Question

Does anyone know about the Human Genome Project (HGP)? What are your views on this? Can you give me tips about how to write a paper on this subject?

Answer 1

In general terms, the purpose of the human genome project is to sequence all the DNA in humans and to locate gene coding regions and so called 'functional regions' in that sequence.

A vocal minority of people - mostly social conservatives - and vested interests - mostly HMOs and drug development companies - were opposed to the project for financial, ethical and bureaucratic reasons, but the vast majority of scientists (myself included) see the project as necessary.

How I'd recommend you go about writing a paper on the human genome project depends on what aspect of it your paper is on: is it on the public policy aspects of the project? Does it focus on scientific aspects of project? The subject is really so broad that you need to give us more info, but for a general summary I'd refer you to Wikipedia and the links on the Wiki page.

Answer 2

Thanks! Well, I have to write my opinion about it but I can't really decide what to say. Could you pls try to convince me about your point of view?

Answer 3

Well if you'd like me to "convince you of my point of view," you have to tell me what your point of view is....

And you have to specificy what aspects of the subject you want my opinion on. Do you want my opinion about the funding and public policy debates surrounding the project? Do you want my opinion about the ethical issues surrounding use of the genome, or its production by an international group of scientists rather than private companies? Do you want my opinion about its uses and applications in science?

You have to be a bit more specific...

Answer 4

Sorry. Oh well, I want to focuse more on its uses and applications in science and also the ethical issues. I think it would be great if they manage to find the cure for diseases such as cancer, but on the other hand it might bring huge ethical consequences. What do you think?

Answer 5

While I think the use of comparative genomics to identify genetic mechanisms underlying diseases is very important, I think you have to be very careful about understanding the role that the HGP actually plays in that field.

As far as pure science goes, it's main significance is that it provides us with some idea of measuring or understanding how little we actually know about molecular biology: most of the bases in the genome turned out to be non-coding and even, apparently, non-functional in that they couldn't be ascribed to genes or functional units, and the big challenges now are resolving what those regions actually do.

And as for applied science, it should be interpreted in context of the more specific and broader techniques which are to some extent based on it like genome wide association studies and other algorithms in computational bioinformatics. In the end the info is only as good as what we do with it.

Do you agree?

And as for ethical issues, if you'd like my opinion on them you still have to be more specific: ethical issues can be interpreted as anything from the legitimate "private drug development companies shouldn't be the only ones to have (and possibly copyright) genetic material" to the absurd "genetics shouldn't be used to genetically engineer children."

Answer 6

So what you're saying is that we only have a little knowledge about how molecular biology works and that is unlikely to make progress in finding cure for diseases? How much have the scientists progressed so far? Do you think they could be already doing something useful to society with that knowledge?
Mmm... The ethical issues I meant were more of social problems. In the future people might get discriminated because of their genetical things, companies might want to request genetic exams to check if their employees would have diseases, stuff like that. What do you think?

Answer 7

I think you need to think a little bit more about what you're saying. I am certainly not saying we "only have a little knowledge about how molecular biology works." We have a vast amount of exquisitely detailed knowledge about how molecular biology works.

"Could scientists already be doing something useful to society with that knowledge?" Go to a hospital. Look around you at all the wonderful achievements of modern medicine. If scientists weren't already being extremely useful to society, doctors would still be bleeding patients and feeding them poison to treat diseases like in the middle ages.

What I am saying is that scientists' understanding of molecular biology is incomplete. And the human genome project is incredibly useful because, for the first time, it gives us a rough way to measure how incomplete that understanding actually is. And I am cautioning you against the common misunderstandings surrounding the human genome project: laypeople like to point at it by itself and say, "this project will cure cancer" instead of interpreting it in the context of its importance to the methods and other data and procedures in the field of genomics.

Clear?

Answer 8

I didn't mean that, blues. I was asking specifically about the findings of HGP. How can they directly benefit society and what are its consequences? You seem to consider its importance in biology field but what about social issues?

Answer 9

Don't you think that people would get discriminated by their genotype? Also, insurance companies might want to charge extra taxes because of probabilities of diseases the person might have, based on DNA exams.

Answer 10

We live in a world of stereotypes. Don't you think society might divide itself in 'superior' and 'inferior' genotypes?

Answer 11

No, I am explaining that its potential uses and relevance to society depend on the theory and methods according to which it is used. You can't just take the data out of context and that is what almost all non-scientists who think they know all about the genomics try to do.

You like the example, could companies screen employees for allelic variants which might limit their fitness to do their jobs. OK. It would be stupid to simply take a genetic sample and map it onto the raw genome and make a decision based on that. They would need to do a GWA study to associate subsets and profiles across entire functional units to make any sort of decision like that - so the importance of the HGP is it's role in development of those methods, and that is a very young, incompletely described field.

The same goes for insurance companies.

Answer 12

And so called 'genetic stereotyping.'

Answer 13

"They would need to do a GWA study to associate subsets and profiles across entire functional units to make any sort of decision like that''
HGP is progressing every day, don't you think they might get to that? I know that this field is still kind of unknown, but I mean in the future.

Answer 14

The sequencing technology and the computational methods will certainly reach that point one day. But however much data you have, the crux of it still rests on interpreting it and understanding it correctly.

Answer 15

Exactly. And people won't do that. Social consequences will be huge. Agree?

Answer 16

No, I think interpretation and use of the data will be so tightly regulated that it cannot be used for discrimination. There are already laws on the books which make it illegal for private companies to require or take genetic samples from their employees; there are already laws on the books which prevent companies from discriminating based on non-genetically assessed health conditions. Perhaps genomic law will become a field in the next decades, but that's for solicitors to decide.

I think the real effect of high throughput genetic profiling will be far more efficient treatment of diseases. Doctors will have the ability to resolve disesases which appear the same but are not - like variants of acute myeloblastic leukemia, on which I work, which are driven by different mutations in the same protein - and treat them accordingly.

Answer 17

Oh, I see. Really interesting. Thanks for the conversation! Feel free to add anything if you want. You seem to do a nice job.