For more information about religion and science issues go to www.metanexus.net
Sacred DNA: Identity, Immortality, and the Human Genome Project
Student Report by Kiren Khan and Eugenia Ho
Dr. Susan Lindee, an assistant professor in the History of Sociology and
Science Department here at the University of Pennsylvania, is mainly interested
in the political and social contexts of twentieth century American biology
that have shaped scientific ideas about the human body. She has co-authored
a book with Dorothy Nelkin called _DNA Mystique: The Gene as a Cultural
Icon_. Dr.Lindee has also written _Suffering Made Real: American
Science and the Survivors of Hiroshima_ on post-war radiation genetics
concentrating on the survivors of Hiroshima. She first became interested
in this topic when she noticed the frequent and recurring image of the gene
in popular culture.
During the lecture, Dr. Lindee asked the question, "How is the word
gene used and what does it mean?" There are four ways to answer this
question.
(1) The word gene appears immortal in popular sources
such as trash or mass culture.
(2) The word gene appears as an equivalent of a relic; it
makes present the people who have passed away.
(3) Genes are crucial in identity: defining an
individual, determining a criminal, or comparing people in relationships.
(4) Genes function as a boundary marker by determining
who you are through differences between self and not self. In summary, "the
gene is a biological construct, a scientific concept, and a part of popular
culture" -- it is a historical and cultural product pulling together
the entire human race. A molecular geneticist is able to reconstitute a
person using DNA from a gene just as God is able to reconstitute a person
using his soul on the Last Day of Judgement. In either case, both molecular
geneticists and God build the organism in order to immortalize it.
In order to illustrate the power of the gene in popular sources, Dr. Lindee
cited the example _Jurassic Park_. In the movie scientists manipulated DNA
to resurrect dinosaurs. Not only was the physical form of the dinosaurs
resurrected, but their behavioral patterns and social constructs were reproduced
as well. Because the dinosaurs followed their instincts, the project became
uncontrollable. This proves that scientists do not have the authority to
tamper with a force as powerful as the gene.
The gene is a relic in the sense that it can make saints present. For example,
for decades scientists have wanted to extract DNA from President Lincoln's
body to determine whether he had Marfan's syndrome and whether he suffered
from manic depression. Indications of Marfan's syndrome are long extremities
and weakness of the heart. People afflicted with Marfan's syndrome usually
pass away from the bursting of the aorta. Some people believe that by reconstructing
Lincoln through his DNA, his true fate can be discovered. In this case,
the gene becomes "a molecular text in which immortal truths are written."
Humans live for a few decades, whereas genes live forever.
From 1890 until 1930, a world-wide eugenics campaign attempted to solve
the social problems of the world by improving breeding patterns of humans.
By controlling human breeding patterns, eugenicists endeavored to manipulate
individuals identities. Eugenicists of this time period believed that human
life should not be wasted on those who were genetically unfit. Eugenicists
thought that they could "improve the human race, not by power and coercion,
but by freely exercised volition of those concerned."
In the 1950's, infertility technology made possible a more humane eugenics.
Those involved with infertility technology appealed to people's needs for
genetic connections through their offspring. They exploited the devastation
experienced by infertile individuals by saying that it was important to
have at least one child who would pass on the family genes and traits. The
parents were led to believe that the suffering of infertile individuals
was due to the breaking of the molecular bond between parent and child --
the fact that an family's genes are lost forever because of infertility.
In a sense, a person's identity is lost forever when his DNA is not passed
on to the next generation.
Genes serve as boundary markers because they show differences between a
person and his surroundings. A popular science writer, Melvin Conner, wrote
on the "erie" world of reunited twins. Since DNA is the key to
one's identity, the twins displayed similar mannerisms even after years
of separation. When individuals have similar DNA, the phenomenon shows "boundary
blurring emotion" from the power of genes.
Another topic Dr. Lindee focused on was pre-determination. One belief in
popular culture is that destiny is pre-determined at birth. In 1992, PBS
aired a series called "Acts of a Serial Killer." One segment featured
the "XYY Man" discovered by Patricia Jacobs, who believes that
serial killers are inherently violent. She attributes the "XYY Man's"
criminal behavior, aggression, and deviance to the extra Y chromosome. This
claim was quickly integrated into the popular culture as illustrated by
Donahue when he aired an episode called "XYY- Is Your Child a Serial
Killer?"
Pre-determination is also claimed to have positive traits on a person. In
the case of the current reigning chess champion, chess experts attribute
the girl's talent to her parents DNA. However, her parents say that her
chess-playing ability has to do with her being taught to play chess at an
early age in their home environment.
The third topic Dr. Lindee centered on was the use of DNA by molecular biologists
in the Human Genome Project (HGP) and the Human Diversity Project. In order
to promote, publicize, and obtain funding, the HGP contends that its goal
is to solve the ancient mystery of life and the problem to human existence;
they state that DNA is a blueprint for humanity. James Watson claims that
the HGP will solve the eternal question: "What does it mean to be human?"
