During the development of the sciences, ethics always have something to interfere, and with genetic engineering is no difference. The researches in the field of transgenics continue with no major ethical problems when the subject is plants or bacteria, but with superior animals the situation changes. Recently, the mapping of genomics has permitted a new door of possibilities, whereas ethics blocked, in a way to avoid the enhancement of genetic manipulation techniques, such as the development of humanized subjects for researches, the inactivation of lethal or harmful genes to avoid the progress of genetic diseases, and the creation of modified humans. The last one still stands on scientific fiction, but recent researches reveal the opposite: …show more content…
In a debate between Savulescu & Sparrow (2012), professors of practical ethics at the University of Oxford, both discussed the social portion of genetics’ situation. Savulescu defended embryo selection as an obligation to provide the children a best life its fathers can insure. On the other side, Sparrow argued that a well satisfied life is enough, so genetics should be used to prevent health problems, not to eliminate them (by modifying the embryo). In a posterior interview, Savulescu (2014) states that humans have a moral obligation to improve themselves, and since genetics serve for this purpose, humanity would embrace it. A species needs to understand the situation of those limiations and overcome it. For example, an investiment of iodine to salt would decrease the IQ loss due to iodine deficiency during pregnancy. That is, Savulescu defends the ethical questions with what he sometimes describes as “all-purpose goods” – qualities and behavior to be selected and enhanced by modifications. However, in the course of history, human modifications and the goal of creating a superior race was not viewed favorably, and those ideas seem to endanger human society as the world knows