Ready for the BIO-age??

As the question mark in the title suggests, it serves as a challenge to the lawmakers and the judiciary department.At the turn of the century, science has fast-tracked to unimaginable proportions that it brought about not only the advance of the internet technology and electronics but also bio-research. Definitely the advance in one branch of science carries everything in its path forward. The article talks about certain issues that have just started appear and in just less than a decade, but recently, there have been numerous discoveries and advances in bio technology that it even crosses the boundaries of the old definition of bio-science itself, I reckon that this article has as much significance as the author may have perceived at the time he wrote it. Internet and electronics has increased the speed of research that it even minimizes the need to use the indispensable help of lab rats in the process.

There are a few things that came into my mind when I read this article. Please feel free to add:

1. Green Peace against Genetically Modified Organisms. This case involves questions regarding Intellectual Property and Environmental ethics:

a. Since when did a product of nature become an intellectual property of another person? Scientists can name dinosaurs, newly discovered species and other previously unknown phenomenon to their liking but they cannot claim it as their own. This scientific advance introduced new questions on ethics and morality that may have not been thought of before. Science has advance so quickly that the legal department should better think fast. Such legal issue I think will become a challenge to the legislation as well as to the Supreme Court.

b. Is it ethical to introduce these organisms to the environment? Following Darwin’s theory of evolution, it took nature billions of years for the organisms that we see today to evolve in order to adapt to the environment and coexist with others and it will only take years or even a baffling number of days to change the face of nature. One classic example of this event would be the accidental introduction of a hybrid the so-called killer bees (hybrid south-African bees) that overtook the more friendly farm bees in North America. Although exaggerated by the media, this phenomenon should serve as a stern warning to scientists that genetic engineering is still a young science and that it demands a more cautious and responsible procedure to deal with it.

Science has always been a double edged-sword; it either preserves and maintains life like the invention of vaccines by Edward Jenner in 1796 and Penicillin by Sir Alexander Fleming in 1928; bring utter destruction to mankind in Alfred Nobel’s invention of the dynamite and Einstein’s research on atoms which opened the door to nuclear fission research that later developed the nuclear bomb.

The precautionary principle then needs to be redefined to give it more teeth to address this new issue. Section 5, article II of the Philippine constitution speaks of the protection of the life, liberty, and property, and promotion of the general welfare. I think the constitution are already set to deal with these kinds of issues but the government with all its legislative, executive and judicial powers should act in order to uphold the constitution by enacting more laws to protect the environment and mankind.

2. The passage of the U.S. Congress of the Law in stem-cell research. Another sensitive issue not only concerning science but also posed some ethical questions. In wikipedia, it stated the reason as to why this is a controversial issue that involves international concern. There exists a widespread controversy over stem cell research that emanates from the techniques used in the creation and usage of stem cells. Human embryonic stem cell research is particularly controversial because, with the present state of technology, starting a stem cell line requires the destruction of a human embryo and/or therapeutic cloning.

In the most recent news, the North Carolina Legislative Panel already passed the stem cell research guidelines. Online news reported: Under the bill, the state will officially allow research using so-called leftover human embryos from fertility clinics. Scientists will be allowed to destroy the days-old unborn children for research.

3. DNA fingerprinting. The main focus of the article, as it changed the way decisions (not only judicial) are made in the other countries it would not be too long when this method will be used to resolve cases in the Philippines as well.

4. Recent development of sciences that were involved in crime-research like the use of Zoology with its study on the behavioral patterns of the animals to aid in criminal profiling. A perfect example of this is an episode in National Geographic about the capture a criminal of murder wherein the case remained unsolved for decades until they hired a zoologist to identify the criminal.

5. Use of biological agents to reduce greenhouse gases. This solution was not perceived before, but the problem in the environment is really that bad (understatement?) that it would need help that it could get even from microorganisms and their ability to break down compounds into simple elements or their ability to make new substances out of certain compounds.

The technology in the west is so advanced that it might take time before it even comes to the Philippines. This however does not exclude us from contemplating on the issues. The boundaries between states are fading as the century moves forward that we must be prepared before one of these issues hit us.