Proponents of the HGP assert that the mapping of the human genome will lead
to the cures of illnesses and mental diseases. They strongly believe that
the world's social problems, such as homelessness, alcoholism, laziness,
etc., are a consequence of hereditary traits. By identifying the genes that
portray these traits and by eliminating them, the genetic and social problems
of the world will be resolved. Behind this political narrative and strategy
is the HGP's underlying viability to biotechnological industry, especially
international competition.
The goal of the Human Diversity Project is to reconstruct human history
by collecting DNA from over 500 isolated groups around the world. It is
problematic that humans no longer turn to archival texts but instead to
DNA in order to reconstruct human history. By using DNA to understand humans
(and their history), DNA becomes an "archival text similar to holy
texts" which tell human history.
Dr. Lindee related DNA's importance to individuals and also to all of humanity
by saying how genes are used in this day and age -- how they appear in popular
culture, how they tell history, how they identify a person, and how they
show differences among people. In addition, she spoke about other concerns
DNA poses to humanity, such as pre-determination and its use in various
projects. Humanity perpetuates the debate about destiny being pre-determined
at birth. The debate has been going on for centuries and will continue for
as long as humans live. Humans have also ventured to understand DNA by establishing
the Human Genome Project and the Human Diversity Project. Both of these
projects have been founded in an attempt to discover humanity's history
and predict humanity's future.
OPINIONS FROM KIREN AND EUGENIA:
Kiren's Opinion --
The lecture Dr. Susan Lindee gave was very interesting and thought-provoking.
In my opinion, Dr. Lindee described how humans are trying to be God-like
by imitating Him. As she stated in the lecture, God resurrects humans through
their souls on the Last Day of Judgement. Geneticists are trying to imitate
Him by reconstructing humans that have passed away through the DNA in their
genes.
I think that it is very egotistical and arrogant for humans to think that
they can act like God. Even if geneticists someday are able to gather all
the necessary DNA to build a human, I do not think he will be truly alive.
He will just be a "guinea pig" for researchers.
There are many questions to be answered about this "human guinea pig."
Whose genes will he inherit? Who will take care of him without treating
him like a "guinea pig?" Who will take care of him if he has problems
or defects? Who will be responsible for him if he has defects? Will he be
put to death *humanely* if something goes wrong? Which human(s) have the
power (and audacity) to decide his fate? How long before geneticists grow
tired of their "human guinea pig?" What happens to him when geneticists
do not want to deal with him anymore? Is he supposed to go away, disappear?
Is he supposed to denature into the petri dish or test tube in which he
was born?
All of these questions need to be answered along with thousands more that
will appear along the way. Are humans ready to take on such a challenge,
or risk, as I see it? Are we so full of ourselves to think that we can bring
a life (from a petri dish or test tube) into this world, control it, decide
its fate? I think such matters should be lift to God for only He knows humanity's
fate.
Kiren Khan
Eugenia's Little Tidbit --
The opinions expressed in this piece belong solely to the author and do
not necessarily reflect the view of my group partner, the professor, executors
, administrators, trustees, their successors....you get the point ;-)
The belief that the gene is a blueprint to humanity is dangerous and fatalistic.
The gene is not the key to solving the ancient mystery of life and the problem
of human existence. There is always something that will remain a part of
us that cannot be fully comprehended or analyzed such as the soul or our
consciousness. In the 19th century, scientists believed that they could
understand how humans think, feel, and dream by deciphering the intricacies
of the neuron and the brain. Today, scientists know how neurons fire and
how ion channels work. However, we are no closer to solving the enigma of
human thought.
I have considered genetic engineering as a possible career. However, lately
I have come to have serious doubts. I believe that scientists have a moral
responsibility to society. They make the choice to do the research and what
they discover influences industry, the public. For example, if there is
flawed data on drug research, it could cost many lives.
We have come to believe that science is flawless and is a completely objective
search for truth. It is, however, important to question science the way
we do religion. Because the general public does not have a scientific background,
they trust scientists for accurate information. A scientists perception
and interpretation of the truth is very important and strongly influences
society.
Scientists have advertised the importance and impact of the Human Genome
Project in order to obtain funding from the government and support from
industry. Once this knowledge is unleashed, it is no longer in the scientists
hands to decide what is done with the knowledge. By the time the technology
is unleashed, anything is possible. The possibility of having a genetic
profile in my resumÈ and being evaluated not by my ability to perform
the job well or my potential but by my faulty genes is frightening.
It is extremely important for me to have my own identity. I have spent most
of life attempting to figure out who I am. It is an arrogant presumption
for someone to think that they can possibly know who I am by analyzing my
genetic profile is ridiculous. They cant possibly know me without understanding
the life I have lived and the way my experiences and my environment have
shaped my life.
After much self realization, I have come to terms with my genetic faults
such as my hereditary bone disease. I am comfortable and proud of the person
I have become Without all the experiences I have gone through because of
my congenital disease, I would not be the same person I am today.
Just some thoughts to make you think the next time you read a journal, but
a product, or support a scientific venture. It is vital to carefully consider
the moral implicatons.
Thanks for listening,
Eugenia