Haploid human genomes, which are contained in germ cells (the …

The United States Department of Energy, seeking data on protecting the genome from the mutagenic (gene-mutating) effects of radiation, became involved in 1986, and established an early genome project in 1987.

An Overview of the Human Genome Project

The Human Genome Project, Part 1
Photo provided by
Pexels

How Cloud and Big Data are Impacting the Human Genome - Touching …

The Human Genome Project has several goals, which include , , and genes, and data, and the ethical, legal, and social issues (ELSI) that may arise from availability of personal genetic information. is the construction of a series of chromosome descriptions that depict the position and spacing of genes, which are on the DNA of chromosomes. This means constructing . Besides determining the complete nucleotide sequence of human DNA, this includes locating the genes within the human genome. The HGP agenda also includes analyzing the genomes of several other organisms (including E. coli, the fruit fly, and the laboratory mouse) that are used extensively in research laboratories as model systems. Studying the genetic makeup of non-human organisms will help in understanding and deciphering the human genome. Although in recent months the leaders of the HGP announced that a “working draft” of the human Genome has been completed, the hope is to have a complete, error-free, final draft by 2003—coincidentally, the 50th anniversary of the discovery of DNA's molecular structure.

What Was the Human Genome Project and Why Has it …

The United States (DOE) and (NIH) organize and control the activities of the Human Genome Project. Many laboratories around the United States receive funding from either the Department of Energy or the National Institutes of Health, or both, for Human Genome Project research. The Department of Energy's Human Genome Program is directed by , head of the Office of Biological and Environmental Research. directs the National Institutes of Health National Human Genome Research Institute.

What is the importance of Human Genome Project?
Photo provided by
Pexels

Human Genome Project - Clan Lindsay

Intellectual property rights also raise ethical questions aboutconflict of interest and exploitation. Such potential exists inresearch that studies relatively small, isolated populations to see ifthere are any rare genes present which may be of value forpharmaceutical development (Dickenson 2004; Salopek 1997). In onewell-known episode, organizations representing indigenous peoplesmounted opposition to a 1995 patent granted to the NIH on a cell lineobtained from a Hagahai man from Papua New Guinea, a claim laterwithdrawn by the NIH due to the controversy. The patenting of humangenes and cell lines is seen as a continuation of the“bioprospecting” and “biopiracy” that havetaken place over the past several decades with western corporationssecuring patents on medicinal and food uses of plants which have beenlong a part of traditional knowledge (Shiva 1996). Problems also arisein clinical research. With multiple sources of conflict of interestoperating, there was the potential for exploitation when teenager JesseGelsinger died in a gene therapy trial in 1999. Researcher James Wilsonheld patents on several of the procedures used; Genovo, the privatefirm sponsoring the study, was founded by Wilson; Wilson and hisemployer, the University of Pennsylvania, held equity in Genovo; andGenovo was providing $4 million per year to the university'sHuman Gene Therapy Institute (Resnik 2004, p. 162).

Who are we?: The Human Genome Project, Race and Ethnicity

People frequently express fears about genetic discriminationresulting from genetic testing made possible by the HGP. Most concernshave focused on insurance companies and employers, but as the use ofgenetic information proliferates, one can readily imagine otherinstitutions in society developing an interest in discriminating amongindividuals on the basis of such information: schools, departments ofmotor vehicles, immigration authorities, creditors, adoption agencies(Nelkin 1992; Nelkin and Tancredi 1989). A number of general argumentshave been made against institutional forms of genetic discrimination:we don’t choose our genes and ought not be punished for what isoutside our control (Gostin 1991); the social costs of creating a“biologic” or “genetic underclass” of peoplewho lack health care and are unemployed or stuck in low-wage jobs aretoo great (Lee 1993; Nelkin and Tancredi 1989); people's fears ofgenetic discrimination, whether realistic or not, may lead them toforego genetic testing that might benefit their lives and be lessinclined to participate in genetic research (Kass 1997); people havethe right not to know their genetic risk status (Kass 1997). Geneticdiscrimination may also occur in less formal circumstances. Mate choicecould increasingly proceed on the basis of genetic information, withcertain people being labeled as undesirable. As more and more fetusesare aborted on genetic grounds, families of children born with similarconditions, and people with disabilities and their advocates morebroadly, worry that increased stigmatization will result. Onerecommendation to address this concern is that society commit fundstoward maintaining social support services for those with disabilitieseven as the numbers of abortions of genetically abnormal fetuses climb(Kitcher 1996). In addition, group-based genetic research into diseasesor behavioral differences risks stigmatizing people based on racial,ethnic, and gender differences. It has been recommended that societyinvest in public education to combat any racial prejudice behavioralgenetic research might unfurl (Kitcher 1996); arguments have also beenadvanced that such research either should not be done or should be heldto more demanding standards than is frequently the case (Kitcher2001).

Human Genome Project - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Philosophical arguments in support of gene patents include: patentsare just rewards for researchers’ efforts and costs; by mixingtheir labor with what occurs naturally, researchers acquire propertyrights in the Lockean sense; patents contribute to scientific andtechnological progress by diminishing secrecy and providing incentives;society ultimately benefits with better and more economical medicaltreatments (Resnik 1997a). Philosophical arguments in opposition togene patents include: patents exert negative effects on scientificresearch by promoting secrecy and impeding openness and sharing of dataand technologies among scientists, leading to publication delays,inhibiting further research, and encouraging researchers to pursueprojects of short term, commercial benefit (Nelkin 2002); patentsoperate as monopolies which compromise medical care by driving up thecosts of diagnostic tests and pharmaceuticals and creating financialconflicts of interests which diminish trust between physicians andpatients (Nelkin 2002); patenting is an unacceptable and dehumanizingcommodification of life (Dickenson 2004); genes even if isolated andpurified remain products of nature and are therefore not patentable(Sagoff 2002); the human genome is the “common heritage ofhumanity” not private property (HUGO 2000).[]