 18 , 19 ].

There is an ongoing debate between transhumanists [ 20–22 ] and bioconservatives [ 18 , 19 , 23 ] on the ethical issues regarding the use of technologies in humans. The focus of this commentary is not centred on this debate, particularly because the discussion of these extreme, divergent positions is already very prominent in the public debate. In fact, it is interesting to notice that the ‘moderate’ discourses around this topic are much less known. In a more moderate view, perhaps one of the crucial questions to consider, independently of the moral views on human enhancement, is whether human enhancement (especially if considering germline heritable genetic interventions) is a necessary development, and represents an appropriate use of time, funding and resources compared to other pressing societal issues. It is crucial to build space for these more moderate, and perhaps less polarized voices, allowing the consideration of other positions and visions beyond those being more strongly projected so far.

Ethical and societal discussions on what constitutes human enhancement will be fundamental to support the development of policy frameworks and regulations on new technological developments. When considering the ethical implications of human enhancement that technology will be available to offer now and in the future, it could be useful to group the different kinds of human enhancements in the phenotypic and genetic categories: (i) strictly phenotypic intervention (e.g. ranging from infrared vision spectacles to exoskeletons and bionic limbs); (ii) somatic, non-heritable genetic intervention (e.g. editing of muscle cells for stronger muscles) and (iii) germline, heritable genetic intervention (e.g. editing of the C–C chemokine receptor type 5 (CCR5) gene in the Chinese baby twins, discussed later on). These categories of enhancement raise different considerations and concerns and currently present different levels of acceptance by our society. The degree of ethical, societal and environmental impacts is likely to be more limited for phenotypic interventions (i) but higher for genetic interventions (ii and iii), especially for the ones which are transmissible to future generations (iii).

The rapid advances in technology seen in the last decades, have raised the possibility of ‘radical enhancement’, defined by Nicholas Agar, ‘as the improvement of human attributes and abilities to levels that greatly exceed what is currently possible for human beings’ [ 24 ]. Genetic engineering offers the possibility of such an enhancement by providing humans a profound control over their own biology. Among other technologies, genetic engineering comprises genome editing (also called gene editing), a group of technologies with the ability to directly modify an organism’s DNA through a targeted intervention in the genome (e.g. insertion, deletion or replacement of specific genetic material) [ 25 ]. Genome editing is considered to achieve much greater precision than pre-existing forms of genetic engineering. It has been argued to be a revolutionary tool due to its efficiency, reducing cost and time. This technology is considered to have many applications for human health, in both preventing and tackling disease. Much of the ethical debate associated with this technology concerns the possible application of genome editing in the human germline, i.e. the genome that can be transmitted to following generations, be it from gametes, a fertilized egg or from first embryo divisions [ 26–28 ]. There has been concern as well as enthusiasm on the potential of the technology to modify human germline genome to provide us with traits considered positive or useful (e.g. muscle strength, memory and intelligence) in the current and future environments.

Genetic engineering: therapy or enhancement and predictability of outcomes

To explore some of the possible implications of heritable interventions we will take as an example the editing (more specifically ‘deletion’ using CRISPR genome editing technology) of several base pairs of the CCR5 gene. Such intervention was practised in 2018 in two non-identical twin girls born in China. Loss of function mutations of the CCR5 had been previously shown to provide resistance to HIV. Therefore, the gene deletion would be expected to protect the twin baby girls from risk of transmission of HIV which could have occurred from their father (HIV-positive). However, the father had the infection kept under control and the titre of HIV virus was undetectable, which means that risk of transmission of HIV infection to the babies was negligible [ 29 ].

From an ethical ground, based on current acceptable practices, this case has been widely criticized by the scientific community beside being considered by many a case of human enhancement intervention rather than therapy [ 29 , 30 ]. One of the questions this example helps illustrate is that the ethical boundary between a therapy that ‘corrects’ a disorder by restoring performance to a ‘normal’ scope, and an intervention that ‘enhances’ human ability outside the accepted ‘normal’ scope, is not always easy to draw. For the sake of argument, it could be assumed that therapy involves attempts to restore a certain condition of health, normality or sanity of the ‘natural’ condition of a specific individual. If we take this approach, the question is how health, normality and sanity, as well as natural per se, are defined, as the meaning of these concepts shift over time to accommodate social norms and cultural values of modern societies. It could be said that the difficulty of developing a conceptual distinction between therapy and enhancement has always been present. However, the potential significance of such distinction is only now, with the acceleration and impact of technological developments, becoming more evident.

Beyond ethical questions, a major problem of this intervention is that we do not (yet?) know exactly the totality of the effects that the artificial mutation of the CCR5 may have, at both the genetic and phenotypic levels. This is because we now know that, contrary to the idea of ‘one gene-one trait’ accepted some decades ago, a gene—or its absence—can affect numerous traits, many of them being apparently unrelated (a phenomenon also known as pleiotropy). That is, due to constrained developmental interactions, mechanisms and genetic networks, a change in a single gene can result in a cascade of multiple effects [ 31 ]. In the case of CCR5, we currently know that the mutation offers protection against HIV infection, and also seems to increase the risk of severe or fatal reactions to some infectious diseases, such as the influenza virus [ 32 ]. It has also been observed that among people with multiple sclerosis, the ones with CCR5 mutation are twice as likely to die early than are people without the mutation [ 33 ]. Some studies have also shown that defective CCR5 can have a positive effect in cognition to enhance learning and memory in mice [ 34 ]. However, it’s not clear if this effect would be translated into humans. The example serves to illustrate that, even if human enhancement with gene editing methods was considered ethically sound, assessing the totality of its implications on solid grounds may be difficult to achieve.

Genetic engineering and human evolution: large-scale impacts

Beyond providing the opportunity of enhancing human capabilities in specific individuals, intervening in the germline is likely to have an impact on the evolutionary processes of the human species raising questions on the scale and type of impacts. In fact, the use of large-scale genetic engineering might exponentially increase the force of ‘niche construction’ in human evolution, and therefore raise ethical and practical questions never faced by our species before. It has been argued that natural selection is a mechanism of lesser importance in the case of current human evolution, as compared to other organisms, because of advances in medicine and healthcare [ 35 ]. According to such a view, among many others advances, natural selection has been conditioned by our ‘niche-construction’ ability to improve healthcare and access to clean water and food, thus changing the landscape of pressures that humans have been facing for survival. An underlying assumption or position of the current debate is that, within our human species, the force of natural selection became minimized and that we are somehow at the ‘end-point’ of our evolution [ 36 ]. If this premise holds true, one could argue that evolution is no longer a force in human history and hence that any human enhancement would not be substituting itself to human evolution as a key driver for future changes.

However, it is useful to remember that, as defined by Darwin in his book ‘On the Origin of the Species’, natural selection is a process in which organisms that happen to be ‘better’ adapted to a certain environment tend to have higher survival and/or reproductive rates than other organisms [ 37 ]. When comparing human evolution to human genetic enhancement, an acceptable position could be to consider ethically sound those interventions that could be replicated naturally by evolution, as in the case of the CCR5 gene. Even if this approach was taken, however, it is important to bear in mind that human evolution acts on human traits sometimes increasing and sometimes decreasing our biological fitness, in a constant evolutionary trade-off and in a contingent and/or neutral—in the sense of not ‘progressive’—process. In other worlds, differently from genetic human enhancement, natural selection does not ‘ aim ’ at improving human traits [ 38 ]. Human evolution and the so-called genetic human enhancement would seem therefore to involve different underlying processes, raising several questions regarding the implications and risks of the latter.

But using genetic engineering to treat humans has been proposed far beyond the therapeutic case or to introduce genetic modifications known to already occur in nature. In particular, when looking into the views expressed on the balance between human evolution and genetic engineering, some argue that it may be appropriate to use genetic interventions to go beyond what natural selection has contributed to our species when it comes to eradicate vulnerabilities [ 17 ]. Furthermore, when considering the environmental, ecological and social issues of contemporary times, some suggest that genetic technologies could be crucial tools to contribute to human survival and well-being [ 20–22 ]. The possible need to ‘engineer’ human traits to ensure our survival could include the ability to allow our species to adapt rapidly to the rate of environmental change caused by human activity, for which Darwinian evolution may be too slow [ 39 ]. Or, for instance, to support long-distance space travel by engineering resistance to radiation and osteoporosis, along with other conditions which would be highly advantageous in space [ 40 ].

When considering the ethical and societal merits of these propositions, it is useful to consider how proto-forms of enhancement has been approached by past human societies. In particular, it can be argued that humans have already employed—as part of our domestication/‘selective breeding’ of other animals—techniques of indirect manipulation of genomes on a relatively large scale over many millennia, albeit not on humans. The large-scale selective breeding of plants and animals over prehistoric and historic periods could be claimed to have already shaped some of our natural environment. Selective breeding has been used to obtain specific characteristics considered useful at a given time in plants and animals. Therefore, their evolutionary processes have been altered with the aim to produce lineages with advantageous traits, which contributed to the evolution of different domesticated species. However, differently from genetic engineering, domestication possesses inherent limitations in its ability to produce major transformations in the created lineages, in contrast with the many open possibilities provided by genetic engineering.

When considering the impact of genetic engineering on human evolution, one of questions to be considered concerns the effects, if any, that genetic technology could have on the genetic pool of the human population and any implication on its resilience to unforeseen circumstances. This underlines a relevant question associated with the difference between ‘health’ and biological fitness. For example, a certain group of animals can be more ‘healthy’—as domesticated dogs—but be less biologically ‘fit’ according to Darwin’s definition. Specifically, if such group of animals are less genetically diverse than their ancestors, they could be less ‘adaptable’ to environmental changes. Assuming that, the human germline modification is undertaken at a global scale, this could be expected to have an effect, on the distribution of genetically heritable traits on the human population over time. Considering that gene and trait distributions have been changing under the processes of evolution for billions of years, the impact on evolution will need to be assessed by analysing which genetic alterations have been eventually associated with specific changes within the recent evolutionary history of humans. On this front, a key study has analysed the implications of genetic engineering on the evolutionary biology of human populations, including the possibility of reducing human genetic diversity, for instance creating a ‘biological monoculture’ [ 41 ]. The study argued that genetic engineering will have an insignificant impact on human diversity, while it would likely safeguard the capacity of human populations to deal with disease and new environmental challenges and therefore, ensure the health and longevity of our species [ 41 ]. If the findings of this study were considered consistent with other knowledge and encompassing, the impact of human genetic enhancements on the human genetic pool and associated impacts could be considered secondary aspects. However, data available from studies on domestication strongly suggests that domestication of both animals and plans might lead to not only decreased genetic diversity per se, but even affect patterns of variation in gene expression throughout the genome and generally decreased gene expression diversity across species [ 42–44 ]. Given that, according to recent studies within the field of biological anthropology recent human evolution has been in fact a process of ‘self-domestication’ [ 45 ], one could argue that studies on domestication could contribute to understanding the impacts of genetic engineering.

Beyond such considerations, it is useful to reflect on the fact that human genetic enhancement could occur on different geographical scales, regardless of the specific environment and geological periods in which humans are living and much more rapidly than in the case of evolution, in which changes are very slow. If this was to occur routinely and on a large scale, the implications of the resulting radical and abrupt changes may be difficult to predict and its impacts difficult to manage. This is currently highlighted by results of epigenetics studies, and also of the microbiome and of the effects of pollutants in the environment and their cumulative effect on the development of human and non-human organisms alike. Increasingly new evidence indicates a greater interdependence between humans and their environments (including other microorganisms), indicating that modifying the environment can have direct and unpredictable consequences on humans as well. This highlight the need of a ‘systems level’ approach. An approach in which the ‘bounded body’ of the individual human as a basic unit of biological or social action would need to be questioned in favour of a more encompassing and holistic unit. In fact, within biology, there is a new field, Systems Biology, which stresses the need to understand the role that pleiotropy, and thus networks at multiple levels—e.g. genetic, cellular, among individuals and among different taxa—play within biological systems and their evolution [ 46 ]. Currently, much still needs to be understood about gene function, its role in human biological systems and the interaction between genes and external factors such as environment, diet and so on. In the future if we do choose to genetically enhance human traits to levels unlikely to be achieved by human evolution, it would be crucial to consider if and how our understanding of human evolution enable us to better understand the implications of genetic interventions.

New forms of human enhancement are increasingly coming to play due to technological development. If phenotypic and somatic interventions for human enhancement pose already significant ethical and societal challenges, germline heritable genetic intervention, require much broader and complex considerations at the level of the individual, society and human species as a whole. Germline interventions associated with modern technologies are capable of much more rapid, large-scale impacts and seem capable of radically altering the balance of humans with the environment. We know now that beside the role genes play on biological evolution and development, genetic interventions can induce multiple effects (pleiotropy) and complex epigenetics interactions among genotype, phenotype and ecology of a certain environment. As a result of the rapidity and scale with which such impact could be realized, it is essential for ethical and societal debates, as well as underlying scientific studies, to consider the unit of impact not only to the human body but also to human populations and their natural environment (systems biology). An important practicable distinction between ‘therapy’ and ‘enhancement’ may need to be drawn and effectively implemented in future regulations, although a distinct line between the two may be difficult to draw.

In the future if we do choose to genetically enhance human traits to levels unlikely to be achieved by human evolution, it would be crucial to consider if and how our understanding of humans and other organisms, including domesticated ones, enable us to better understand the implications of genetic interventions. In particular, effective regulation of genetic engineering may need to be based on a deep knowledge of the exact links between phenotype and genotype, as well the interaction of the human species with the environment and vice versa .

For a broader and consistent debate, it will be essential for technological, philosophical, ethical and policy discussions on human enhancement to consider the empirical evidence provided by evolutionary biology, developmental biology and other disciplines.

This work was supported by Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT) of Portugal [CFCUL/FIL/00678/2019 to M.A.].

Conflict of interest : None declared.

Pham P , Roux S , Matonti F et al.  Post-implantation impedance spectroscopy of subretinal micro-electrode arrays, OCT imaging and numerical simulation: towards a more precise neuroprosthesis monitoring tool . J Neural Eng 2013 ; 10 : 046002 .

Google Scholar

Maghami MH , Sodagar AM , Lashay A et al.  Visual prostheses: the enabling technology to give sight to the blind . J Ophthal Vis Res 2014 ; 9 : 494 – 505 .

Weitz AC , Nanduri D , Behrend MR et al.  Improving the spatial resolution of epiretinal implants by increasing stimulus pulse duration . Sci Transl Med 2015 ; 7 : 318ra203.

Bouton CE , Shaikhouni A , Annetta NV et al.  Restoring cortical control of functional movement in a human with quadriplegia . Nature 2016 ; 533 : 247 – 50 .

Geddes L. First paralysed person to be ‘reanimated’ offers neuroscience insights. Technique moves man’s arm by decoding his thoughts and electrically stimulating his own muscles . Nat News 2016 ; 533 .

Squires JE. Artificial blood . Science 2002 ; 295 : 1002 – 5 .

Lowe KC. Blood substitutes: from chemistry to clinic . J Mater Chem 2006 ; 16 : 4189 – 96 .

Moradi S , Jahanian-Najafabadi A , Roudkenar MH. Artificial blood substitutes: first steps on the long route to clinical utility . Clin Med Insights Blood Disord 2016 ; 9 : 33 – 41 .

Powell R , Kahane G , Savulescu J. Evolution, genetic engineering, and human enhancement . Philos Technol 2012 ; 25 : 439 – 58 .

Parens E (ed.). Enhancing Human Traits: Ethical and Social Implications . Washington, DC : Georgetown University Press , 1998 .

Google Preview

Giubilini A , Sanyal S. Challenging human enhancement. In: Clarke S , Savulescu J , Coady T et al.  (eds). The Ethics of Human Enhancement: Understanding the Debate . Oxford : Oxford University Press , 2016 .

Elliott C. Better Than Well: American Medicine Meets the American Dream . New York, NY : WWW Norton & Company, Inc ., 2003 .

Kramer P. Listening to Prozac . London : Fourth Estate , 1994 .

Moravec H. Mind Children: The Future of Robot and Human Intelligence . Cambridge : Harvard University Press , 1990 .

Bostrom N. Human genetic enhancements: a transhumanist perspective . J Value Inq 2003 ; 37 : 493 – 506 .

Kurzweil R. The Singularity is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology . New York, NY : Viking , 2005 .

Harris J. Enhancing Evolution: The Ethical Case for Making Better People . Princeton, NJ : Princeton University Press , 2010 .

Fukuyama F. Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution . New York, NY : Picador , 2002 .

Sandel M. The Case Against Perfection: Ethics in the Age of Genetic Engineering . Cambridge : The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press , 2007 .

Savulescu J , Persson I. The perils of cognitive enhancement and the urgent imperative to enhance the moral character of humanity . J Appl Philos 2008 ; 25 : 162 – 77 .

Buchanan A. Beyond Humanity . Oxford : Oxford University Press , 2011 .

Persson I , Savulescu J. Moral enhancement, freedom, and the god machine . Monist 2012 ; 95 : 399 – 421 .

Leon K. Ageless bodies, happy souls: biotechnology and the pursuit of perfection . New Atlantis 2003 ; 1 : 9 – 28 .

Agar N. Humanity’s End: Why We Should Reject Radical Enhancement . Cambridge : MIT Press , 2010 .

Gaj T , Gersbach CA , Barbas CF III ,. ZFN, TALEN, and CRISPR/Cas based methods for genome engineering . Trends Biotechnol 2013 ; 3 : 397 – 405 .

Baltimore D , Berg P , Botchan M et al.  Biotechnology. A prudent path forward for genomic engineering and germline gene modification . Science 2015 ; 348 : 36 – 8 .

Otieno MO. CRISPR/Cas9 human genome editing: challenges, ethical concerns and implications . J Clin Res Bioeth 2015 ; 6 : 253 .

Ishii T. Germline genome-editing research and its socio-ethical implications . Trends Mol Med 2015 ; 21 : 473 – 81 .

Bionews.org.uk. First Genome-edited Babies: A Very Different Perception of Ethics , 2018 . https://www.bionews.org.uk/page_140060 (27 August 2019, date last accessed).

Cyranoski D. CRISPR-baby scientist fails to satisfy his critics . Nat News 2018 ; 564 : 13 – 4 .

Galis F , Metz JA. Evolutionary novelties: the making and breaking of pleiotropic constraints . Integr Comp Biol 2007 ; 47 : 409 – 19 .

Falcon A , Cuevas MT , Rodriguez-Frandsen A et al.  CCR5 deficiency predisposes to fatal outcome in influenza virus infection . J Gen Virol 2015 ; 96 : 2074 – 8 .

Gade-Andavolu R , Comings DE , MacMurray J et al.  Association of CCR5 Δ32 deletion with early death in multiple sclerosis . Genet Med 2004 ; 6 : 126 – 31 .

Zhou M , Greenhill S , Huang S et al.  CCR5 is a suppressor for cortical plasticity and hippocampal learning and memory . eLife 2016 ; 5 : e20985 .

Tibayrenc M , Ayala FJ (eds). On Human Nature: Biology, Psychology, Ethics, Politics, and Religion . London : Academic Press , 2017 .

Baldi P. The Shattered Self: The End of Natural Evolution . Cambridge : MIT Press , 2001 .

Darwin C. On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or, the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life . London : J. Murray , 1859 .

Gould SJ. The Structure of Evolutionary Theory . Belknap, NY : Harvard University Press , 2002 .

Rees M. Our Final Century: Will the Humans Race Survive the Twenty-first Century? Eastbourne : Gardners Books , 2003 .

Nuffield Council on Bioethics. Genome Editing: An Ethical Review . London : Nuffield Council on Bioethics , 2016 .

Powell R. The evolutionary biological implications of human genetic engineering . J Med Philos 2012 ; 37 : 204 – 26 .

Liu W , Chen L , Zhang S et al.  Decrease of gene expression diversity during domestication of animals and plants . BMC Evol Biol 2019 ; 19 : 1 – 11 .

Fages A , Hanghøj K , Khan N et al.  Tracking five millennia of horse management with extensive ancient genome time series . Cell 2019 ; 177 : 1419 – 35 .

Zhang J , Wang X , Yao J et al.  Effect of domestication on the genetic diversity and structure of Saccharina japonica populations in China . Sci Rep 2017 ; 7 : 42158 .

Theofanopoulou C , Gastaldon S , O’Rourke T et al.  Self-domestication in Homo sapiens : insights from comparative genomics . PLoS One 2018 ; 13 : e0196700 .

Capra F , Luisi PL. The Systems View of Life . Cambridge : Cambridge University Press , 2014

• genetic engineering

Email alerts

Citing articles via, affiliations.

• Online ISSN 2050-6201
• Copyright © 2024 International Society for Evolution, Medicine, and Public Health
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

NC State Extension Publications

Related Publications

There is a PDF version of this document for downloading and printing.

Let’s Talk About Genetic Engineering: A Guide to Understanding Genetic Engineering and its Applications in Food, Agriculture, and the Environment

Introduction.

Biotechnology refers to the field of science where genetic material, living organisms, cells, and biological systems can be studied or used to create products and technologies. For instance, genetic engineering refers to a powerful set of tools within the field of biotechnology. By using genetic engineering in food, agricultural, and environmental contexts, scientists have been able to develop new food products, crop varieties, and approaches to potentially restore ecosystems, among other examples. Many of these applications aim to improve or enhance food production, quality, and environmental conditions.

At the same time, there have been significant discussions and public debates over the past few decades about the role of genetic engineering and its use in different fields. Today, scientists and regulatory officials continue to work together with other stakeholders from industry, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and members of the public to understand and address these concerns. This work also aims to refine approaches to evaluate safety and ensure sufficient regulatory oversight of genetic engineering and its use in various products and within different contexts.

This publication outlines and describes core concepts related to genetic engineering and its use in food, agriculture, and the environment. This information may be particularly helpful for Extension agents, researchers, community members, government officials, and others who wish to better understand genetic engineering and the role it plays in our society.

This publication aims to discuss the following questions:

• What is genetic engineering?
• How is genetic engineering used in food and agriculture?
• How do I know which foods have been genetically engineered?
• Are genetically engineered foods safe to eat?
• What other social and ethical considerations have been discussed for genetically engineered foods and agricultural products?
• How is genetic engineering used for environmental purposes?
• What are the potential risks and ethical concerns of using genetic engineering for environmental purposes?
• How is genetic engineering regulated?
• How can I learn more?

