Genetic Engineering:
A Buddhist Assessment
Dr. Ron Epstein
---o0o---
What might it be like to be a Buddhist in a future
world where your life started with your parents designing your genes? In addition to
screening for unwanted genetic diseases, they select for sex, height, eye-, hair-, and
skin-color, and, if your parents are Buddhists, maybe even genes that allow you to sit
easily in the full lotus position. Pressured by current social fads, they may also have
chosen genes whose overall functions are not clearly understood but are rumored to be
connected with temperament, intelligence, mindfulness, and perhaps psychic powers. (There
is no longer any need to search for tulkus. They now clone themselves and get reborn in
their own clones.) .) If your parents are poor, they may have been paid to design you with
genes tailored for a particular occupation, together with a pre-birth contract for future
employment. As in the film Gattaca, you probably belong to a clearly defined social class
according to the degree of your genetic enhancement. Of course there may still be a few
weird, unenhanced naturals-by-choice meditating in the mountains.
From the very first milk you suckled, your food is
genetically engineered. The natural world is completely made over, invaded and distorted
beyond recognition by genetically engineered trees, plants, animals, insects, bacteria,
and viruses, both planned and run amok. Illnesses are very different too. Most of the old
ones are gone or mutated into new forms, yet most people are suffering from the aftermath
of genetically engineered pathogens, either used in biowarfare, or mistakenly released
into the environment, or recombined in toxic form from originally harmless but rapidly
mutating engineered organisms. Genetic engineering is so commonplace, you started your own
simple experiments with it in elementary school.
That future is more plausible than you might think.
From a Buddhist perspective, we need to analyze how current developments in genetic
engineering are providing the causal seeds that will influence the worlds of the future.
Because genetic engineering has the potential to radically transform both nature and human
nature, it poses a much greater threat than other technologies.
According to Buddhist teachings, nature as we
experience it is a label for the shared karma of sentient beings on the planet, and human
nature is a karmic mixture of thought and emotion that has to be transformed on the path
to enlightenment. Since karmaand sufferingwill still be with us in the Brave
New World, some have suggested that genetic engineering is not a big deal for Buddhists,
that the work cut out for us now will, essentially, not change. But maybe we should take a
deeper look.
What, for instance, is the relation of genetic
engineering to our potential for enlightenment and its realization? The Buddhist view is
that the condition of our bodies and nervous systems affects our minds and vice versa.
That is why karmic-based ethics insists on purity of both mind and body as a prerequisite
for spiritual progress. For example, when we meditate, subtle physiological changes take
place in our bodies that resonate with our level of spiritual progress. The deeper our
meditation, the more profound the body-mind transformation. Likewise, from the time of the
Buddha, Buddhists have recognized that certain places have special natural energies that
enhance progress in meditation and insight.
Genetic engineering has the potential for altering
both our bodies and environments in ways that lessen their ability to support the process
of personal transformation. For instance, when a person takes drugs, the bodily physiology
becomes altered which makes meditation more difficult; similarly, genetic engineering may
impact our bodies in ways as yet unknown that will impede our progress on the Path. Even
if there is only a relatively small possibility of genetic engineering affecting progress
on the path to enlightenment, it is a serious cause for concern. Because science deals
only with the physical realm, no scientific experiment can possibly assess this kind of
risk.
Another key concept, which Buddhism cherishes and
science ignores, is the first moral precept: the principle of non-harming and respect for
all sentient life and for its potential for enlightenment. Sentient beings have a central
nervous system, so they are aware of pain (plants are not considered sentient). An
important corollary is the alleviation of suffering and the notion of selfless compassion
as a guiding principle in our actions.
Buddhism, then, condemns any instrumental use of
human or non-human sentient life by geneticists, or anyone else. That means Buddhists
shouldn't treat sentient beings as objects or tools to be used without regard for their
own wishes or aspirations. Thus, the Buddhist approach to genetic engineering begins with
analyzing its effect on life, how it creates or alleviates suffering, and how it aids or
cripples the efforts of sentient beings to
realize their potential for enlightenment.
Some geneticists are well-intentioned in their
desire to use genetic engineering in altruistic ways. For example, in agriculture they are
trying to increase yields and resistance to harmful insects. In the field of medicine they
are trying to develop new genetic cures for cancer and inherited genetic diseases. Yet
many get caught up in their own desires for profit, power, and fame.
Even well-intentioned efforts often look dubious
from a Buddhist viewpoint. Animals are transformed genetically in ways that are often
cruel, and humans are being treated as guinea pigs to test genetically engineered food.
The basic health of ecosystems and the longer term health of life on the planet are also
disregarded.
