The pre-implantation genetic diagnosis is a new technology green discusses in his article in which he claims it has helped many couples have healthy and normal babies. Green says that PGD can screen growing cells for genetic defects very early in embryonic life. It encompasses taking a solitary cell from a fertilized embryo and peering inside it at its chromosomes. Green argues that its advantage is that, one does not have to wait until they are nearly halfway through a pregnancy to learn that the baby may have a devastating genetic disease.
This is a good opportunity to people who are at risk of passing along an inherited disease and elderly women who might want to know their embryos are healthy before they get transferred to their wombs. Green discards critics of PDG by arguing that many do not understand it. He argues that knowing more about our genes will increase our freedom in understanding the biological obstacles together with opportunities we have to work with. Green refers to Catholics as hypocrites since they apply double standards on science. The catholic teaching based on scientific evidence and reasoning believes that the zygote and embryo is a human being who ought to be respected so by PDG one is intruding God’s domain.
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"Genetic Engineering Research".
In response to the article by Hayes, he criticizes green on various issues concerning his article. In his article professor green has alluded to the HFEA’s decision in which he says the decision is a sign of good things to come. Hayes differs with Green on how the new human genetics technologies prevent terrible diseases. He supports the technology and at the same time criticizes it saying technology may have real harm. Hayes argues that the future will be dark if we start modifying children and children will become artifacts instead of members of a family. Where Professor Green has proposed that eugenic technologies be used to reduce class divide, Hayes argues that Green should have explained how this will be made practical in the real world. This means he has analyzed Green’s article thoroughly to understand before criticizing it.
From Hayes’ article it can be seen that Green does not understand and differentiate the uses of genetic technology and critical distinctions. This is because he has used one case of Tay-Sachs to argue his opinion. He tries to assume that tiger woods might have had a gene modified to him by his father to become great. This means he has no facts but assumptions. Green wants people to embrace this gene technology which might lead people to become genetically modified persons. Hayes’ goes on to discredit Green saying that he does not understand proper use of genetic science and technology and thus is show by his surveys in which 80% of students Green surveyed were against the human genetic engineering.
Hayes has tackled nearly everything in Green’s article and analyzed it before responding. In his article he uses Green’s word in his article to discredit his argument and credit where it matters. He tries to correct Green to understand that it is good to have those kind of technologies but they should not be used to change the human nature.
Pray in his article in which he compares the two gentlemen Green and Hayes, he analyses their arguments in a good way to be seen neutral. In his article there are no much differences apart from trying to explain to us more about PDG. He uses arguments in the Green’s article and Hayes’ article trying to show how the articles have led to debates the world over with medical experts taking different stance based on their facts and evidence.
