ETHICAL ISSUES
There is one major ethical concern associated with Tommy John surgery. First let me say that I believe that the surgery is totally ethical in the sense that someone is simply repairing their damaged arm. What we have to ask ourselves, however, is how far can we go with tendon transplants. The issue has been raised as to weather or not excess tendons can be transplanted into the arm to add to strength of the current tendon. Imagine a major league baseball pitcher who can throw a 130mph fastball because he now has two tendons where he should only have one. Along the same line, could an even tighter tendon replace the normal tendon in order to increase the velocity of a pitch or improve ones athletic ability. If these operation could be perform, should they be performed? In my opinion they should not. Athletes get to where they are through hard work and determination, not because they went to the doctor, handed them a check, and walked out with a cannon for an arm. The argument for this, however, would be if you were to deny this operation, why are supplements still allowed to be used? Technically someone is going out and paying money to get an edge over their competition so it is pretty much the same concept. My response to this is that even through the use of supplements, the athlete still has to work incredibly hard to get to the point where he or she wants to be. Whereas with the insertion of a tendon, the athlete in question is essentially doing no work whatsoever. Since the insertion of a tighter or extra tendon has never been attempted there are no specific groups that are for or against the surgery, but I would like to ask the opinion of a major league baseball player and find out his thoughts on facing a 130mph fastball.
While everyone in the world may have the opportunity to benefit from genovations, there is still one ethical issue surrounding weather or not we should go forward and take the next step. In order to find out what types f diseases or deficiencies we are individually susceptible to, a map of our genetic makeup must be produced. The issue is who will have control over our genetic information and will this information be available to the public. Essentially, it is an issue of privacy. Along with this issue is the idea that insurance companies in the future would be able to charge outlandish rates to people who are at high risk for heart attack because they know that they have a better chance of dying at a young age. Or possibly an employer denying a job or heath benefits to a person because of a genetic disposition associated with their genes. If we are going to take the next step and begin to map individual DNA and gene sequences, the information must be private and withheld from everyone except the individual in question. To make it public would be an infringement upon our constitutional 5th amendment which states that we have the right not to incriminate ourselves. Again, there are no groups that are for or against the idea of making food healthier but the idea that we can map each individual set of genes is such a new concept that we would have to bring out the crystal ball to see exactly where these technologies are going to lead. I would imagine that if DNA mapping does become popular that there will be groups against it, but until that day comes this technology is difficult to predict.
The doctors who deal with Tommy John surgery do not have legal restrictions holding them back from inserting extra tendons into someone's arm but they do face a moral dilemma of sorts. Should that person be allowed such a huge advantage over the competition? If so then what is to stop track runners from tightening the tendons in their legs in order to run faster, jump higher, or throw further? As with most moral issues, a line must be drawn representing an ethical boundary which should, under no circumstances, be crossed. To do so would create a world where people would not have to do, strive for, or work hard for anything.
The doctors dealing with genometrics also face a moral dilemma as to the release of the genetic information. It is understood that in developing and implementing these technologies, we are striving to improve the human condition. The benefits of such advances could be astronomical. But we cannot allow ourselves access to others genetic information. Measures must be implemented (and I believe that they will be soon) to protect this information and keep it private. We must also put in place punishments for those who distribute the genetic information of others without permission. In the technology age and the development of the internet and it's capabilities, an informational leak (via hackers or corrupt corporations) is very possible and would have to be prevented in order for these biotechnological industries to thrive.
This site was created for Biotechnology ISSI470 @ Monmouth College