Activity 5: Genetic Engineering Techniques

Directions. Voice out your perceptions on the following statements about the curent technology
in genetic engineering. Discuss whether you agree or not. Your answer must have an in-depth
analysis of the statement with clear expression and no grammatical errors. Write your answer in
your journal notebook.

MONKEYS HAVE BEEN CLONED, PAVING THE WAY FOR HUMAN

CLONING

On july 5, 1996, Dolly the sheep – the first mammal to have been successfully cloned
from an adult cell through genetic engineering technique called somatic cell nuclear transfer,
where the cell nucleus from an adult cell is transferred into an unfertilized oocyte or developing
egg cell where its cell nucleus are removed. Dolly was born at the Roslin Institute in Scotland.
Using the same genetic engineering technique, scientists in China have also successfully cloned
two monkeys, both female, named Zhong Zhong and Hua Hua (currently 4 years old as of 2022)
who were created at the Institute of Neuroscience at the Chinese Academy of Sciences in
Beijing, China. Since scientists believe that humans are closely related to primates, the success
of this genetic engineering hypothetically pave the way for human cloning.

Now, given the success of these genetic engineering starting from Dolly the sheep to its
legacy – the long-tailed Macaques. Many speculations and conspiracy theories have risen that
questioned this kind of experiment.

In conclusion, I do not affirm human cloning despite the success of cloned mammals, as
the disadvantages of cloning cannot be reconciled with its advantages. First and foremost, why
do we need to clone humans given the fact that a lot of countries all over the world are over-
populated? Second of all, cloning is not safe and a hundred percent proven to be accurate given
that there’s only a very few experiments that were successful out of several attempts that killed
many animals. Third, researchers have observed that genetic malformation are highly likely for
cloned animals that results to adverse health effects that may not be observable during early
stage. These include a variety of defects in vital organs, such as the liver, brain, and heart. An
example of this was Dolly the sheep that died due to an incurable lung disease and arthritis that
lead her to be euthenized. Fourth, there will be no genetic variation since the experiment makes
an identical clone from the original. This may result to shortened lifespan and in worst scenario
fast extinction. Since all clones are identical that means they are also susceptible to the same
diseases or environmental factors where the species will not be able to adapt to changing
environments and evolve. This defies the theory of natural selection which observed that species
with desirable traits are the only species to survive in a particular change of environmental
factors or conditions. Lastly, human cloning is unethical. This has already found expression in
international human rights instruments. The Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and
Human Rights, 1997 (UDHGHR) emphasizes the need to fully respect human dignity, freedom,
and human rights. Article 11 states that: “Pracrices which are contrary to human dignity, such as
reproductive cloning of beings, shall not be permitted.” Similar prohibition is sought in the 1997
European Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine. Article 1 of the 1998 Additional
Protocol on the Prohibition of Cloning Human Beings provides: “Any intervention seeking to
create a human being genetically identical to another human being, whether living or dead, is
prohibited.”

BACTERIA AS LIVING MICROROBOTS TO FIGHT CANCER

The idea of using bacteria to treat cancer is not new. One of the earliest reports on
bacteria as a cancer therapy comes from the immunotherapy pioneer William Coley, who in the
late 19th century recognized the usefulness of injecting bacterial toxins, heat-inactivated
microbes, or even live cultures of bacteria in treating cancers especially patients with inoperable
bone and soft-tissue cancers, often leading to remissions.

As changes took place in the variations of cancers from case to case where the same
techniques cannot be used generally, further studies have discovered different types of therapy to
treating cancers such as the use of radiation and chemotherapy.
 In 1954, the use of engineered nanorobots that can roam inside the body to detect and
treat tumors was invented as researchers have come to understand that some bacteria innately
possess some traits of a nanorobot: they can autonomously seek out tumors and have readily
toxic payloads that can kill cancer cells. Combining bacteria with classical approaches in
robotics and engineering for external control.

Based on the premises I’ve read so far, I do agree in genetically modifying bacteria as
living microrobots to fight cancer due to the fact that bacterias are indeed effective antigens in
treating tumors and even virus. Best examples of this are vaccines that fights against COVID-19
virus, polio, rotavirus, and etc. which primarily containing weakened bacteria or virus to help
fight cancerous cells or tumors. While engineered nanorobots has been observed effective to
autonomously seek out and destroy cancer cells actively that can even extend as far as cancer
diagnosis and treatment, according to IFL Science article. This futuristic and revolutionized idea
of integrating the components of microrobots with built-in bacteria as antigen (living
microrobots) in treating cancer could be very useful tool especially for chronic or acute cases of
cancers. While in terms of possible disadvantages of using such technique in treating cancer, I
think it’s fair enough given that we’re talking about cancer patients which could peace out early
if left untreated. So, taking the risk to opt with using living microrobots given its possible danger
(if there is) is okay rather than wait for the cancer cells to spread and become fatal and then
eventually kill the patient.
Activity 6: PROS and CONS

A. Directions. Conduct a short interview with one or two of your family members. Ask them
about how they think of the positive and negative effects of genetic engineering. List all
their responses.

QUESTIONS RESPONSES
What do you think are the positive effects of For GMOs, all I know are it produce high
Genetic Engineering? quality products, more harvest yields, less
expenses for fertilizers and pesticides, and of
course more income compare to traditional
products that we plant.
For GET in medicine, I think this engineering
help improve human resistance to diseases,
help cure genetic disorders, and synthesize
vaccines such as COVID-19 Vaccine variants.
What do you think are the negative effects of For GMOs, the seedlings are pricey, not
Genetic Engineering? organic or natural that may pose potential
harms to our health, environment, and food
security, production of new toxins, and loss of
nutrients of the food.
For GET in medicine, I think some
techniques are still not too safe to use that
may not be effective treating a certain disease
or cancer which may cause to exacerbate the
problem. It may cause more genetic
abnormality, development of novel cancers or
diseases, or it may kill a patient rather than
treating it.
 B. Make a list of pros and cons of genetic engineering by summarizing the interview done.
PROS
 High quality products
 Greater yields
 Less use of pesticides and fertilizers
 Improve resistance to diseases in humans
 Help treat genetic disorders
 Produce medical treatments
CONS
 Pricey seedlings
 Not organic
 May be harmful to health
 Poses harm to environment
 May cause food insecurity such as
contamination
 Production of new toxins
 Loss of nutrients compare to traditional
products
 Unsafe to use treating patients if not
proven and tested to be effective
 May exacerbate the problem
 New development of cancer cell or
diseases