This publication concludes with a list of resources for more information about genetic engineering as applied in food and agricultural systems and the environment.

What Is Genetic Engineering?

Genetic engineering refers to a set of techniques designed to change or alter the genetic makeup of an organism by introducing, removing, or modifying specific genes. An organism is a living being and includes all forms of life, such as bacteria, plants, animals, and fungi. All organisms possess genetic material (deoxyribonucleic acid, or DNA) containing information that controls an organism’s ability to function, develop, and reproduce, which is passed on to its offspring. Genes are the parts of the genetic material of an organism that most directly code for inherited traits that are passed on from one generation to the next. Typically, a gene contains a specific segment of DNA encoding a functional product, such as a protein, and can affect various traits and characteristics of organisms, such as hair and eye color in animals, as well as flower color and seed shape in plants, among others. Most traits are not controlled by only one gene; instead, they result from many genes acting in concert and responding to the environment.

Genetic engineering techniques can be used to introduce a new trait or characteristic to an organism or to enhance existing traits by directly altering its genetic material. An organism that is produced through genetic engineering is called a genetically engineered organism , also known more commonly as a genetically modified organism (GMO) .

The term transgenesis refers to a genetic engineering process in which a sequence of DNA from one species of organism is introduced into a different species. Most commercially grown, genetically engineered crops have been developed using this approach. In some applications, a gene from a naturally occurring bacterium that codes for a protein that is toxic to some insect pests was moved into crops which in turn makes those crops toxic to the insects. Examples of this are Bt corn and Bt cotton, which contain a gene from Bacillus thuringiensis ( Bt ) that codes for a protein that controls caterpillars.

Gene editing is a relatively new genetic engineering method that can edit an organism’s genetic material and does not necessarily involve using another organism’s DNA. When no DNA from another organism is introduced, this is called a cisgenesis modification. Among other new techniques, the CRISPR system is a recently developed gene editing technique that acts like a pair of “molecular scissors” to cut an organism’s DNA in a precise location and either insert a new sequence of DNA, delete a piece of DNA, or substitute one piece of DNA for another piece ( Figure 1 ). Genetic engineering, including CRISPR and other tools, has been used in a wide range of applications, including food, agriculture, environmental conservation, medicine, and industry.

Figure 1. New genetic engineering techniques, such as CRISPR, can be used to edit an organism's DNA to modify traits or characteristics.

Source: NC State 2021

How Is Genetic Engineering Used in Food and Agriculture?

Genetic engineering is used to enhance food and agricultural production by increasing yields, reducing pest and disease damage, improving food nutrition and quality, and contributing to sustainable agricultural practices. In plants, genetic engineering has enhanced crop characteristics, decreased insecticide use, improved tolerance to herbicides, and adapted plants to the impacts of climate change (such as drought and salinity resistance). For example, a type of corn called DroughtGard® has been genetically engineered to include a gene from the Bacillus subtilis bacterium to improve its tolerance to drought ( Bayer, 2023 ; Nemali et al., 2014 ). There are also genetically engineered crops with improved health and nutritional qualities, such as rice engineered to have increased beta-carotene content (Golden Rice), soybean with increased omega-3 fatty acid content, and potatoes with lower acrylamide content ( NASEM 2016 report ).

Today, there are several genetically modified crops available for purchase in the United States, including sugar beets, canola, corn, soybean, cotton, alfalfa, eggplant, potato, summer squash, papaya, and plum, as well as a few varieties of pineapple and apples ( FDA 2022a ; USDA n.d.a ) ( Figure 2 ). A genetically engineered purple tomato with high antioxidant properties has received USDA approval and has hit the market recently ( Norfolk Healthy Produce 2023 ). Other products that are expected to reach the market in the coming years include gene-edited, pitless or seedless cherries and mangoes ( Pairwise 2023 ) and disease-resistant bananas ( FoodIndredientsFirst 2023 ).

Most genetically modified crops (including corn, soybean, and alfalfa) are used to feed animals, such as cows, poultry, and fish. Today, a consumer may only encounter a few, if any, of the aforementioned genetically engineered fruits or vegetables during a trip to the fresh produce aisle of a US supermarket. This is because items in a supermarket that are most likely to contain engineered ingredients are processed foods with flour, sugars, and oils from engineered corn and soybeans. This may change in the next decade if engineered fresh produce finds a bigger market niche.

There are some genetically engineered animals on the market and others in development. For example, AquAdvantage Salmon has been genetically modified to grow at a faster rate than its conventional counterpart by using genes from Chinook salmon and an ocean pout ( FDA 2023b ). The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved AquAdvantage for sale in the United States. Further, a type of cattle has been recently produced using gene editing to have a slick hair coat, which can improve its ability to withstand higher temperatures ( CRISPR Beef Cattle Get FDA Green Light 2022 ). It has been reviewed and approved by the FDA and is expected to reach the US market soon (FDA 2022a). Other recent developments include genetically engineered microbes for use in various applications, including in livestock or directly in agricultural soils, although most of these are still in the research and development phases.

Figure 2. Examples of genetically engineered crops available in the United States.

How do i know which foods have been genetically engineered.

There are a few different approaches to inform consumers about whether a food or food product has been genetically engineered or contains genetically engineered ingredients.

Food labeling and disclosure laws are both options, and they tend to vary by country. Food labeling involves the presentation of information on food packaging and includes detailed information such as product name, ingredients, nutritional content, allergens, serving size, and other information. Food disclosures are broader than labeling and include not only information on a label but also information provided through other means such as online platforms or nutritional information available in restaurants.

In the United States, the federal government passed the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard ( NBFDS ) in 2016. Since January 1, 2022, this law requires foods that contain genetically engineered ingredients to include transparent information for consumers about the food they purchase and whether they contain genetically engineered ingredients. This law uses the term “bioengineered” instead of “genetic engineering,” although these terms are essentially the same. For any new bioengineered foods (such as Bt sugarcane) that are added to an updated list of bioengineered foods, food manufacturers have until July 1, 2025, to comply with this law ( USDA n.d.b ). The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) is the federal agency responsible for implementing and overseeing the food disclosure standard in the United States In addition to food labeling requirements, the FDA and USDA publish lists of foods that have been genetically engineered on their websites (FDA 2022a; USDA n.d.a).

There are three general approaches for disclosing a food containing genetically engineered or bioengineered ingredients according to the NBFDS: (1) the list of ingredients on the food package can contain information indicating that the food contains bioengineered ingredients ( Figure 3A ), (2) the manufacturers may use a symbol or a QR code that provides a link to a web page with more information ( Figures 3B and 3C ), and (3) the food manufacturers can place a phone number on the food package that consumers can call or text to receive information about the bioengineered content. While food companies may use other terms such as “genetically modified organism,” “GMO,” and “genetic engineering” on food labels, they are required to use “bioengineered food” or “contains bioengineered ingredient(s)” according to this food disclosure law. In addition, the US food disclosure law does not require that the manufacturer or food producer specify which ingredients within the food are bioengineered.

If a food is labeled as containing bioengineered ingredients, this means that it contains detectable levels of genetic material that has been modified through genetic engineering techniques that could not be created through conventional breeding processes. This also extends to gene-edited food ingredients. In these cases, USDA investigates each bioengineered food on a case-by-case basis to determine if it contains “modified DNA” in the final product. If so, then it requires disclosure according to the NBFDS rule. Note that animal products derived from animals that are fed genetically engineered crops but not genetically engineered themselves, such as meat, poultry, and eggs, do not need to be labeled or disclosed. In addition, food that is sold at very small food manufacturers, restaurants, food trucks, within trains and airplanes, or present in very small portions of food ingredients (that is, less than 5%) are exempt from this disclosure law ( USDA n.d.c ; National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard 2018).

Figure 3. Foods that are genetically engineered (also called bioengineered) must be labeled after July 2025, according to the US NBFDS. The options for labeling foods include (A) listing bioengineered ingredients, (B) using a bioengineered symbol, or (C) using a QR code that provides an additional link on food packaging.

Are genetically engineered foods safe to eat.

Significant research has been conducted over the past several decades on the safety of genetically engineered foods and food ingredients for human consumption. Risk and safety studies focus on identifying new or different hazards resulting from engineering or modifying an organism's genetic material through genetic engineering techniques. This research has been conducted by large scientific bodies of experts, including the World Health Organization (WHO), Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), US National Academies of Sciences, and European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), as well as many other organizations and individual investigators.

Across these investigations, there has not been compelling evidence or data to directly link the consumption of genetically engineered crops with adverse health effects. These studies have relied on both short-term and long-term toxicity investigations using animals, studies of disease and chronic conditions in people (such as cancer, obesity, diabetes, and gastrointestinal issues), as well as investigations into their nutritional value and allergenicity (for instance, gluten allergenicity). Further, these research investigations have indicated that currently marketed, genetically engineered foods are expected to be just as safe and nutritious to consume as their non-genetically engineered counterparts.

Similarly, studies that have focused on the safety of genetically engineered foods for consumption by livestock animals also show that they are as safe as their non-genetically engineered counterparts (NASEM 2016). In addition, the genetically engineered components of the animal feed do not transfer to the animal or to any animal products they produce (such as milk, eggs, and meat).

What Other Social or Ethical Considerations Have Been Discussed for Genetically Engineered Foods or Agricultural Products?

Over the past few decades, significant social and ethical concerns have been raised by the development and use of genetic engineering, particularly in food and agriculture products. One set of these concerns is related to potential unintended impacts on the environment, such as the potential for modified or engineered genes to spread into wild populations, as well as impacts on biological diversity in ecological systems. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), USDA, and FDA are responsible for investigating these potential impacts through risk assessment processes in their respective jurisdictions. A second set of concerns relates to issues of transparency and consumer awareness of genetically engineered foods or food ingredients in the food supply and the ability of consumers to make informed decisions. For these reasons, the United States has introduced the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure standard that labels foods containing bioengineered ingredients (see previous section). Concerns about transparency have also centered on the regulation and approval of genetically engineered products as updates to rules in various agencies have increased the number of genetically engineered products that are exempt from regulation, and much of the information leading to approval is not always fully disclosed. In addition, the developer is primarily responsible for transparency, which is voluntary.

There have also been ethical concerns regarding the use of genetic engineering in animals, primarily regarding their treatment and well-being. For these reasons, among others, several groups have not accepted the use of genetic engineering in food and agriculture products.

How Is Genetic Engineering Used for Environmental Purposes?

In addition to applications in food and agriculture, genetic engineering has been proposed to help solve environmental challenges. Genetic engineering may help conserve and restore biological diversity, develop plants and animals that are more resilient to climate change, create biofuels and bioplastics, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, manage invasive species, and create trees that can absorb more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, among other examples.

Gene drives are a tool of genetic engineering that can help spread certain genetic traits in a population and may be used for environmental conservation purposes. Rather than relying on the normal rules of genetic inheritance, gene drives use another type of genetic “super” inheritance that increases the probability of inheriting a gene, which in turn increases the prevalence of specific genes across a population. For example, in normal inheritance, a gene has an equal probability (50-50) of being passed on from parent to their offspring. Gene drives can increase that likelihood to greater than 95% ( Figure 4 ).

