How much progress?

All this talk of human-animal embryo “chimeras” has reopened the bioethics debate, and unlike a lot of stuff, this makes even me a little uncomfortable.

Of course your opinion of what is “too far” is heavily influenced by what you have to gain from it, so there will inevitably be those who claim that it’s our best bet to treat things like Alzheimer’s disease, and that is likely correct. Since I’m not in that position presently, I can stand back a bit and think about how far we want to go with all of this.

As usual, the headlines are somewhat misleading and sensationalistic. This is what sells papers (or whatever these days) and will certainly grab your attention. The actual procedures are pretty benign, as there is no human reproductive material used in it. Add to this the fact that the embryos will never be allowed to mature, and I don’t have a strong logical problem with the idea.

In fact the whole trend of biotechnology keeps pushing things farther out. I’ve read a lot of Sci-Fi, and more than a few books have dealt with the idea of genetic warfare and its’ aftermath. Most of this I think is way out there (but interesting to read if well done), but there is the whole slippery slope to consider.

I’ll happily eat genetically modified wheat or cloned beef, since I understand the processes well enough to realize that it won’t hurt me. Smarter people than me are working on a lot of stuff I don’t really understand, but most of it is of obvious (to me) benefit to us. What I’m hoping is that these same clever types are aware of the potential downside of transgenic experiments, especially those involving human genetic material.

So no, don’t go out and blow-up a biotech company, but if something sounds weird to you, check it out so as to understand it better, don’t rely on the media to tell you what’s good and what’s not. But then, that advice applies to pretty much everything…

Oh, by the way, Happy New Year, since this is the first thing that’s shifted me to post here in 2007.