Limits On Scientific Research

Table of Contents

Rifkin acknowledges that engaging in scientific research is like playing ecological roulette with mother nature’s design. Scientific research allows man to manipulate organisms in their natural status and create novel organisms. This can be beneficial and can also be disastrous hence the need for restrictions. Author Shelley brings to light her experience with an experimentation of creating life. Stringent laws must be prepared to monitor and regulate all scientific research. Scientific regulations not only refer to genetic manipulation of human beings, but also involve manipulation of crops in a process known as crop engineering. Such levels of genetic manipulation should be restricted and controlled. This ensures that man does not end up causing more harm than good to the ecosystem. Controlled restrictions ensure that scientific research involving manipulation of genes in plants and animals occurs where unavoidable. Otherwise, man should let nature prevail as nature is predictable compared to genetically manipulated organisms.

Biotech Manipulation And The Second Genesis

Man is in the biotech age, where he can manipulate human genes for economic purposes. Man has evolved form the industrial age, where emphasis was on manipulation of plastics and metals, to the biology age where he can manipulate and manufacture living material. Critics argue that biotech manipulation in this biotech century is similar to an attempt at the second genesis. According to Rifkin, “attempts of biotech technology involving genetic manipulation may create a tower of Babel situation in the world” (Rifkin, 1999, p 72). This refers to a situation of increased chaos in the biological world. Rifkin, by using this quite gives the biblical perception of the attempts that man is making to play God.

He compares the situation of scientific research to the people of Babel who tried to construct a tower so as to reach God. In the same manner, Rifkin indicates that scientific research is an attempt to play God, and it may end up disastrous. Shelley indicates that he has spent many hours and days on trying to bring his creation to life. However, his creation was not up to his expectation. Shelley states “his yellow skin scarcely covered the work of muscles and arteries…” (Shelley, 2000, p288). Shelly points out that though the experiment of bringing a form to life was partly successful; it had several horrid contrasts. His creation has lustrous black hair and a set of white teeth. However, the eyes of his creation were watery, had a shriveled complexion and had straight black lips.

The many hours, days and time that Shelley spent trying to create life were futile as he created a horrid life form. Shelley acknowledges that he has deprived himself sleep and rest for two years. He also acknowledges that his anxiety, and anticipation for the outcome of his experiment left him on the edge. Shelley states “…but my enthusiasm was checked by anxiety, and I appeared doomed by slavery to toil in the mines… every night I was oppressed by slow fever…” (Shelley, 2000, p287). The author shows the danger of trying to play God. The determination of Shelley to be a creator responsible for creating a life form saw her embark on a life changing experiment. This gave her sleepless nights as she anxiously worked day and night. The author also acknowledges how her health deteriorated due to continuous work. The confusion and anxiety that the author felt is similar to the confusion of the people of Babel in an effort to reach God.This is an indicator that some aspects of life should be left to occur.

The creation and coming to life of man is strictly biological, and efforts of man to create life through laboratory experiments will be futile. Unrestricted genetic manipulation allows interested parties to manipulate the natural world. With genetic manipulation scientists would even attempt genetic manipulation involving unrelated species. Genetic manipulation will also encourage cloning where scientist would make replicas of original living things. Restrictions to limit scientific research should emphasize so as to overcome unforeseen threats. The science of genetic engineering is quite attractive and has numerous positive effects. However, just like any other technology, the long term consequence of genetic engineering is unknown.According to Rifkin “genetically engineered organisms released into the environment poses a potential threat to the ecosystem” (Rifkin, 1999, p72). Genetically manipulated organisms are unpredictable compared to naturally occurring organisms. It is, therefore, difficult to determine their future impact to the ecosystems.

Rifkin’s points out that ecologists involved in genetic engineering of crops remain unsure of the overall impact of crop engineering. The science of introducing genes to crops is novel; hence the overall impact is unknown. With the risk of uncertainty, emphasizing restrictions is best alternative. Shelley’s experience shows the extent of manipulation of the natural world. She states “I beheld the wretch-the miserable monster I had created… if eyes were called were fixed on me” (Shelley, 2000, p288).It is evident that Shelley regrets the creation she made. He is uncertain whether it is human or not. The experiment had been disastrous, and Shelley was confused on what action to take with his creation. This is proof that scientific research should be restricted. Man should not be granted the authority to manipulate life forms, and attempt to change the natural occurrence of the worldThe fact that genetically engineered product reproduce is another reason why scientific research must be restricted.

Genetically modified organisms grow and migrate, like any other organisms. This makes it difficult to keep track of any underlying effects. It also makes it difficult to recall all dangerous genetically manipulated organisms. Restriction is thus mandatory to regulate and monitor the organism released in the ecosystem. With regulation, it will be easy for scientists to follow and regulate the genetically manipulated organisms. As Rifkin states “the risk of releasing novel genetically engineered organisms into the biosphere is similar to… introducing exotics organism in North America” (Rifkin, 1999, p 73). Like many exotic organism introduced in the biosphere, some have been successful and flourished while others have turned out disastrous to the biosphere. Restrictions will guarantee monitoring and regulation hence management of the genetically manipulated organisms.

Restriction in research will also ascertain that scientists conduct their experiments in moderation. Extremities such as manufacture of a new herbicide tolerant crop mean that farmers will no longer suffer from weed infestation that hampers crop yield. However, such a move will see farmers increase the use of herbicides on their farms. This will not only lead to increased pollution, but will also result to the creation of breeds of weeds that are resistant to existing herbicides. This will in turn interfere with the fertility of the land and destruction of other insects and animals needed for soil restoration. Rifkin’s also argues “the introduction of new genetically engineered life forms also raises a various serious human health issues…” (Rifkin, 1999, p98). The author reviews the aspect of health by looking at genetically modified foods, in relations to increased allergic reactions to consumers. Restrictions will guarantee that manufacturers of genetically modified food stuff label their products.

This gives the consumer the liberty of choice of whether to eat natural or genetically modified foods. Scientific research and specifically biotechnology practices such as cloning and tissue culturing encourage uniformity of genes. Rifkin states “genetic diversity that is so vital to guaranteeing the triumph of the biotech industry” (Rifkin, 1999, p108). Rifkin emphasizes on the need to restrict such scientific research so as to uphold diversification. It is the diversity of the genetic pool that is relevant to the success of scientific research. Restriction is thus advisable to ensure that scientist only adopt those procedures that are of importance and relevance.

Conclusion

Scientific research has evolved from the basic smelting of iron, manufacture of automobiles to include genetic manipulations. Unfortunately, unlike other fields of scientific research genetic manipulation cannot go unrestricted. Unrestricted genetic manipulation will result to change in the natural world as man knows it. It will increase the risk of danger and uncertainty. This is because the field of genetic manipulation if fairly new hence long term risk are unknown. Restriction is hence paramount to ensure that animals or crops that are genetically manipulated are controlled. Controlling ensures that scientists keep tabs of the progress, risk and dangers that may arise. Restrictions also guarantees that limits are set on what scientists can manipulate and what they cannot manipulate. Scientific research on cloning, and creation of human-like forms should be strictly regulated as they interfere with the natural order ion the bio-system.

Work Cited

Rifkin, J. (1999). The biotech century: playing ecological roulette with mother nature’s designs. Jeremy P Tarcher/Putman

Shelley, M. (2000). Frankenstein. Palgrave Macmillan

Is this your assignment or some part of it?

We can do it for you! Click to Order!