Some biologists and conservationists are interested in using gene drives for environmental conservation purposes, including the management of invasive species and biodiversity conservation. For example, researchers and conservation groups (such as Island Conservation) are developing gene drive systems in mice to help eradicate invasive mice populations that threaten biodiversity and native ecosystems on islands ( Godwin et al. 2019 ; Hay and Guo 2022 ). In these cases, invasive mice and other rodents threaten endemic species on islands, resulting in a loss of biodiversity. This is particularly concerning because many islands contain species that are found nowhere else on Earth ( Barnhill-Dilling et al. 2019 ). Traditional control measures, such as rodenticides, have not proven effective enough and cannot be used on a large percentage of islands where invasive mice are impacting local ecosystems and human communities. Rodenticides are broad-spectrum toxicants, which means that they often have unintended effects on other species, including negative impacts on the very species conservation groups are trying to protect ( Barnhill-Dilling and Delborne 2021 ). Therefore, researchers are exploring the use of gene drives for more effective, long-term solutions to eradicating invasive mice populations on islands and restoring ecological biodiversity. Currently, gene drive mice are being developed in laboratories, and meanwhile, other stakeholders, such as the international consortium Genetic Biocontrol of Invasive Rodents (GBIRd) are exploring potential ecological impacts and public perceptions of using these gene drives.

Other examples of using genetic engineering to help solve environmental challenges include genetically engineered corals that are heat-resistant in response to warming marine environments ( Hobman et al. 2022 ; Cornwall 2019 ), CRISPR-mediated gene editing to create more efficient biofuels production ( Lakhawat et al. 2022 ), and genetically engineered crops for better utilization of nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus ( Lebedev et al. 2021 ; Gaxiola et al. 2011 ), among other examples.

Figure 4. Overview of super-Mendelian inheritance used in gene drives.

Adapted from Grieger et al. 2024.

What Are the Potential Risks or Ethical Concerns of Using Genetic Engineering for Environmental Purposes?

Similar to concerns raised about the use of genetic engineering in other applications, its use to help solve environmental challenges has also raised a number of health, environmental, social, ethical, and regulatory concerns. For example, concerns have been raised about genetically engineered trees regarding the potential of engineered or modified genes to escape to sexually compatible trees and unintended effects on other environmental organisms. There are also issues raised about the proprietary aspects of genetically engineered trees, including ownership, control, and regulation ( Pinchot 2014 ).

Some broader concerns about the use of genetic engineering are focused on the possible increased use of agrochemicals (like fertilizers and pesticides), the use of environmental resources such as water and land use, and the impacts that genetic engineering may have on climate change with a possible increase in greenhouse gas emissions ( Kuzma 2023 ). At the same time, and as mentioned above, many proponents of genetic engineering suggest that there may be environmental benefits to many of these agricultural and environmental applications, including using fewer agrochemicals and potentially decreasing greenhouse gas emissions ( Brookes 2022 ).

In addition, other concerns have been raised related to the development and release of gene drive organisms. These include potential unintended effects on other non-target species, the ability for engineered or modified genes to transfer to other sexually compatible species, unintended environmental effects, and ethical and regulatory implications ( Kormos et al. 2022 ; Hartley et al. 2022 ). Concerns have also been raised about how effective the technology is and how to ensure it can be stopped if needed, along with many ethical concerns focused on island-based nations being testing sites for the technology.

How Is Genetic Engineering Regulated by Government Agencies?

Genetic engineering regulation varies by country. In the United States, products developed using genetic engineering are regulated by three different government agencies under the Coordinated Framework for Regulation of Biotechnology, established in 1986 ( US Office of Science and Technology Policy 2017 ). These agencies include the US EPA, FDA, and USDA. Each agency is tasked with specific responsibilities related to the safety and regulatory approval of products that have been genetically engineered or contain genetically engineered components under their jurisdiction ( Figure 5 ). The FDA is tasked with regulating human and animal food and feed, ensuring food and feed are safe for consumption. The US EPA regulates pesticides, including substances known as plant-incorporated protectants (PIPs) that may be present in some genetically engineered crops, ensuring that these products do not pose unintended or unreasonable risks to humans, animals, or the environment. The USDA (specifically the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, or APHIS) safeguards plant and animal health, including protecting agriculture and agriculturally important resources by ensuring that genetically engineered crops do not have harmful side effects on agricultural systems or the environment. Together, USDA, FDA, and EPA are responsible for ensuring genetically engineered organisms do not present risks to human health or the environment. These agencies also continuously update their oversight and guidance as the technologies and products change. They also consider input from the White House, such as the recent Executive Order on Advancing Biotechnology and Biomanufacturing Innovation for a Sustainable, Safe, and Secure American Bioeconomy, which includes genetic engineering and calls for changes in its oversight. The regulation of genetically engineered organisms that are not related to food or agricultural products, such as trees or gene drive mice, also falls under the jurisdiction of these agencies, depending on existing laws and statutes as part of the Coordinated Framework for the Regulation of Biotechnology.

Figure 5. US regulatory agencies and their responsibilities in regulating genetically engineered crops.

Adapted from NASEM, 2016.

Genetic engineering is a powerful set of biotechnology tools that allow for the deliberate modification of an organism's genetic makeup by introducing, removing, or altering specific genes to introduce new traits or enhance existing ones. New gene editing techniques, such as CRISPR, have been developed in recent years.

Today, there are more than a dozen food and agricultural products on the US market that have been directly genetically engineered. In addition, genetic engineering has been proposed to help solve different environmental challenges, including restoring the environment, conserving biodiversity, and adapting to the effects of climate change.

While genetic engineering has potential benefits, concerns continue to be raised about its safety, oversight, and regulation. Today, three regulatory agencies in the United States, the USDA, FDA, and EPA, are responsible for regulating genetic engineering through the Coordinated Framework for Regulation of Biotechnology.

How Can I Learn More?

The following resources may be particularly helpful and informative for learning more about genetic engineering and its applications in food, agriculture, and the environment. Additional references are included in the subsequent section.

• National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM). 2022a. “ Are All Crops That We Eat Genetically Improved? ”
• NASEM. 2022b. “ Foods Made with GMOs Do Not Pose Special Health Risks. ”
• The United Website for Biotechnology Regulation. 2024. “ About the Coordinated Framework. ” US Department of Agriculture (USDA), US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
• US Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2024. “ Biotechnology Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs). ”
• US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2023. “ Genetically Modified Organisms .”
• US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). 2023. “ Agricultural Biotechnology: Feed Your Mind. ”

Barnhill-Dilling, S. K., Serr, M., Blondel, D. V., & Godwin, J. 2019. “Sustainability as a Framework for Considering Gene Drive Mice for Invasive Rodent Eradication.” Sustainability 11, no. 5: 1334. ↲

Barnhill‐Dilling, S. K., & Delborne, J. A. 2021. “Whose Intentions? What Consequences? Interrogating ‘Intended Consequences’ for Conservation with Environmental Biotechnology.” Conservation Science and Practice 3, no. 4: e406. ↲

Bayer. 2023. “ DroughtGard® Hybrids. ” Drought Protection, Bayer Traits, Crop Science US.” Accessed January 26, 2024. ↲

Brookes, G. 2022. “Genetically Modified (GM) Crop Use 1996–2020: Environmental Impacts Associated with Pesticide Use Change.” GM Crops Food 13, no. 1: 262–289. ↲

Cornwall. W. 2019. “ Researchers embrace a radical idea: Engineering coral to cope with climate change. ” Accessed January 26, 2024. ↲

CRISPR Beef Cattle Get FDA Green Light . 2022. Nature Biotechnology 40, no 4: Article 4. ↲

FoodIngredientsFirst. 2023. “ Gene-Editing Tech Could Save Cavendish Bananas from Deadly Fungus Threatening Extinction. ” Accessed January 26, 2024. ↲

FDA. 2020. “ FDA Approves First-of-its-Kind Intentional Genomic Alteration in Line of Domestic Pigs for Both Human Food, Potential Therapeutic Uses. ” Press Announcements, FDA. ↲

FDA. 2022a. “FDA Makes Low-Risk Determination for Marketing of Products from Genome-Edited Beef Cattle After Safety Review.” Press Announcements, FDA. ↲

FDA. 2023b. “ AquAdvantage Salmon Fact Sheet .” AquAdvantage Salmon, FDA. ↲

Gaxiola, R. A., Edwards, M., & Elser, J. J. 2011. “ A Transgenic Approach to Enhance Phosphorus Use Efficiency in Crops as Part of a Comprehensive Strategy for Sustainable Agriculture .” Chemosphere 84, no. 6: 840–845. ↲

Godwin, J., Serr, M., Barnhill-Dilling, S. K., Blondel, D. V., Brown, P. R., Campbell, K., Delborne, J., Lloyd, A. L., Oh, K. P., Prowse, T. A. A., Saah, R., & Thomas, P. 2019. “ Rodent Gene Drives for Conservation: Opportunities and Data Needs .” Proceedings. Biological Sciences 286, no. 1914: 20191606. ↲

Grieger, K., Wiener, J. Kuzma, J. 2024. “ Improving Risk Governance Strategies via Two-way Learning: A Comparative Analysis of Solar Geoengineering and Gene Drives .” Environment Systems and Decisions. ↲

Hartley, S., Taitingfong, R., & Fidelman, P. 2022. “ The Principles Driving Gene Drives for Conservation .” Environmental Science & Policy 135 (September 2022): 36–45. ↲

Hay, B. A., & Guo, M. 2022. “Gene Drive-Mediated Population Elimination for Biodiversity Conservation. When You Come to a Fork in the Road, Take It.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 119, no. 51: e2218020119. ↲

Hobman, E. V., Mankad, A., Carter, L., & Ruttley, C. 2022. “ Genetically Engineered Heat-Resistant Coral: An Initial Analysis of Public Opinion ." PLoS ONE 17, no. 1: e0252739. ↲

Hoofprint Biome (website) . 2023. Accessed January 26, 2024. ↲

Kormos, A., Lanzaro, G. C., Bier, E., Santos, V., Nazaré, L., Pinto, J., Aguiar dos Santos, A., & James, A. A. 2022. “ Ethical Considerations for Gene Drive: Challenges of Balancing Inclusion, Power and Perspectives. ” Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology 10. ↲

Kuzma, J., Grieger, K., Cimadori, I., Cummings, C. L., Loschin, N., & Wei, W. 2023. “ Parameters, Practices, and Preferences for Regulatory Review of Emerging Biotechnology Products in Food and Agriculture ." Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology 11: 1256388. ↲

Lakhawat, S. S., Malik, N., Kumar, V., Kumar, S., & Sharma, P. K. 2022. “ Implications of CRISPR-Cas9 in Developing Next Generation Biofuel: A Mini-Review .” Current Protein & Peptide Science 23, no. 9: 574–584. ↲

Lebedev, V. G., Popova, A. A., & Shestibratov, K. A. 2021. “ Genetic Engineering and Genome Editing for Improving Nitrogen Use Efficiency in Plants .” Cells 10, no. 12: 3303. ↲

National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard . 2018. Federal Register. ↲

NASEM. 2016. Genetically Engineered Crops: Experiences and Prospects | The National Academies Press . Accessed January 26, 2024. ↲

Nemali, K.S., Bonin, C., Dohleman, F.G., Stephens, M., Reeves, W.R., Nelson, D.E., Castiglioni, P., Whitsel, J.E., Sammons, B., Silady, R.A., Anstrom, D., Sharp, R., Patharkar, O.R., Clay, D., Coffin, M., Nementh, M., Leibman, M.E., Luethy, M., & Lawson, M. 2014 . “Physiological responses related to increased grain yield under drought in the first biotechnology-derived drought-tolerant maize.” Plant, Cell & Environment 38, no. 9 : 1866-1880. ↲

Norfolk Healthy Produce (website) . 2023. Accessed January 26, 2024. ↲

Pairwise. 2023. “ Conscious Foods .” Accessed January 26, 2024. ↲

Pinchot, L. 2014. “ American Chestnut: A Test Case for Genetic Engineering? ” US Forest Service. Wisdom , (spring-summer 2014): 8–15. ↲

USDA. n.d.a. “ List of Bioengineered Foods .” Agricultural Marketing Service. Accessed January 26, 2024. ↲

USDA. n.d.b. “ Industry Fact Sheet – National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard .” Agricultural Marketing Service. Accessed January 26, 2024. ↲

USDA. n.d.c. “ BE Disclosure .” Agricultural Marketing Service. Accessed January 26, 2024. ↲

US Office of Science and Technology Policy. 2017. Modernizing the Regulatory System for Biotechnology Products: Final Version of the 2017 Update to the Coordinated Framework for the Regulation of Biotechnology . ↲

Acknowledgment

This work is supported by the A1642 Social Implications of Food and Agriculture Technologies program, project award no. 2022-67023-36730, from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Institute of Food and Agriculture. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and should not be construed to represent any official USDA or U.S. Government determination or policy.

• Agriculture
• Risk Perception
• Genetic Improvement
• Genetic Engineering
• Bioengineering

Find more information at the following NC State Extension websites:

Publication date: July 23, 2024 AG-967

N.C. Cooperative Extension prohibits discrimination and harassment regardless of age, color, disability, family and marital status, gender identity, national origin, political beliefs, race, religion, sex (including pregnancy), sexual orientation and veteran status.

URL of this page

Receive Email Notifications for New Publications

Genetically Modified Food Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Need to write a genetically modified foods essay? Take a look at this example! This argumentative essay on GM foods explains all the advantages and disadvantages of the issue to help you form your own opinion.

Introduction

• The Benefits
• The Drawbacks

Genetically modified (GM) foods refer to foods that have been produced through biotechnology processes involving alteration of DNA. This genetic modification is done to confer the organism or crops with enhanced nutritional value, increased resistance to herbicides and pesticides, and reduction of production costs.

The concept of genetic engineering has been in existence for many years, but genetic modification of foods emerged in the early 1990s. This genetically modified food essay covers the technology’s positive and negative aspects that have so far been accepted. Currently, a lot of food consumed is composed of genetically altered elements, though many misconceptions and misinformation about this technology still exist (Fernbach et al., 2019).

Genetically modified foods have been hailed for their potential to enhance food security, particularly in small-scale agriculture in low-income countries.

It has been proposed that genetically modified foods are integral in the enhancement of safe food security, enhanced quality, and increased shelf-life, hence becoming cost-effective to consumers and farmers. Proponents of this technology also argue that genetically modified foods have many health benefits, in addition to being environmentally friendly and the great capability of enhancing the quality and quantity of yields (Kumar et al., 2020).

Genetically modified foods are, therefore, considered to be a viable method of promoting food production and ensuring sustainable food security across the world to meet the demands of the increasing population. This genetically modified food advantages and disadvantages essay aims to cover conflicting perspectives in the technology’s safety and efficacy. In spite of the perceived benefits of genetic engineering technology in the agricultural sector, the production and use of genetically modified foods have triggered public concerns about safety and the consequences of consumption (Fernbach et al., 2019).

Genetically Modified Foods: The Benefits

Many champions of GM food suggest the potential of genetic engineering technology in feeding the huge population that is faced with starvation across the world. Genetically modified foods could help increase production while providing foods that are more nutritious with minimal impacts on the environment.

In developing countries, genetic engineering technology could help farmers meet their food demands while decreasing adverse environmental effects. Genetically modified crops have been shown to have greater yields, besides reducing the need for pesticides.

This is because genetically modified crops have an increased ability to resist pest infestation, subsequently resulting in increased earnings (Van Esse, 2020). Some genetically engineered crops are designed to resist herbicides, thus allowing chemical control of weeds to be practiced. Foods that have been genetically modified are perceived to attain faster growth and can survive harsh conditions due to their potency to resist drought, pests, and diseases.

Genetically modified foods have also been suggested to contain many other benefits, including being tastier, safer, more nutritious, and having longer shelf life. Though scientific studies regarding the safety and benefits of genetically modified foods are not comprehensive, it is argued that critics of this technology are driven by overblown fears (Fernbach et al., 2019).

Genetically Modified Foods: The Drawbacks

To most opponents of the technology’s application in agriculture, issues relating to safety, ethics, religion, and the environment are greater than those that are related to better food quality, enhanced production, and food security. Genetic modification technology is perceived to carry risks touching on agricultural practices, health, and the environment.

The major issue raised by society concerning this technology pertains to whether genetically modified foods should be banned for people’s benefit. The gene transfer techniques are not entirely foolproof, thus raising fears that faults may emerge and lead to many unprecedented events.

There is a possibility that DNA transfer to target cells may not be effective. Alternatively, it may be transferred to untargeted points, with the potential effect being the expression or suppression of certain proteins that were not intended. This may cause unanticipated gene mutations in the target cells, leading to physiological alterations (Turnbull et al., 2021).

A number of animal studies have indicated that genetically modified foods could pose serious health risks/ Those include the tendency to cause impotency, immune disorders, acceleration of aging, hormonal regulation disorders, and alteration of major organs and the gastrointestinal system (Giraldo et al., 2019). It has also been demonstrated that genetically modified foods can act as allergens and sources of toxins.

Opponents argue that there is a lack of clear regulatory mechanisms and policies to ensure that genetically modified foods are tested for human health and environmental effects. Thus, human beings allegedly become reduced to experimental animals subjected to adverse toxic effects and dietary problems.

In animals, it has been argued that the use of genetically modified feeds causes complications, such as premature delivery, abortions, and sterility, though these claims have later been debunked (Xu, 2021). Some genetically modified crops, such as corn and cotton, are engineered to produce pesticides.

It has been demonstrated that this built-in pesticide is very toxic and concentrated as compared to the naturally sprayed pesticide, which has been confirmed to cause allergies in some people. Many studies have also shown the immune system of genetically modified animals to be significantly altered. For instance, a persistent increase in cytokines indicates the capability of these foods to cause conditions such as asthma, allergy, and inflammation (Sani et al., 2023).

Some of the genetically modified foods, such as soy, have also been shown to have certain chemicals known to be allergens, for example, trypsin inhibitor protein (Rosso, 2021). Genetic engineering of food may also result in the transfer of genes that have the capability to trigger allergies into the host cells.

Furthermore, most of the DNA transferred into genetically modified foods originates from microorganisms that have not been studied to elucidate their allergenic properties. Similarly, the new genetic combinations in genetically modified foods could cause allergies to some consumers or worsen the existing allergic conditions. Various cases of genetically modified foods causing allergic reactions have been reported, leading to the withdrawal of these foods from the market (Kumar et al., 2020).

Genetic modification of crops could also increase the expression of naturally occurring toxins through possible activation of certain proteins, resulting in the release of toxic chemicals. It is argued that sufficient studies have not been carried out to prove that genetically modified foods are safe for consumption (Fernbach et al., 2019).

Genetically modified foods are also associated with many environmental risks. Issues relating to the manner in which science is marketed and applied have also been raised, challenging the perceived benefits of genetically modified foods. Many opponents of genetic engineering technology perceive that genetic modification of food is a costly technology that places farmers from low-income countries in disadvantaged positions since they cannot afford it (Kumar et al., 2020; Leonelli, 2020).

It is also argued that this technology cannot address the food shortage issue, which is perceived to be more of a political and economic problem than a food production issue (Liang et al., 2019).

Political and economic issues across local and global levels have been suggested to prevent the distribution of foods so as to reach the people faced with starvation, but not issues of agriculture and technology. Politics and economic barriers have also been shown to contribute to greater poverty, subsequently making individuals unable to afford food (Kumar et al., 2020).

Some bioethicists are of the view that most genetic engineering advances in agriculture are profit-based as compared to those that are need-based. It challenges the appropriateness of genetic modification of food in ensuring food security, safeguarding the environment, and decreasing poverty, especially in low-income countries.

This argument is supported by the costly nature of genetic engineering technology and the yields from the application of this technology. The economic benefits of genetic engineering of foods are usually attained by large-scale agricultural producers, thus pitting the majority of the population who are involved in small-scale agricultural production (Kumar et al., 2020).

With the widespread adoption of genetic engineering technology, regulatory policies such as patents have been formulated, subsequently allowing exclusively large biotechnological organizations to benefit (Kumar et al., 2020).

Though biotechnological firms suggest that genetic modification of foods is essential in ensuring food security, the patenting of this technology has been perceived by many as being a potential threat to food security (Leonelli, 2020).

Patenting of genetically modified foods gives biotechnology firms monopoly control, thus demeaning the sanctity of life. This technology has also enhanced dependency, whereby farmers have to continuously go back to the biotechnology firms to purchase seeds for sowing in subsequent planting seasons.

Genetically modified food is believed to be unsafe, allegedly because sufficient tests have not been carried out to show that it would not cause some unprecedented long-term effects in another organism. Despite possessing positive attributes, such as health benefits and food safety, many consumers are wary of these foods because of a consistent belief in a lack of proven safety testing (Fernbach et al., 2019).

There are also fears that the genetic material inserted into genetically modified foods often gets transferred into the DNA of commensals found in the alimentary canal of human beings. This may lead to the production of harmful genetically modified chemicals inside the body of the human being, even long after ceasing the consumption of such foods.

Prior to the widespread adoption of this genetic engineering technology in agriculture, many scientists and regulatory agents raised health concerns. Some argue that genetically modified foods are inherently harmful and can trigger allergies, toxic effects, gene transfer to commensals in the gut, and can lead to the emergence of new diseases and nutritional problems (Deocaris et al., 2020; Seralini, 2020).

Despite multiple rigorous studies, it remains unknown whether genetically modified foods could be contributing to the rising cases of various health conditions such as obesity, asthma, cancer, cardiovascular diseases, and reproductive problems. In most cases, the testing that has been performed involves the evaluation of the growth and productivity of the modified organism, and not in terms of environmental and health impacts (Agostini et al., 2020).

Gene transfer may affect the nutritional quality of foods as the transfer is likely to reduce the amounts of certain nutrients while raising the levels of other nutrients. This causes a nutritional variation between conventional foods and similar foods produced through genetic modification techniques.

Furthermore, few studies have been carried out to show the effect of nutrient alterations brought about by genetic engineering in relation to nutrient-gene interactions, metabolism, and bioavailability (Hirschi, 2020). Critics of genetically modified foods argue that little information is available to show how the alteration of food contents affects gene regulation and expression as these changes occur at rates that far overwhelm scientific studies.

