Gene Doping In Spiderman

Superior Essays
In the movie Spiderman, the protagonist Peter Parker is a geeky, introverted, intelligent high school boy who gets bit by an engineered spider during a field trip to a lab. After the biting of the spider, Parker turns into a stronger and confident person who possesses spider-like qualities. Throughout the movie it is clear Spiderman’s legacy is that he wishes to protect civilians, he can be considered as a superhero vigilante or be considered as a criminal. Parker develops super speed, strength, mental acumen, agility, increased control over the five senses after being bit by the spider. The rationale that is being investigated is whether bioengineering humans can produce a new stronger, faster, intelligent, human race and what methods can …show more content…
Athletes for example can change their physique by gene doping, some athletes use this method to get stronger quicker. Gene doping is the younger sibling of gene editing, it does not focus on the removal and prevention of the disease, it focuses on furthering the athlete to repair the muscles quickly. The method of gene doping is that scientists inject the athletes with the modified genes, this can temporarily better them but the risks of this are massive, it can trigger an immune reaction or even jump start cancer. The risks with gene doping are equally bad as gene editing, overall this method is slightly less risky than gene editing as the effects are temporary, but the long term risks are equally harming. Thus, gene editing and gene doping cannot create a super human like …show more content…
But to create a super human and using science technology to manipulate a human’s natural qualities has many negative aspects. The first disadvantage is that humans will lose their individuality when creating a super human, everyone will be exactly the same. Next, it is unethical to subject animals and embryos to undergo testing when no one can tell whether they are suffering or not. There are moral aspects that need to be addressed, if this research were to be continued there must be a board regulating every step. The society will benefit from preventing harmful diseases but the health risks the research poses is huge. There has to be more research done by bioethicists and geneticists to determine if this is possible in the near future. CRISPR-Cas9 promises to remove the genes for obesity, Alzheimer’s but what is being neglected to mention is the process of how this research is obtained and the societal impacts. Creating super humans will lead to uniformity and lack of individuality within the society, everyone would aim to look a certain way, physically be a certain standard, have the same intelligence as others. It would be a tamer version of Brave New World, the people that cannot afford to have their genes edited would be treated as scum. The endless possibilities of scientific research invoke curiosity but it fails to project

Related Documents

  • Superior Essays

    Gene Therapy Cons

    • 2176 Words
    • 9 Pages

    The downside is that germ-line therapy could have overwhelming and unintended effects on not only the embryo but future generations. Once a mistake is made in germ-line therapy, it is permanent and has the potential to be passed on to future offspring. It is also an expensive treatment which will not be available to most couples. Much like Glannon, Walters and Palmer argue that germ-line therapy has the potential to lead to genetic enhancement which would not be beneficial for society as a whole. It could also then allow few individuals, such as scientists and doctors, power and control over future generations and the evolving human race.…

    • 2176 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Is Human Cloning Possible

    • 1372 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Instead of creating clones that have to experience the effects of the imperfections, scientists should focus more on improving the lives of people by using other ways that does not include ethics or does not cause harm to others. These scientists are making the clones suffer through unneeded complications. Head states in the article, “Should human cloning be banned?”, “Scientists generally agree that it would be irresponsible to clone a human being until cloning has been perfected, given that the cloned human would probably face serious, and ultimately terminal, health issues.” It is impetuous for scientists to continue cloning because the babies that were made are alive and have their own feelings. They should not be forced to live with health issues their entire life because of our imperfect experiments. Scientists only want to create clones in order to have better organ donors.…

    • 1372 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Designing the genes of humans to fix the birth defects and many detrimental diseases babies are born with would create a more stable and healthy society. This opportunity could be a huge and necessary technological breakthrough; however, the majority of people are misusing it in a harmful way. If there was a possibility of using genetic engineering for fixing health issues then that would be excellent, but most good things we suggest in society have their own downsides. Changing a child physically and mentally will diminish the value of talent and natural-born abilities. Genetic engineering would help to only a certain…

    • 1252 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Some feel that the cloning of embryos, is morally repugnant and may feel that the idea of cloning humans is “playing God” according to “What are the Pros and Cons of Cloning?” So, if too many people are conflicted based on a moral stance, it will create too much turmoil in the science community. Considering how difficult it is to create clones, scientist cannot afford to get their clones rejected solely based on morale. Others also fear that people could decide to genetically engineer super kids, according to “What are the Pros and…

    • 486 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Michael Sandel in “The case Against Perfection” talks about benefits and drawbacks in genetic engineering, designer children, and bionic athletes. The benefit is that improving technological advancement, we will be able to treat and prevent many diseases that are prevalent today. The downside is that exponential growth of technologies will allow us to manipulate our own nature, to enhance our cognitive abilities, physical strength, and choose genetic traits of our children to make ourselves “better than well” (Sandel, 2004). Sandel argues that Genetic engineering offers us the power to master our nature, but that kind of power & choice threatens our ability to appreciate life as a gift, and erode human agency by allowing us to serve our purposes…

    • 1017 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    One of the good purposes could be that scientists could use GMOs to find cures for diseases in the world and r to get rid of them. Besides this I personally cannot think of another reason why GMOs should be even talked about in society. they are not doing what they are “labeled” to do, causing even more deaths, are leading to more diseases, and are the people behind it are wasting a lot of money that could be used to or other good…

    • 1740 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The main problem and issue with embryos is that when scientist work on, and in the process of modifying the embryo is exposed. With them being exposed that is when the diseases fall in place and start to attack the embryo. But on the other hand editing sperm, eggs, and embryos can cause inheritable diseases. It’s one thing to edit an adult’s immune cells. If anything goes, the effects won’t be passed on.…

    • 1196 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Essay On Gene Editing

    • 771 Words
    • 4 Pages

    It is wrong for parents and scientists to play God, except in the instance it could save the child from suffering. Now that scientists have successfully modified human embryos, the debates is on if human germline editing, changing the genetic code of future descendants, is an ethical thing to do. People say it is unnatural, but so are antibiotics and modern medicine. Another argument against gene editing is that it is changing the next generation without their consent, which is an awful argument because they cannot consent if they do not exist. The more time…

    • 771 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Despite being a topic that will never universally agreed upon, it is very likely that most of the population's initial response was of a negative context. Human cloning makes us face the necessity to make moral decisions without having experienced any of the technology whilst in the possession of little information about the risks. However, as our familiarity with the issue increases so does our acceptance. Nonetheless, we should never suppress these initial ethical intuitions about new discoveries since they could very well be true. Human cloning could be jeopardizing to our self-worth, and the value of life we hold considering it essentially creates life out thin air.…

    • 986 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Who are we to take away that right to our uniqueness? We are also taking away our own natural ability to provide a better chance of survival by the genetic differences provided by sexual reproduction. Many arguments have been made in the past on why cloning is ethical, but in retrospect they are wrong. In this case the pro’s do not outweigh the con’s. Arguments have been made stating that cloning could save lives, but it would jeopardize many more than it would save the scientists from the article “The Cloning Debate.…

    • 1745 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays