ABSTRACT
Genetic modification of individuals or populations carries hypothetical risks. In humans, there are objections against modifying the gene pool by producing designer babies. This activity would only be affordable by rich people, and make little global impact, but could create a genetic elite. Another possibility is the accidental or deliberate creation of a lethal pathogen. Genetic manipulation and cloning of animals and crop plants is of more immediate relevance. There is a specific objection to creating transgenic species by transferring genes from one species to another. This fundamentalist objection is to ‘playing God’ and changing creation. Objectively, the two important considerations are the cost benefit ratio, and the comparison with the alternative, typically current practice. There are many perceived risks. The mere act of adding or changing a single gene may have unforeseen consequences. The gene and product are thoroughly known when modification is done by genetic manipulation. This makes genetic manipulation safer than conventional breeding that involves the introduction of hundreds of unknown genes, or mass mutation, then selection for the desired phenotype with no investigation of hidden changes. Suffering may occur in genetically modified animals with human genetic diseases (e.g. cystic fibrosis in mice) or with accelerated muscle growth or milk production in cattle. The costs and benefits must be assessed. There are already regulations regarding animal experiments, but none on conventional breeding which can produce gross abnormalities (e.g. small dogs whose eyes tend to fall out, cows with gross udders). Crop plants producing internal pesticides may also be toxic to harmless species, but the conventional alternative is chemical sprays that are generally worse. Plants resistant to herbicides allow chemical removal of weeds, in turn reducing support for nonpest wildlife, however the whole purpose of agriculture is to replace natural ecosystems with human crops. Fire and the plough have a much greater impact, and have been used for thousands of years. Greater efficiency of production on land already cultivated reduces the need to extend cultivation (e.g. into rain forests) and can allow poorer soils to be returned to a natural state.