Genetic modification of food involves the transfer of genetic material even between organisms belonging to different species. To biotechnology firms and other proponents of genetically modified foods, this approach helps in maximizing productivity and profits. However, many consumers, environmental conservationists, and opponents of genetically modified foods perceive gene transfer across different species as causing a decrease in diversity (Turnbull et al., 2021).

With the reduction of diversity, benefits such as resistance to diseases and pests, adaptation to adverse weather conditions, and productivity also diminish. Critics of genetic engineering technology, therefore, suggest that applying this technology creates uniformity in organisms and decreases their genetic diversity, rendering them at increased risks of diseases and pests.

Transfer of genetic material also carries many environmental risks, especially in the event of wide cultivation of such crops. Some critics suggest that genetically engineered plants with herbicide and insect-resistant traits could transfer these traits to wild plants and subsequently lead to the evolution of difficult-to-eradicate weeds (Anwar et al., 2021).

These weeds could develop into invasive plants with the capability to decrease crop production and cause a disruption of the ecosystem. The genetically modified plants could also evolve into weeds, which will then require costly and environmentally unfriendly means to eradicate.

The genetic engineering of food may also have an impact on non-target organisms, which would further reduce diversity. It is a persistent concern that genetically modified foods, such as pesticide-resistant crops, could cause harm to non-target organisms.

Certain genetically modified crops have the potential to change the chemistry of the soil by releasing toxins and breaking down the plants after they die. Moreover, crops that have undergone genetic modification to withstand elevated chemical concentrations sustain a heightened application of herbicides, ultimately leading to elevated chemical concentrations in the soil (Anwar et al., 2021).

Genetic engineering’s intentional transfer of antibiotic resistance genes could have detrimental effects on human health and the environment. Antibiotic-resistant genes may be passed to pathogenic bacteria in animals’ and humans’ digestive tracts, increasing their pathogenicity and causing more and more public health problems (Amarasiri et al., 2020).

Genetic modification of food is applauded as an appropriate method of ensuring increased food availability, better nutrition, and general improvement in the agricultural sector. However, as this genetically modified food essay demonstrates, many issues surround this technology, mostly concerning safety, health, cultural, social, and religious issues.

Most of the concerns regarding genetically engineered foods can be cleared by conducting expansive research to establish clear grounds for such issues. Unless concrete research is conducted to substantiate the benefits and potential harms of genetically engineered foods, the majority of people will remain wary of genetically modified foods. In the end, the full potential of genetically engineered foods will not be realized.

Amarasiri, M., Sano, D., & Suzuki, S. (2020). Understanding human health risks caused by antibiotic resistant bacteria (ARB) and antibiotic resistance genes (ARG) in water environments: Current knowledge and questions to be answered. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 50 (19), 2016-2059.

Anwar, M. P., Islam, A. M., Yeasmin, S., Rashid, M. H., Juraimi, A. S., Ahmed, S., & Shrestha, A. (2021). Weeds and their responses to management efforts in a changing climate. Agronomy, 11 (10), 1921-1940.

Agostini, M. G., Roesler, I., Bonetto, C., Ronco, A. E., & Bilenca, D. (2020). Pesticides in the real world: The consequences of GMO-based intensive agriculture on native amphibians. Biological Conservation, 241 , 108355.

Deocaris, C. C., Rumbaoa, R. G., Gavarra, A. M., & Alinsug, M. V. (2020). A Preliminary analysis of potential allergens in a GMO Rice: A Bioinformatics approach. Open Journal of Bioinformatics and Biostatistics, 4 (1), 12-16.

Fernbach, P. M., Light, N., Scott, S. E., Inbar, Y., & Rozin, P. (2019). Extreme opponents of genetically modified foods know the least but think they know the most. Nature Human Behaviour, 3 (3), 251-256.

Giraldo, P. A., Shinozuka, H., Spangenberg, G. C., Cogan, N. O., & Smith, K. F. (2019). Safety assessment of genetically modified feed: is there any difference from food?. Frontiers in Plant Science, 10 (1592), 1-17.

Hirschi, K. D. (2020). Genetically modified plants: Nutritious, sustainable, yet underrated. The Journal of Nutrition, 150 (10), 2628-2634.

Kumar, K., Gambhir, G., Dass, A., Tripathi, A. K., Singh, A., Jha, A. K., Yadava, P., Choudhary, M., & Rakshit, S. (2020). Genetically modified crops: current status and future prospects. Planta, 251 , 1-27.

Leonelli, G. C. (2020). GMO risks, food security, climate change and the entrenchment of neo-liberal legal narratives. In Transnational food security (pp. 128-141). Routledge.

Liang, J., Liu, X., & Zhang, W. (2019). Scientists vs laypeople: How genetically modified food is discussed on a Chinese Q&A website. Public Understanding of Science, 28 (8), 991-1004.

Rosso, M. L., Shang, C., Song, Q., Escamilla, D., Gillenwater, J., & Zhang, B. (2021). Development of breeder-friendly KASP markers for low concentration of kunitz trypsin inhibitor in soybean seeds. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 22 (5), 2675-2690.

Sani, F., Sani, M., Moayedfard, Z., Darayee, M., Tayebi, L., & Azarpira, N. (2023). Potential advantages of genetically modified mesenchymal stem cells in the treatment of acute and chronic liver diseases. Stem Cell Research & Therapy, 14 (1), 1-11.

Seralini, G. E. (2020). Update on long-term toxicity of agricultural GMOs tolerant to roundup. Environmental Sciences Europe, 32 (1), 1-7.

Turnbull, C., Lillemo, M., & Hvoslef-Eide, T. A. (2021). Global regulation of genetically modified crops amid the gene edited crop boom–a review. Frontiers in Plant Science, 12 , 630396.

Van Esse, H. P., Reuber, T. L., & van der Does, D. (2020). Genetic modification to improve disease resistance in crops. New Phytologist, 225 (1), 70-86.

Xu, Q., Song, Y., Yu, N., & Chen, S. (2021). Are you passing along something true or false? Dissemination of social media messages about genetically modified organisms. Public Understanding of Science, 30 (3), 285-301.

• Genetically Modified Foods Negative Aspects
• Natural Science, Ethics, and Critical Thinking
• Genetically Modified Foods and Environment
• The Effect of Genetically Modified Food on Society and Environment
• Objection to the Production of Genetically Modified Foods
• Analyzing the Prospects of Genetically Modified Foods
• Will Genetically Modified Foods Doom Us All?
• Super Weeds's Advantages and Disadvantages
• Concept of the Gene-Environment Interactions
• Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms Genetic Epidemiology
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2018, December 11). Genetically Modified Food Essay. https://ivypanda.com/essays/genetically-modified-foods-4/

"Genetically Modified Food Essay." IvyPanda , 11 Dec. 2018, ivypanda.com/essays/genetically-modified-foods-4/.

IvyPanda . (2018) 'Genetically Modified Food Essay'. 11 December.

IvyPanda . 2018. "Genetically Modified Food Essay." December 11, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/genetically-modified-foods-4/.

1. IvyPanda . "Genetically Modified Food Essay." December 11, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/genetically-modified-foods-4/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Genetically Modified Food Essay." December 11, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/genetically-modified-foods-4/.

• < Previous

Home > Honors College > Honors Theses > 2127

Honors Theses

On the ethics of human genetic engineering.

John Ryan Speights

Date of Award

Document type.

Undergraduate Thesis

Philosophy and Religion

First Advisor

Robert Westmoreland

Relational Format

Dissertation/Thesis

In this paper I propose a guideline that we may use to determine when it is ethical to take advantage of the technology that we call human genetic engineering. I first clarify the purpose of the paper by explaining the science behind the technology, defining much of the debate in the process. In short, manufactured DNA is introduced into the human genome for the purpose of modifying the expression of the genes and the person that they produce. I indicate that this is a value theory paper rather than a detailed policy paper. This is significant because it merely addresses what is ethical, and not what is easily enforceable through regulation. Given this, I propose that it is ethical to undertake genetic engineering of human embryos in cases of medical disease or defect and unethical to do so for cosmetic purposes. I recite two prominent ethical theories in philosophy, Kantian ethics and utilitarianism, and use these theories to judge my proposed guideline. By showing how my theory is consistent with two radically different views on ethics, I prove the strength of my theory as a good principle on how to ethically use genetic engineering on humans.

Recommended Citation

Speights, John Ryan, "On the Ethics of Human Genetic Engineering" (2010). Honors Theses . 2127. https://egrove.olemiss.edu/hon_thesis/2127

Accessibility Status

Searchable text

Since June 04, 2021

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately, you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.

• Collections
• Disciplines

Advanced Search

• Notify me via email or RSS

Author Corner

• Submit Thesis

Additional Information

• Request an Accessible Copy

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright

GMO - Free Essay Examples And Topic Ideas

The importance of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) concern resides in the fact that it is the best answer to the world’s food dilemma. Population growth is a significant contributor to this problem’s severity. Especially in the United States, advances in DNA engineering technology have made it possible to create new, improved varieties of plants and animals.

This genetic innovation is also commonly employed in agriculture; it enables farmers to raise resilient crops regardless of the weather. In turn, it’s linked to the climate change issues scientists grapple with. This complex issue requires expertise in many fields, including biology, genetic engineering, ecology, etc. This, in turn, can cause significant issues when attempting to compose an argumentative essay on Genetically Modified Foods.

Writing essays on GMOs provides a platform to delve into the multifaceted issue of Genetically Modified Organisms and explore their impact on various aspects of society. Whether crafting a GMO argumentative essay or conducting research on this topic, it is essential to begin with a well-structured GMO essay introduction and outline that provides background information, introduces the problem at hand, and presents a clear thesis statement. The body paragraphs should present arguments supported by evidence and research. Exploring GMO essay topics can shed light on the potential benefits and risks associated with genetic engineering, including its impact on human health, environmental sustainability, and global food security.

Throughout the research paper about GMOs, it is crucial to analyze different viewpoints, consider opposing arguments, and offer potential solutions. Additionally, providing titles and thesis statement examples can guide the reader and set the tone for the essay. Finally, a comprehensive conclusion should summarize the main points discussed, reiterate the thesis statement, and leave the reader with a thought-provoking closing statement. In conclusion, writing essays on GMOs allows for an in-depth exploration of this complex issue, enabling researchers to analyze the problem, present arguments supported by evidence, and propose potential solutions, all while contributing to the broader discourse on genetically modified foods.

GMO Position Paper

Abstract GMO foods are a controversial subject today. In this paper I will discuss some of pros of GMOs, thoughts for the future, personal opinions as well as other subjects concerning genetically modified foods and my research on the subject. GMO Position Paper What is the definition of Genetically Modified Foods? According to the World Health Organization (WHO) Genetically Modified Foods are foods produced from or using GM organisms (WHO, 2017). The issue of GMOs in food has become prevalent […]

GMO Foods are Killing Us

According to the Grocery Manufacturers Association, GMOs are ubiquitous in the food supply--present in about 80 percent of processed foods in the United States of America (Linden 1). People use genetic modification to improve the quality and quantity of foods. In Gandhi’s explanation of The Seven Deadly Social Sins, he explains how Science without humanity is when scientists or people in general, develop new technologies without taking into consideration of what they may do to humans. In this case, they […]

The Genetically Modified Mosquitoes

The demand for cures that are able to fight off diseases are high. Although, acquiring cures is arduous. As the world grows so does the technology. Technology provides gives boundless opportunities but it can also have negative effects. Unfortunately, cases of vector-borne diseases have tripled nationwide from 2004 to 2016, from 27,338 growing over to 96,075 (Howard, n.pag). One of these vector-borne diseases is Chikungunya. Chikungunya is a virus transmitted to people by female mosquitoes. The disease is imported to […]

We will write an essay sample crafted to your needs.

