DNA holds the secrets to our genetic make-up |
My main topic is on the current government
policies and regulations surrounding gene-based medical treatments and their
societal implications. The main relevance of this topic is how it will affect
patient treatment options in the future. This is particularly important for
parents when deciding children’s treatments or executors of estates when
determining treatments for the elderly or those who are incapable of deciding
for themselves. This is a complex multi-faceted issue that is affected by government
regulation, research ethics, pharmaceutical markets, and many other things, so
I’m trying to focus on the policy and research aspects of the gene therapy and
specifically what thing should be considered when moving forward in this field.
The current working thesis I have is
“even though uninhibited research can be dangerous and lead to unethical
experimentation, governments shouldn’t regulate gene-based treatments because
they have the potential to be more effective than traditional medicine.”
Historical
There are many historical components I can tie in with this topic. As of now, the enclosure movement has many obvious parallels. As bigger corporations encircle genetic treatment techniques through patents, it blocks out smaller more independent groups. However, housing it all under a bigger umbrella provides more resources for future advancement.
This also ties into the enlightenment
value of rational progress. Historically, it can be highlighted that a rational
look at nature led to a greater understanding of the world. Bacon also said that
“knowledge of physical nature [gives us] power over it,” so as we understand the
human genome, we will gain power over it.
Rhetorical Component
Rhetorically, gene therapy does try
the idea of pluralism. Pluralism advocates that people coexist in society despite their differences and argues we will be better because of it. In a similar way,
nobody has the same DNA. For that reason, if we can learn to treat people
individually despite their genetic differences instead of forcing a generalized
approach based on pharmaceutical drugs, we could become healthier and be better
off because of it.
Personal Connection
Including a personal connection feels difficult right now. I think generalized questions about the health of loved ones could engage people but would be too
general and not as gripping. However, I also feel like it would be sappy or cliché
to bring up the health issues in my own family that could be benefitted by
gene therapy. The issue I’m having with the personal connection is that I want it to
resonate with readers without being over the top, and I want it to provide a launch
point for others to open up and converse. I'm not sure how to find that sweet spot between inviting dialogue and being genuinely personable.
Any thoughts or ideas would be
greatly appreciated!
I get what you're saying about the personal connection, maybe it could just be about why this interests you?
ReplyDelete