The second moral precept is the prohibition against
stealing. Yet, biotech corporations and even some universities are stealing our genes, the
genes of indigenous peoples, native herbs and plants, patenting them, and then charging
for their use. The Buddhist approach is much different. The Buddha taught that, in
interacting with others and with the environment, we should emulate the honey-bee as it
takes pollen from flowers. The advantage is mutual and there is no harm.
Furthermore, Buddhism understands the cosmos as an
open system. In contradistinction, the scientific method usually operates within
hypothesized artificial and closed systems that are assumed to have some meaningful, but
incomplete and imperfect, correspondence with the "real" world. What seems to be
the case in the laboratory may or may not be valid in the natural world. Scientific
methodology cannot, because of its inherent limitations, assess the full extent of the
possible effects of genetically engineered alterations on living creatures in a world that
is an open system.
From the viewpoint of basic Buddhist morality,
specific developments in genetic engineering are troubling and point to a future riddled
with ethical uncertainty and complexity. Buddhist practitioners first need to know what is
actually going on in the field, before they can do their own karmic analyses of how they
and the world we all live in will be affected in ways that are important to them and what
their appropriate responses might be. The following is a representative sampling of some
of the areas of greatest ethical concern.
Plants and food continue to be subjects for genetic
engineering . The Delta & Pine Land Company received a U.S. patent on a technique that
genetically alters seed so that it will not germinate if replanted a second time, so that
their seeds lose their viability unless sprayed with a patented formulae, containing
primarily antibiotics.
Monsanto Corporation wants to use this
"Terminator Technology" to keep farmers from collecting genetically engineered
seed, forcing them to buy it every year.
To avoid dependency on petroleum-based plastics,
some scientists in the U.S., Europe, and Canada have genetically engineered plants that
produce plastic within their stem structures. They claim that it biodegrades in about six
months. If the genes escape into the wild, there is the prospect of natural areas littered
with the plastic spines of decayed leaves. Aesthetically repugnant, the plastic also poses
a real danger since it has the potential for disrupting or killing entire food-chains. It
can be eaten by invertebrates, which in turn are eaten, and so forth. Dr. John Fagan,
Professor of Molecular Biology at the Maharishi University of Management and formerly
research group leader at the National Institutes of Health, has warned that the new
constituents used in these plastics are oils that are probably toxic to animals.
Another distressing idea is to genetically engineer
plants with scorpion toxin, so that insects feeding on the plants would be killed. A
prominent geneticist, Joseph Cummins, Professor Emeritus of Genetics at the University of
Western Ontario, warned that such genes could be horizontally transferred to the insects
themselves, thereby risking the creation of insects whose stings or bites would inject
scorpion toxin into their victims, including us. Nonetheless, research and field-testing
continue.
Many scientists have claimed that the ingestion of
genetically engineered food is harmless because stomach acids break down the engineered
substances. According to research, however, significant portions reach the bloodstream and
also the brain-cells. Furthermore, the natural defense mechanisms of the body's cells are
not entirely effective in keeping the genetically engineered substances out of the cells.
Recent experiments show that genetically engineered organisms can mutate up to thirty
times faster than normal ones, so they are a serious potential health hazard.
The creation of xenographs--genetically altered
animals who often contain human genes--is one of the more horrendous uses of this
technology. Often experiments result in horribly deformed animals that have to undergo
terrible suffering. Even when experiments are 'successful', the scientific model is that
of the animal as a factory which efficiently produces some substance--meat, milk, or
pharmaceuticals--for human consumption. What Buddhists need to pay attention to here are
the degrees of negative karma. The killing of animals for meat violates the precept
against killing. Factory farming adds incredible suffering to the lives of animals before
they are killed. The creation of xenographs is an even more fundamental violation of the
animals' lives. Whether or not the genes inserted to create new animals are human ones,
xenographs are created for human use and patented for corporate profit without regard for
the suffering of the animals, their feelings, thoughts, natural life-patterns, or
potential for enlightenment.
Recent examples of this type of genetic engineering
include putting human genes into fish to make them grow faster. PPL Therapeutics, based in
Edinburgh, Scotland, the Biotech companies Nextran and Alxion in the United States, and
others, are racing to place human genes into pigs in order to genetically match them to
human individuals. In other words, you can have your own personal organ donor pig with
your genes implanted. When one of your organs gives out, you can use the pig's.
Of course, many would say that it is better to
sacrifice the pig so that they or their loved ones can live, even though such thoughts and
actions are not in accord with the ideal of the Bodhisattva. Yet, other more humane
solutions are available. For instance, in some Western European nations, everyone is
considered a potential organ donor unless they specifically file with the government not
to be, so there is no shortage of organs for transplant there and no need for sacrificing
genetically engineered pigs.