The Positive and Negative Effects of GMO’s

According to Dictionary.com, a genetically modified organism (GMO), is an organism or microorganism whose genetic material has been modified by means of genetic engineering. They take an organism and inject it with genetics it doesn't usually produce to enhance its abilities. Genetically modified organisms are typically used for crop production of maize, canola, and cotton. Like anything else in the world, GMO's have a positive and negative effect our changing society. Positive Impact of GMO Genetically modified organisms may also […]

The Effects of GMO’s Food on the World

INTRODUCTION Attention getter: Have you ever wondered what goes into making most of the food you eat everyday? Relevance: It is important to be aware of what is happening to the food you put in your body everyday, and how it affects you and other things in the world, because if you aren't it might come back to hurt you one day. Thesis: Today you will be learning about the effects of GMOs in food on the world Initial preview: […]

Are G.M.O. Foods Safe?

Following the discovery of the double helix, DNA structure in 1953, genetic engineering became increasingly popular in experimenting with different genetic traits, within different organisms. The science behind Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) is different from selective breeding. It involves the insertion of DNA from one organism into another, or a modification of an organism's DNA in order to achieve a desired trait. Today, scientist and farmers have teamed up in producing GMO's with animals and plants that have affected today's […]

Are GMO Foods Better than Organic Foods

When we talk about GMO a lot of people might think that GMO(genetic modified organism) is used in animal or human, but today I will talk about the use of GMO on the plant. A lot of people think that GMO is not safe for eat because you are changing a DNA/gene of the plant and our body might not recognize the food that we had eaten. Another group of people refuses to buy GMO labeled foods. This cost a […]

GMO’s and World Hunger

As the world begins to feel the constraints of overpopulation and diminishing resources, the rate at which people are affected by chronic world hunger continues to grow exponentially (Geldof). Record climate change brought about by global warming and an increase in greenhouse emissions has increased the longevity of droughts, causing the desert to spread, and what small area of forest we have to left to soon run out (Gerry). According to research conducted at Harvard, the world population is estimated […]

Research Paper: Genetically Modified Organisms

Genetically modified organisms, otherwise referred to as GMOs, is a highly debated and researched topic throughout the world, however, highly prevalent in the United States today. It is plant, animals, or other organism in which their genetic makeup has been altered or modified by either genetic engineering or transgenic technology. GMOs are used either in the medical field or agriculturally, looking to cure diseases and create vaccines or attempt to get the healthiest or highest profit out a product. Prior […]

GMO’s: Safe or Harmful?

Ever since the first signs of agriculture, there have been new developments in every generation. The world's population and demand for food is progressively growing getting larger as every day, as well as the demand for food, and whereas, the land that is used for agricultureal production is diminishing not getting any larger. Crop scientists are working hard every day to find a way to multiply farmers' yields and to do it in a safe and healthy way. Many crop […]

GMO Food Labeling

Genetically modified organisms, also known as GMO, are organisms that have been genetically altered to have a specific characteristic or trait. GMOs were first introduced in 1994 and no one knew about the potential health problems that could come. Nowadays more Americans worry about where their food comes from. Even though GMOs can help starvation and save labor costs, GMOs should be labeled because we don't know the long-term health effects, and GM foods can cause a numerous amount of […]

Genetically Modified Plants

Genetically Modified Organisms, better known as GMO's, are plants or animals whose gene code has been altered using genetic information from other living organisms such as bacteria, other plant species, animals, and even humans. Typically, genetic modification of plants involves the addition of genetic sequences coding for specific proteins that result in a desirable heritable trait. These proteins alter the biology of the plant to enhance characteristics that are beneficial to humans. But along with altered or added genes for […]

Pro GMO: Feeding the World

To fully understand the benefits GMO's we should first be able to define it. According to source, GMO's in reference to agriculture is, a plant and or microorganism whose genetic makeup has been modified in a laboratory using genetic engineering or transgenic technology.  GMO's are not a newly introduced subject, in fact we have been eating GMO's for hundreds of years and we are still perfectly healthy. The public that is opposed to the use and of GMO crops, often […]

Social and Ethical Implications of GMO’s

There are biotechnology debates about genetically modified organisms in society and can be illustrated with the serious conflict between two groups that are voicing possible benefits and possible drawbacks to GMOs. First, are the Agricultural biotech companies that provide tools to farmers to yield bigger better crops but in the most cost-effective way, also known as Agri-biotech. Agri-biotech investors and their affiliated scientists versus the independent scientists, environmentalists, farmers, and consumers (Maghari 1). On one hand, you have the Agri-biotech […]

Dangerous Food GMO

Do you know that you eat often the GMO foods in everyday life. GMO was detected in our favorite Ramen and popular canola oil. What is GMO? It is made 'genetically modified foods' shorter and it is a genetically recombinant creature that manipulates the genes of common life into a new breed. According to this article, there is popular controversy now about the safety of GMO. On the affirmative, GMO foods are safe scientifically and provide food in starving nations. […]

GMO Labeling

GMO's Food is a crucial and fundamental necessity of human life. Because of this, the United States had an average of 2.08 million farms in 2014 (Facts, 2018). Production from these farms not only play a factor within the U.S. but globally as well. Mexico, Canada, and China are just some of the countries that received agricultural products from the United States in 2015 that added up to a total of $133 billion dollars (Facts, 2018). Such success of exports […]

Environmental Science GMFS: our Savior or Destroyer

GMFs are genetically modified foods created by Herbert Boyer and Stanley Cohen back in 1973. This technological advance led to more genetically modified foods and organisms being created and manufactured. GMFs are created either by direct genetic code modification or selective breeding. Direct genetic code modification occurs when a certain part of the genetic code is cut out, copied into bacteria, made into bullets, loaded into a gene gun, and shot into a cell where the genetic information incorporates itself […]

GMO’s Foundation of Life

Imagine eating chemicals instead of food. Not so tasty I would imagine. With GMOs, you may actually be eating chemicals. GMO is an acronym for Genetically Modified Organisms, or organism that have undergone changes in a lab. Some of these changes may include heat resistance, frost resistance, resistance to pesticides, etc¦ Because of GMOs harmful traits and inconclusive research, GMOs should be banned. Surprisingly, we have been genetically modifying organisms for over 30,000 years. Selective breeding, where humans encourage two […]

GMO the Biological Weapon

I really believe that people don't have to eat healthy; they just have to know what they are eating, and then they'll each better. That is really the movement we are behind (Musk)Do we really know what we eat? Does people know what GMO is, and how harmful they are for us? The truth is most of us does not read the tiny shrift on the labels. We buy products based on the marketing. Furthermore, we are constantly being used […]

The GMO Dilemma: Society’s Boon or Bane?

We’ve heard a lot about GMO (Genetically Modified Organism) or genetic manipulation. You can find everywhere in our life in foods, clothes and include medication. As science and technology have developed, humans become able to manipulate genes and there are many voices of interest and concerns.There are positive voices about GMO. They are saying in GMO products, the damage caused by insects, weeds and natural disasters is less than natural agricultural products and the improvement in quality resulted in an […]

GMO’s: Feeding the World or Killing it

Many people today are often amazed by the amount of food and nutrients created a year for human consumption. The constant prominence of genetically modified (GMO) foods is not only intimidating, but confusing. The dictionary definition of GMO is genetically modified organism: an organism or microorganism whose genetic material has been altered by means of genetic engineering. Simply explained, foods are plants and animals that have had their genetic makeup artificially altered by scientists to make them grow faster, taste […]

Climate Change and Genetically Modified Food

Social issues are the factors that affect how human beings live. One of the most prominent social issues in the twenty first century is climate change and genetically modified food. The two issues are somewhat related since climate change has changed weather patterns, forcing human beings to change their farming methods one way to adapt to climate change has been genetically modified food. Both climate change and genetically modified food have subject to rigorous debate and there lacks consensus regarding […]

What are GMOs?

A GMO, a genetically modified organism, is an organism that has had its characteristics changed through the modification of its DNA. By changing an organism's genome, scientists can change its characteristics, appearance, or even capability. Scientists can create GMOs by deleting or altering sections of an organism's DNA through lab techniques of gene splicing or gene insertion. Removal of an existing gene from an organism is known as gene splicing, where adding an artificial gene to an organism is known […]

GMOs: a Solution to Global Hunger and Malnutrition?

It is common knowledge that a nutritious well-balanced diet is important to our health and well-being. Some of the time food biotechnology prompts resistance from buyer gatherings and hostile to biotechnology from lobbyist gatherings. As far as safety for humans, it is commonly recognized that testing of GMO (Genetically Modified Organisms) foods have been deficient in the identification of unpredicted allergens or poisons which can prompt destructive outcomes. However, research has shown that GMOs may be extremely useful in a […]

GMO’s at a Corporate Scale

Genetic modification is the direct alteration of an organism's genetic material using biotechnology. Currently, this form of genetic modification is a rapidly developing field because of the benefits it provides the environment and mankind. However, with GMOs on the rise a great deal of controversy has been sparked. While GMOs prove to be beneficial in some cases, they do have they're drawbacks. All around the world people are beginning to protest against GMOs and the giant corporations which develop them. […]

GMO in Foods

Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is a reasonably well-known concept. This experimental technology modifies DNA from different species, including plants, animals, and bacteria, to create a longer lasting food product. Many people are not aware of the adverse side effects GMOs can cause to the body ("What are GMOs?"). Although it might be a solution to creating an abundance of food production, GMOs are harmful to the environment and increases the risk of health problems on the consumers (Baetens). The purpose […]

GMO’s on Developing Countries

Biotechnology advanced in 1973 when Stanley Cohen and Professor Herbert Boyer originated Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) recombination (Friedberg, 590). Recombinant DNA (rDNA), more commonly known as 'transgenic' or genetically modified organisms, are made by withdrawing genes from one species and forcefully infusing the genes into another species. According to Catherine Feuillet (2015), GMOs were created with objectives to improve crop characteristics and overall help the environment. Not only are seeds being manipulated, but animals are too. Although the animals are mainly […]

Study on Improving the Calculation Accuracy of Sphygmomanometer Based on Bidirectional Filtering

Abstract: Objective: In the current market, there are all kinds of blood pressure monitors that use different filtering algorithms. Therefore, their calculation accuracy varies. Through research, it's determined that the calculation accuracy of a sphygmomanometer's filtering algorithm can be effectively improved. This is proven via experimental data obtained from the processing of various filter algorithms. A comparison of this data with the gains from the bidirectional filter algorithm shows that the bidirectional filter algorithm improves the calculation accuracy of the […]

GMO’s Educating the other Point of View

These risks are associated with a product that has been modified from its original state and is made up of different components that may be harmful to those that are sensitive to those to components. It is important that producers make the new allergy risks and different components from the original state are noticeable whether it is printed on the label, advertised on the tv or radio or if an article is published about it. It needs to be made […]

Should we Grow and Eat GMO’s

In 1986, the first tests for genetically modified tobacco crops were conducted in Belgium (History). Since then, the process has become much more widespread, and today, genetically modified foods are commonplace across the globe. For example, in 2016, Brazil had almost 50 million hectares of genetically modified crops; Argentina had 23 million, and India had 10 million (Acreage). As of 2017, a massive 89% of corn in the United States was grown with genetically modified seeds (Recent Trends). The term, […]

Additional Example Essays

• GMO Disadvantages Essay
• The Extraordinary Science of Addictive Junk Food
• Junk Food Should be Taxed
• Poor Nutrition and Its Effects on Learning
• David Zinczenko: “Don't Blame the Eater”
• Why Parents and Schools Shouldn't Ban Junk Food
• The Mental Health Stigma
• Psychiatric Nurse Practitioner
• Substance Abuse and Mental Illnesses
• A Research Paper on Alzheimer's Disease
• Nursing Shortage: solutions of the problem
• Why Abortion Should be Illegal

How To Write an Essay About GMO

Understanding genetically modified organisms (gmos).

