b2cfa24f
a94c03f2
XPost: alt.mindcontrol, alt.conspiracy
From: john.h.gohde@gmail.com

On Apr 28, 11:09 am, 23x  wrote:
> Thought Experiment - Who Are We Really? Manipulating the human
> microbiome has ethical implications.
>
> BACTERIAL FINGERPRINT: There is the possibility that microbial DNA may
> contain even more information about a person than does their human
> DNA.Lucy Reading-Ikkanda
> We are human beings. Normally, one might take this to mean that, at
> least on a biological level, we are defined by our own genome. But
> living in and on the human body is an ecosystem of microorganisms that
> outnumber our own cells by at least a factor of ten. It is estimated
> that there are 100 times as many microbial genes as human genes
> associated with our bodies. Taken together, these microbial
> communities are known as the human microbiome. Recent technological
> and scientific advances, mainly in the field of metagenomics, are
> rapidly enriching our knowledge of the genomes and functions of many
> of these microbial communities.
>
> The ultimate aim of much of this research is to discover how
> perturbations of the microbiome might be related to various diseases,
> including inflammatory bowel disease, asthma, and obesity. Other
> research is currently investigating the potential role of microbes in
> anxiety, depression, and autism. These findings have the potential to
> change the landscape of medicine. And they also have important
> philosophical and ethical implications.
>
> A key premise of some microbiome researchers is that the human genome
> coevolved with the genomes of countless microbial species. If this is
> the case, it raises deep questions about our understanding of what it
> really means to be human. Typically, we draw a distinction between
> environmental and genetic factors in understanding human traits and
> the development of disease. What precisely is meant by “environmental”
> varies dramatically across disciplines. Irrespective of how
> environmental factors are conceptualized in a given study, a common
> focus is their interaction with stable genetic factors. Traditionally,
> the microbial communities in and around us would be counted towards
> the environmental, rather than the genetic side of this equation.
> Given recent findings from human microbiome research, however, this
> classification may need to be reconsidered. If the microbiome, on a
> species level, coevolved with the human genome and, on an individual
> level, is a unique and enduring component of biological identity, then
> the microbiome may need to be thought of more as “a part of us” than
> as a part of the environment.
>
> Ethics of DNA manipulation
>
> The human microbiome may need to be thought of more as “a part of us”
> than as a part of the environment.
>
> There are practical ethical implications associated with these
> somewhat philosophical considerations. Over the past few decades a
> strong ethical position has emerged regarding manipulation of the
> human genome. In most jurisdictions it is deemed unethical (and
> illegal) to alter a human genome in such a way that these changes
> might be passed on to offspring. There are several arguments
> supporting this position, an important one being to safeguard the
> right of the child to an “open future.” Because the consequences of
> even ostensibly benign genetic manipulations cannot be predicted with
> certainty, it is currently deemed unethical to make choices on behalf
> of a child as it might lead to permanent changes to its biological
> identity. This reasoning underlies the prohibition in many countries
> against manipulation of germ-line DNA. An important question thus
> arises about how permanent certain changes to the human microbiome
> might be, especially to the microbiomes of infants and children, and
> whether such changes could be transmitted to offspring.
>
> Planning for the future
>
> We alter the mix of our microbial genomes all the time, through
> changes in our diet and surroundings and, significantly, every time we
> take antibiotics. It is currently not known how permanent these and
> other changes to the microbiome are. Certainly some changes are very
> transient, with the microbiome eventually returning to a fairly stable
> state. However, it is unclear just how stable the microbiome really is
> across a person’s lifespan. There seems to be an emerging scientific
> consensus that there is a critical period in infancy and early
> childhood during which the microbiome initially develops and gains a
> certain degree of stability. Neonates emerge from a sterile uterine
> environment and are immediately colonized by microbes from the baby’s
> environment, beginning with the birth canal or, in the case of
> cesarean section, the mother’s skin, which hosts a significantly
> different bacterial community. It is thus possible that, starting with
> the mode of birth, early childhood exposure or lack of exposure to
> certain microbial communities may have important implications for
> health and illness later in life. For example, researchers in British
> Columbia are currently investigating the possible role of early
> childhood use of antibiotics in later development of asthma.
>
> More important in the context of ethical considerations is the
> possibility that if the adult microbiome is indeed relatively stable,
> then such early childhood manipulations of the microbiome may be used
> to engineer permanent changes that will be with the child throughout
> life. There is thus the potential that an infant’s microbiome may be
> “programmable” for optimal health and other traits. For example, might
> we program a baby’s microbiome to decrease chances of becoming obese?
> Or might we program it such that the person will always have a dislike
> of alcohol? While such manipulation is likely to be motivated by many
> good intentions, it does raise the familiar specter of “designer”
> babies, and the ethical problem of making choices for infants and
> children that may permanently affect their biological identity.
>
> The issue of how stable an individual’s microbiome is over time also
> raises other ethical questions. For example, because human DNA is a
> unique identifier of individuals, there are many safeguards for

[continued in next message]

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
 * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)