1: I wouldn’t want to get tested for
any genetic illness because then if there was no cure at the time, or it was
incurable, like the baby’s disease from the movie, I would have to live with
that fact. I also think that it is morally wrong to tell someone that they are
diseased if it won’t affect them at the present time, if you for example have
diabetes it may not show immediately, but it could come up when you are older,
therefore instead of living with the fact, you can find it out when it starts
making a problem.
2: I wouldn’t give my DNA for testing because; I
find it weird that people are going to experiment with my DNA. Even though it
may provide a cure I still believe that selling drugs based on someone’s genes
is wrong, it is basically like selling a replica of a part of the person. In
the case that I would give my DNA for testing, I would certainly take royalties
because my genes were used in the process of making the medicine, meaning that
I contributed in a way. As I said previously I find it morally wrong to tell
someone that they are going to have a disease later on in life, because they
would carry the burden through their life until that moment when it shows
up.
The second answer is interesting, and quite different from my own. When you are giving your DNA for testing, wouldn't you feel as though you could be saving thousands of people? For their sake, would you be willing to give your DNA samples for free? :)
ReplyDeleteTeodora has a point. Also, you mentioned that you would not want to know if you have any genetic diseases. However, sometimes prevention or early detection is the best medicine, especially for cancer. I see that you answered two of the questions, where is number 3 and your reflection to the film?
ReplyDelete