PDA

View Full Version : Geno-discrimintation in the future?



Clawn
10-12-05, 00:06
I recently watched a movie called "GATTACA" starring Ethan Hawke and Jude Law, that is about a (scarily near) future where most people no longer were left up to chance, their physical and mental attributes were determined through genetic engineering. This caused people who weren't genetically engineered to be "superior" to be given crappy jobs, not be considered for insurance or higher schooling or advancement in the workplace, etc.

The movie follows the life of Vincent, a "faith child" (a child born on faith and not science) who, because of his genetic makeup, is forced to live a lower class life. His younger brother, Anton, who was genetically engineered to be one of the "elite", is constantly surpassing him in every field imaginable, until one day, the unthinkable happens, Anton has a medical emergency because of a heart problem.

This causes Vincent to understand that just because he's not made like everybody else, he has a chance to be great, so, to enter the job he wants to get into(involving space travel to one of Saturn's moons) he needs to "borrow" someone else's, on of the elite's, genetic makeup. Enter Jerome(Jude Law) a swimmer who is paralyzed from the waist down. Brought together by a "gene seller" Jerome and Vincent live together in a symbiotic relaitonship, Vincent allows Jerome to live in his upperclass life style, and Jerome allows Vincent to use his DNA through urine, blood, and hair, to fulfill his dream of spacetravel.

It all pulls together in an exciting story with an unthinkable and dramatic end. But the point I'm interested in is this:

Should your genetic makeup be seen as a standard for who you are and what you can do in life? Should companies be allowed to use genetics as a statistic in whether or not you get a job?

Think about it this way, the world would be full of the best and working at its optimum. But, in exchange, there is a high chance for discrimination, not among race or religion, but among Genetic codes.

I'd just like to know your opinion, would you see a better, more efficient world? Or would you see a crueler, more self-absorbed world?

Thanks:-)

Kinsao
10-12-05, 01:57
I take the pessimistic view.

Have more to add, but it's too late at night for poor little me... will return to this topic! :p

:sleep:

bossel
10-12-05, 02:48
there is a high chance for discrimination, not among race or religion, but among Genetic codes.

I'd just like to know your opinion, would you see a better, more efficient world? Or would you see a crueler, more self-absorbed world?
Pretty similar to what it is now.

Sensuikan San
10-12-05, 04:22
I agree with Bossel ...

'Twas always thus ... what else is new?

Sadly,

W

Maciamo
10-12-05, 11:36
Let us not forget that "discrimination" refers to an unfair treatment during the selection process. If someone is, say Black, and does not get a job because his qualifications are not as good as other candidates, they cannot claim discrimination. A pretty good example of discrimation would be to annouce in the job ad that "Black people should not bother to apply" or give them a lower salary for the exact same job.

Yet it is a fact that we are all genetically different. AFAIK, DNA tests are not yet used in job selections, for the simple reason that we do not know enough about genes now. But I find this kind of story (GATTACA) lacking enormously in credibility, but it fails to consider some crucial aspects of human capabilities. First of all, even cloning a person, that clone will not be equal in body and brain health to the original donor. The reason is obvious to any medical doctor or neurologist : the health of a baby depends more of the lifestyle, health and nutrition of the pregnant mother than on genes.

It also naturally depends on how the baby is treated and fed after birth, especially during the first 5 years. Then, genetic potential will differ a lot from actual capabilities, for the obvious reason that lived experience forges the needs, personality, acquired skills and knowledge and physical abilities of an individual. No matter how "athletic" one's DNS is, if the person never does any sport or physical activity, they won't become great athletes. The same is of course true for intellectual skills. Hard-work, motivation, perseverance and the quality of training (who is the trainer/teacher, what are the facilities/equipment/materials available ?) are all as important as genes. Even maturity depends a lot on personal experience (esp. bad experiences).

I don't think that DNA is important enough, as tests have shown that identical twins separated at birth, end up having quite different lives, education levels, jobs, etc. In fact, even those raised in the same family and going to the same schools, can end up with extremely different careers (e.g. one becomes an artist, while the other becomes a lawyer).

That;s too bad for the writers of GATTACA that they didn't think about that more carefully.

Tsuyoiko
12-12-05, 14:28
I think the film was trying to show that genes aren't everything - Vincent was able to live Jerome's life without the manipulation. My problem was more that society would never get that way anyway. I don't think things will ever go that far - as Maciamo says, anyone who knows enough about genes understands that they are only one factor in determining a person's intelligence etc.

I have a friend who is an identical twin, but he is nothing like his brother. Physically they are alike - people who don't know them well can't tell them apart, but if you get to know them there is no way you could get them mixed up - there are lots of subtle differences in appearance. My friend is physically much stronger than his brother, who had some problems with his leg caused by lack of nutrition in the womb. My friend is also a bit more intelligent, probably for the same reason. Their personalities are also totally different. My friend is less masculine than his brother - his main hobby is theatre, most of his friends are girls, and he is not interested in sports at all. He likes reading fiction books. He can be very silly and giggly at times. His brother is more sporty, he reads non-fiction, and is more rough-and-tumble - he is one of the lads. He is also more down-to-earth and serious. Although other twins I know are more alike, I think these two are a good example of how genes aren't everything.

JackMack
04-06-09, 21:51
I recently watched a movie called "GATTACA" starring Ethan Hawke and Jude Law, that is about a (scarily near) future where most people no longer were left up to chance, their physical and mental attributes were determined through genetic engineering. This caused people who weren't genetically engineered to be "superior" to be given crappy jobs, not be considered for insurance or higher schooling or advancement in the workplace, etc.

The movie follows the life of Vincent, a "faith child" (a child born on faith and not science) who, because of his genetic makeup, is forced to live a lower class life. His younger brother, Anton, who was genetically engineered to be one of the "elite", is constantly surpassing him in every field imaginable, until one day, the unthinkable happens, Anton has a medical emergency because of a heart problem.

This causes Vincent to understand that just because he's not made like everybody else, he has a chance to be great, so, to enter the job he wants to get into(involving space travel to one of Saturn's moons) he needs to "borrow" someone else's, on of the elite's, genetic makeup. Enter Jerome(Jude Law) a swimmer who is paralyzed from the waist down. Brought together by a "gene seller" Jerome and Vincent live together in a symbiotic relaitonship, Vincent allows Jerome to live in his upperclass life style, and Jerome allows Vincent to use his DNA through urine, blood, and hair, to fulfill his dream of spacetravel.

It all pulls together in an exciting story with an unthinkable and dramatic end. But the point I'm interested in is this:

Should your genetic makeup be seen as a standard for who you are and what you can do in life? Should companies be allowed to use genetics as a statistic in whether or not you get a job?

Think about it this way, the world would be full of the best and working at its optimum. But, in exchange, there is a high chance for discrimination, not among race or religion, but among Genetic codes.

I'd just like to know your opinion, would you see a better, more efficient world? Or would you see a crueler, more self-absorbed world?

Thanks:-)

I am all for genetic testing and the new world of understanding where we come from and how this can affect our health. I hope that we use this information to benefit others and not use it against them. We can find fault with anything or anyone if we put our minds to it- and that would not be a good idea.:good_job: