My March article, written by Ian Sample, a science correspondent to The Guardian newspaper
is titled "Gene therapy cures life-threatening lung infection in teenage boy".
Link
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/feb/29/gene-therapy-cures-lung-infection
Summary
The article is a report on Remy Halbawi, a sixteen year old boy who has become the "first patient to benefit from a new form of gene therapy". Halbawi has a genetic condition, x-CGD (Chronic Granulomatous Disorder); he has a faulty gene that disrupt his immune cells, weakening the body's immune system making him prone to infections. The condition can be cured through a bone marrow transplant (which cured Remy's brother who also inherited the condition), however doctors haven't found a good donor for Remy and decided to begin an "experimental gene therapy technique to replace the faulty gene with a working copy". In doing this, doctors had to make his bone marrow release stem cells through the administering of a drug; the doctors then collected the stem cells from his blood stream to transform/infect them with "a newly developed, genetically modified virus that carries a correct copy of the gene that is faulty in x-CGD". This procedure helped to boost his immune system...only temporarily, but it helped to tackle his lung infection.
One (well two) question I have
How do you feel about altering genes and using DNA as a way to treat disease? Mutations can be terrible, like the one that caused this genetic condition, however they are vital for genetic variation and the process of evolution. (Thanks AP Bio!) So, do you think it would be good or bad thing if we ended up discovering a way to cure and fix all of these conditions that arise from mutations through gene therapy and stem cells...what do you think would happen to us?
I believe that altering genes and using DNA as a way to treat diseases is wrong in a way. This is because if God wanted a cure for a disease, then He would have created one. However, with science always providing new and alternative ways for curing and defining a health problem, then by all means allow it! I rather have alternation in genes and DNA to help find a cure and safe one's life, than die and suffer. If we find our findings from mutations, then everyone will have a missing limb. Society will change physically because then the definition of what is healthy may be missing a limb, instead of having all your limbs attached to your body.
ReplyDeleteno one should mutate someone or our genes, even if it could somehow help us. it is not natural and if people do that, how would we know if the side affects from it is actually worth the risk to do it. the dna from a different source could somehow be contaminated and then it would contaminate the dna that it mixed with. people should find a different way in helping and solving cures and not something unnatural like mixing two different dnas together like an animal and a human one. it could only end badly for all of us
ReplyDeleteI think it is great for altering DNA and discovering cures and solution but at the same time it is a risk, meaning is it even worth the risk if you don't know the long prolonged outcome of the gene altering maybe it is just temporarily but in my opinion it doesn't seem right to me with all these test unless you are absolutely sure it will work.
ReplyDelete