The Perfect “Scientific” Impulse
Nathaniel Comfort portrays the evolution of genetic medicine from the 19th century to the present. Scientists, statisticians and other distinguished individuals contributed to the idea of eugenics and its relation to genetic medicine. Three central concepts that support the central idea of the story include: positive and negative eugenics, genetic medicine and the eugenic impulse.
Comfort’s argument focuses on the idea that medical genetics and eugenics have one major aspect in common, THE EUGENIC IMPULSE. Society looks down upon eugenics; however, medical genetics is glorified and seen as a scientific accomplishment. Comfort emphasizes that in reality, the two coexist. The following quote from
…show more content…
Eugenicists were focusing on undetected genes being spread across people. Preventive medicine was the topic of discussion; negative eugenics was emphasizing the question of who should be able to reproduce? Genetic diseases such as obesity, diabetes, mental conditions and others were coming into question. The relevance of genetic medicine is now apparent in today’s age as when we go to the doctor, the forms that we have to fill out entail family history. As discussed earlier, Garrod focused on the importance of family history when he tracked the baby’s family and today family history or genetic medicine has become an essential part in patient diagnosis.
Another major concept that was starting to make a push during this period was that in order to practice positive eugenics, negative eugenics also had to be practiced. Muller along with other eugenicists including: Frederick Osborn, William Allan and others believed that the prevention of defective conditions was essential and the base of the movement. They knew the benefits of negative eugenics, including its social acceptability and technological feasibility. Geneticists and scientists now understood the importance of genes and their different
…show more content…
Human happiness is dependent on so many different factors yet we try to define it. Like Comfort said, knowing our full molecular explanation, genes, brain chemistry, personality and other elements will not define us as individuals and determine how we nurture. The eugenic impulse and eager to determine our heredity will limit us from potential successes and failures that shape who we are, as individuals. People want to live longer, be smarter, and want to limit disease. Is it fair to discriminate against certain individuals with certain diseases? In my opinion, our genetic makeup and the environment determine who we will become. The eugenic impulse combined with genetic medicine takes away from the originality and the diversity of the