Before writing an essay about Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs), it's essential to understand what they are and their significance. GMOs are organisms whose genetic material has been altered using genetic engineering techniques. These modifications are made for various reasons, such as increasing crop yield, enhancing nutritional content, or making plants resistant to pests and diseases. Start your essay by explaining the science behind genetic modification and the different types of GMOs, including crops, animals, and microorganisms. Discuss the history of GMOs, their development, and how they have become a common part of agriculture and food production globally.

Developing a Thesis Statement

A strong essay on GMOs should be centered around a clear, concise thesis statement. This statement should present a specific viewpoint or argument about GMOs. For instance, you might discuss the potential benefits of GMOs for global food security, analyze the environmental and health concerns associated with GMOs, or explore the ethical and regulatory debates surrounding their use. Your thesis will guide the direction of your essay and ensure a structured and coherent analysis.

Gathering Supporting Evidence

To support your thesis, gather evidence from a range of sources, including scientific studies, agricultural reports, and policy documents. This might include data on GMO crop yields, research on their safety and nutritional value, or examples of regulatory frameworks from different countries. Use this evidence to support your thesis and build a persuasive argument. Remember to consider different perspectives on GMOs, covering both advocates and opponents of their use.

Analyzing the Impact of GMOs

Dedicate a section of your essay to analyzing the impact of GMOs. Discuss the various aspects, such as their role in modern agriculture, their effects on biodiversity and the environment, and their implications for food safety and public health. Explore both the potential positive impacts, such as increased food production and reduced pesticide use, and the concerns raised, including potential health risks and environmental effects.

Concluding the Essay

Conclude your essay by summarizing the main points of your discussion and restating your thesis in light of the evidence provided. Your conclusion should tie together your analysis and emphasize the significance of GMOs in the context of global food systems and sustainability. You might also want to reflect on future prospects of GMOs, considering ongoing scientific advancements and societal debates.

Reviewing and Refining Your Essay

After completing your essay, review and refine it for clarity and coherence. Ensure that your arguments are well-structured and supported by evidence. Check for grammatical accuracy and ensure that your essay flows logically from one point to the next. Consider seeking feedback from peers, educators, or experts in the field to refine your essay further. A well-crafted essay on GMOs will not only demonstrate your understanding of the topic but also your ability to engage with complex scientific and ethical issues.

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

• Essay Database
• world trade center
• Greek Food and Culture
• The Future Portrayed I…
• Intercultural Communications
• In Heart of Darkness, …
• Things Fall Apart by C…
• In J.M. Coetzee's Wait…
• The Criminals Of Profe…
• Socialization of Children
• The Poet of Nature, Wi…
• Leonhard Euler
• Articles of Confederat…
• About all Sharks
• Vietnam Poetry

Genetic Engineering

What is paper-research.

• Custom Writing Service
• Terms of Service
• Privacy Policy
• Biographies

share this!

August 16, 2024

This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:

fact-checked

peer-reviewed publication

trusted source

Key biofuel-producing microalga believed to be a single species is actually three

by Ashley Vargo, Texas A&M University

When a global pandemic forced previous graduate student Devon Boland, Ph.D., out of the lab and onto the computer, he found a world of difference hidden in the long-studied species of Botryoccocus braunii—and discovered that it isn't one species at all, but three.

Botryococcus braunii was first discovered in the mid-1800s. Technically a plant, it undergoes photosynthesis and, most interestingly to researchers, produces high amounts of hydrocarbons that can be used as a renewable source of fuel.

It was previously believed to be a single species with three races: A, B and L, which each produce slightly different types of oils. But after uncovering a dramatic 20%–30% genetic difference between each race , a team of Texas A&M AgriLife researchers proposed a new classification—and completed any biologist's dream of naming species.

"As a graduate student, you read papers that all say the same thing, that this is a single species with three chemical races, and you internalize it," said Boland, first author of the study showing the genomic comparisons. "You start to think that must be right. No one has found otherwise, and all those scientists have had much longer careers than me—I'm just a kid.

"But I ended up getting to propose names for a species that were accepted for publication, which is something I never thought would happen."

Half necessity, half circumstance

Before coming to Texas A&M, Boland spent his undergraduate research working on "bread and butter" biochemistry research in areas like protein engineering. His graduate thesis was meant to center around the production process Botryococcus braunii uses to synthesize its unique hydrocarbons.

But when the COVID-19 pandemic hit, Boland was worried about losing time on his thesis and the possibility of it delaying his graduation.

In response, Tim Devarenne, Ph.D., associate head of undergraduate programs and associate professor in the Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics at the Texas A&M College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, suggested that Boland take the opportunity to dive into genetic data and bioinformatics.

"Having the genome of your organism of interest mapped out is always ideal in research because it allows you to more easily find genes and work to determine their functions," Devarenne said.

Another previous graduate student in the lab, Daniel Browne, had performed some sequencing and assembled the B race's genome. During one of Devarenne and Boland's weekly meetings, Devarenne proposed they try to do the same thing with the A and L race.

"It had a double benefit," Boland said. "We were able to do something that hadn't been done before, plus it could help us to better understand the hydrocarbon biosynthesis."

Though the races are practically indistinguishable under the microscope, Boland said there had been some debate on whether these were different species. They were interested to know whether a genomic study could shine light on the question.

Along with Devarenne, Boland and Browne, the research team included Ivette Cornejo Corona, Ph.D., postdoctoral researcher in Devarenne's lab; John Mullet, Ph.D., another researcher and professor in the Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics; Rebecca Murphy, Ph.D., a former graduate student in Mullet's lab; and a longtime collaborator on Botryococcus studies, Shigeru Okada, Ph.D., a professor at the University of Tokyo in Japan.

Genetic analysis

Even though Botryococcus is commonly studied for its hydrocarbon production, sequencing its genome has proven difficult.

Boland, now an assistant research scientist at the Texas A&M Institute for Genome Sciences and Society, said the thick, oily medium the cells live in makes extracting and isolating the DNA a challenge.

Nonetheless, the team was determined to analyze the genomes to see the similarity between the genes and proteins involved in each race's biofuel production processes.

But after piecing together the genomes and using the supercomputers at the Texas A&M High Performance Research Computing Center to run genomic comparisons, Boland said it became clear these organisms were not the same species.

"It was like everywhere we looked, things were different," he said.

In the end, the researchers said around 1 in every 5 genes were unique to each of the Botryococcus races. To put that 20% difference in perspective, the genetic difference between humans and chimpanzees, our closest evolutionary relative, is less than 2%.

After some further validations, Boland and Devarenne set out to reclassify the Botryococcus races. Boland said the team spent months workshopping different names.

They kept race B with its original name of Botryococcus braunii to preserve its history and renamed race A to Botryococcus alkenealis and race L to Botryococcus lycopadienor, which signify the type of hydrocarbons each produces.

What makes a species

In the recent past, biologists have given more weight to genes and genomes when it comes to classifying organisms.

But even with all the evidence for these Botryococcus algae to be considered separate species, Devarenne said what really makes a species is the general acceptance by the scientific community.

After publishing their study in PLOS ONE , Devarenne shared the team's findings with more than 100 other researchers who study the organisms in their own labs.

"How we define separate species might not change much with how these organisms are used in research," he said. "But it's important for the scientific understanding, how we think about the ways these organisms are related to each other and to all other species."

Boland said he and Devarenne published in an open-access journal so that other scientists could build off their work. The complete genomes of the species are also available on the National Center for Biotechnology Information website .

"It was important to us that the information was publicly available when it was ready to publish," he said. "Science is community driven. The ultimate goal is always to further our collective knowledge, and I think that's what we accomplished here."

Journal information: PLoS ONE

Provided by Texas A&M University

Explore further

Feedback to editors

Researchers discover smarter way to recycle polyurethane

8 hours ago

DNA study challenges thinking on ancestry of people in Japan

9 hours ago

A visionary approach: How a team developed accessible maps for colorblind scientists

New tool simplifies cell tracking data analysis

How some states help residents avoid costly debt during hard times

Review of 400 years of scientific literature corrects the Dodo extinction record

Study confirms likely identity of the remains of Bishop Teodomiro

Computer simulations suggest more than half of people on Earth have limited access to safe drinking water

Hailstone library to improve extreme weather forecasting

Exploring Huntington's disease: Researchers discover that protein aggregates poke holes in the nuclear membrane

10 hours ago

Relevant PhysicsForums posts

Hiking illness danger -- rhabdomyolysis.

6 hours ago

Strategies and Tips for First Responders Interacting with Autism Spectrum Disorder Patients

Cannot find a comfortable side-sleeping position, using capsaicin to get really high, therapeutic interfering particle.

Aug 14, 2024

Neutron contamination threshold in tissue using LINAC

Aug 8, 2024

More from Biology and Medical

Related Stories

Hundreds of new genome sequences fill gaps in the fruit fly tree of life

Jul 18, 2024

Using reference genome of the species itself is optimal for SNP calling, finds study

May 15, 2024

Zoom disrupts the rhythm of conversation

Nov 22, 2021

How (apparently) identical animals can be completely different species

Jul 3, 2024

Exploring acoustic design for better, quieter prisons

Dec 5, 2023

Decoding the Easter Bunny: Eastern Finnish brown hare represents standard for species' genome

Mar 20, 2024

Recommended for you

Newly discovered mechanism for propagation of flaviviruses reveals potential therapeutic target

Combining genetic diversity data with demographic information reveals extinction risks of natural populations

Let us know if there is a problem with our content.

Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form . For general feedback, use the public comments section below (please adhere to guidelines ).

Please select the most appropriate category to facilitate processing of your request

Thank you for taking time to provide your feedback to the editors.

Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages.

E-mail the story

Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Phys.org in any form.

Newsletter sign up

Get weekly and/or daily updates delivered to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties.

More information Privacy policy

Donate and enjoy an ad-free experience

We keep our content available to everyone. Consider supporting Science X's mission by getting a premium account.

E-mail newsletter