As more and more human genes are being inserted into
non-human organisms to create novel forms of life that are genetically partly human, new
ethical questions arise. What percent of human genes does an organism have to contain
before it is considered human? For instance, how many human genes would a green pepper
have to contain before you would have qualms about eating it? This is not merely a
hypothetical query. The Chinese at Beijing University are now putting human genes into
tomatoes and peppers to make them grow faster. For meat-eaters, the same question could be
posed about eating pork with human genes. And what about the mice that have been
genetically engineered to produce human sperm?
What about humans, themselves? A few years ago
Granada Biosciences of
Texas applied to the European Patent Office for a
patent on a so-called "pharm-woman," the idea being to genetically engineer
human females so that their breast-milk would contain specialized pharmaceuticals. Work is
also ongoing to use genetic engineering to grow human breasts in the laboratory. Not only
would they be used for breast replacement needed due to cancer surgery, but could easily
foster a vigorous commercial demand by women in search of the "perfect" breasts.
A geneticist, Jonathan Slack of Englands Bath University, has recently proposed
genetically engineering headless humans to be used for body parts. Some prominent
geneticists, such as Lewis Wolpert, Professor of Biology as Applied to Medicine at
University College London, have supported his idea.
Gene therapy for replacement of
"defective" human genes that are associated with the risk of contracting
diseases involves the intentional introduction of new genes into the body in an attempt to
modify the genetic structure of the body. Since genes easily move from one organism to
another, introduction of a new gene can have unforeseen effects. In
addition, we have the slippery slope that leads to
"designer genes." One indication that the slope is becoming more slippery is the
experimental administration of genetically engineered growth hormone to healthy children
who are simply shorter than average but whose parents would like them to be taller.
Buddhist parents may want to think about whether societal fashions for kids bodies
are more important to them than raising their children to be good people.
When considering the potential of genetic
engineering for curing illness, we should remember that, according to Buddhist teachings,
we get sick for one of two main reasons. Our "four elements" may become
imbalanced, which may be roughly interpreted in modern terms as "we are run-down and
our resistance to pathogens is low." And sickness or a shortened lifespan may in some
instances be karmic retribution for the taking of life. As Buddhists, we should be
especially sensitive to geneticists degradation of what it means to be a human
being. Do we want a "cure" at any price? We may want to ask ourselves whether
the karma from the harming of life involved in the development and application of the gene
therapy is going to cause us even heavier karmic problems down the road. Or how are
transgenic animal body-parts in our bodies going to affect the human quality of our
everyday awareness?
Viruses pose special dangers when they interact with
genetically engineered organisms. Plant, animal, and human viruses play a major role in
the ecosystems that comprise the biosphere and are viewed by some as one of the primary
factors in evolutionary change. Viruses have the ability to enter the genetic material of
their hosts, to break apart, and then to recombine with the genetic material of the host
to create new viruses. Those new viruses then infect new hosts, transferring new genetic
material to the new host. When the host reproduces, genetic change has occurred. We can
presume that ordinary viruses, no matter how deadly, if naturally produced, have a role to
play in an ecosystem and are regulated by that ecosystem.
If cells are genetically engineered, then when
viruses enter cellswhether human, animal, or plantthis material can also be
transferred to the newly created viruses and spread to the viruses' new hosts. Since
viruses with genetically engineered material could never naturally arise in an ecosystem,
there is no guarantee of natural defenses against them. This alone might lead to
widespread death of humans, animals or plants, thereby temporarily or even permanently
damaging the ecosystem. Widespread die-off of a plant species can affect its whole
ecosystem, and the possibility of widespread die-off of human beings should command our
attention.
The notion that ecosystems can ultimately deal with
any threat, however extreme, is without scientific basis. No evidence exists that the life
and welfare of human beings have priority in those self-organizing systems. Nor is there
any evidence that anything in those systems is equipped to deal with all the threats that
genetically engineered organisms may pose.
Genetic engineering can affect the whole of nature,
as well. In Buddhist terms, "nature" refers to the patterns of causes and
conditions that reflect the karma of sentient beings who live on the planet. In terms of
respect for life, which is the foundation of all Buddhist practice, nature can also be
understood as the sum total of ecosystems that support life; it is the essential condition
for preserving living beings from harm. Humans, animals, and other sentient beings are
dependent upon a wholesome environment for a healthy life. Harming that environment causes
those sentient beings to suffer, and, ultimately, to die prematurely. Harming life-energy
itself, even on the level of microorganisms, can have deleterious effects on more complex
organisms because of the interconnectedness of all life.
Furthermore, nature as wilderness provides an
effective place for meditation, one where rapid progress can be made. In self-cultivation,
harmony with nature involves the ability to find a place for practice where the natural
energy is auspicious. Nature acts as a mirror for seeing the deep workings of our own
body-minds. In the wilderness the distinctly human afflictions of others do not reinforce
our own affliction. Imagine what would happen if we genetically engineer ourselves so that
we can no longer resonate with the natural patterns of nature. These are not the kinds of
concerns that can be laid to rest by any scientific data.
Biogenetic warfare is the most serious short-term
threat of genetic engineering to human life. Because Buddhism is a fundamentally pacifist
tradition, it should be gravely concerned with the use of genetic engineering in warfare
as an efficient means for causing widespread suffering and death. International terrorists
have already begun seriously considering the deployment of genetically engineered viruses.
This use is almost impossible to regulate because the same equipment and technology that
are used commercially can easily be transferred to military application. During the late
1980's, the former Soviet Union had 60,000 people working on biowarfare, including
genetically engineered pathogens. In one of their more frightening projects, they
attempted to combine smallpox virus with Ebola virus. No one knows for sure where most of
the scientists have gone, or what they have taken with them.
In June, 1997, US Defense Secretary William Cohen
warned about "certain types of pathogens that would be ethnic specific so that they
could eliminate certain ethnic groups." Several countries have reportedly already
been genetically engineering viruses which target specific ethnic groups.
Despite the benefits of genetic engineering
trumpeted in the mediaprimarily to repair genetic flaws, cure disease, and increase
food productionin the overwhelming number of cases, I believe the price is too high
to pay. To insure megaprofits for multinational corporations well into the next century,
we will have to mortgage the biosphere, seriously compromise life on the planet, and may
even harm our potential for enlightenment. Genetic engineering poses serious risks to
human health and to the environment. It raises serious ethical questions about the right
of human beings to alter life on the planet, both sentient and non-sentient, for the
benefit of a few.
What makes genetic engineering special is both its
power and its irreversibility. Its ability to harm human, animal, and plant life, etc. is
a quantum leap greater than most other technologies and does not leave room for mistakes.
Results of flaws in this technology cannot be recalled and fixed, but become the negative
heritage to countless future generations.
If there are some areas of genetic engineering that
can safely benefit humanity while respecting other forms of life, then efforts need to be
redoubled not only in the area of scientific risk assessment and use of the precautionary
principle, but also in developing broad ethical guidelines. Since the scientific
establishment is acknowledging the need for public input, there is a window of opportunity
for introducing the perspective of Buddhist ethics to current moral questions about
proposed research in genetic engineering. It is also important for the public to demand
scrutiny and regulation of the industry's revolving door relations with academia and
government.
Can we really have an influence? Even slowing the
inexorable progress of the current trends will be extremely difficult. Yet there is hope.
Fortunately, a vocal minority of well-trained scientists in the field, such as Prof.
Stuart Newman of the Council for Responsible Genetics, Prof. Richard Strohmann of the
University of California at Berkeley, Dr. Mae-Wan Ho of Open University, Drs. Margaret
Mellon and Jane Rissler of the Union of Concerned Scientists, to name just a few, see the
dangers of what is occurring and are brave enough to voice their consciences.
Clearly the key is educating the public about what
is happening. We need to have confidence that ordinary citizens working together can build
a foundation of collective wisdom that can show us the way through the incredibly
complicated maze of issues surrounding genetic engineering. Can we make the problems go
away? Probably not. But successes are possible: The Third World Network, under the
leadership of Prof. Vandana Shiva, has mobilized India and other underdeveloped nations to
resist multinational corporations in search of genetic profit. In Europe, heightened
public awareness of the dangers of genetically engineered foods has recently forced the
major corporate players to back off from plans for their widespread introduction there.
Here in the United States, the organic food lobby, the Mothers for Natural Law, and others
have orchestrated a public education campaign about the dangers of such food, so that
attempts to include genetically engineered food as organic under the National Organic
Standards Rule have not succeeded.
From a Buddhist perspective the problems with
genetic engineering are no different in principle from most other problems we face in our
daily life. They are all the result of klesas-desire, anger, ignorance, and so
forth. What makes the situation with genetic engineering unique is the difference in the
degree of damage it can do to life on the planet and the irreversibility of its effect on
us and the environment. There is probably not a single answer to the question of what
Buddhists should do about these problems. Some may decide to work actively with the many
groups trying to raise public awareness and stop the most blatant dangers. Others may
prefer to work directly on the mind ground and try to generate the wisdom and compassion
that transforms the minds of all sentient beings toward awakening. Yet others will
undoubtedly put their heads in the sand and let the karma fall where it may.
Source: www.buddhismtoday.com
Update : 01-12-2001