Intended Audience
The paper “The Ethical Gene” by Reuven Brandt is written for geneticists, policymakers, and other scientists. While the general public may need to read the article to engage with the discussion, the author’s primary focus is professionals who either advocate for specific laws or represent the scientific world in policymaking. As the language of the paper is advanced and the use of scientific terms is broad, the text may be challenging to understand without specific knowledge of genetics.
Central Topic and Supporting Information
The topic under discussion is the current and potential definition of genes and their connection to the policy limiting genetic modifications. The author argues that laws accepted by several countries describe genes in a broad way, which leads to vague wording and contradictory views on medical interventions (Brandt, 2022). To support this opinion, Brandt (2022) investigates the policy on gene modification for reproduction and provides several examples of how the legal view of genes differs from the more complex biological interpretation. For example, the researcher challenges the idea of DNA’s sole role in encoding genetic traits, discussing how RNA and other structures are also involved in this process.
Emphasis on Heredity
As can be seen from the topic, the paper mainly considers the aspect of heredity–nature in human development. Brandt (2022) talks about a potential redefinition of the word gene to suit the evolving world of science and support further discoveries in genetic modification without creating a general acceptance of this practice. The idea of nature affecting inheritable conditions is, therefore, central to the article. The environment is briefly discussed—the author mentions how various lifestyles, diets, and stress affect one’s epigenetics to contrast the lack of restriction on these aspects in policy (Brandt, 2022). Nevertheless, heredity is mainly discussed from a genetic point of view.
Referenced Domain of Development
Although the paper does not explicitly target one type of development, the author discusses gene modification to refer to the physical domain. One of the concerns that are examined by Brandt (2022) is the potential for gene redefinition to allow for different genetic modification procedures.
Moreover, the researcher considers ovulation, in vitro fertilization, meiosis, and other processes that are connected to people’s physical development. Although socioemotional and cognitive changes are mentioned among possible risks of genetic modification, the central theme of the discussion is one’s body.
Type of Evidence Used
While presenting his case, the author focuses on personal expertise as well as scientific publications to support his arguments. All information related to biological processes and medical procedures is cited with appropriate scholarly materials to demonstrate that the descriptions are rooted in science and can be researched further. Furthermore, as the article offers a personal opinion, Brandt (2022) refers to his knowledge as a foundation for the viewpoint expressed. The researcher does not use case studies, instead referring to some theoretical examples.
Validity of the Article’s Conclusions
The article’s conclusions appear valid and rooted in the material previously outlined and analyzed by the researcher. Brandt (2022) suggests redefining the term “gene” and shows a potential change to policy surrounding genetic modification. Then, he discusses arguments for supporting this position as well as concerns that would cause opposition to this change, refuting them. As an outcome, the conclusions made by the researcher are consistent with his arguments and suppositions.
Personal Evaluation and Reflection
The article contains much interesting information about the practice of genetic modification and its legal restrictions. While introducing a new gene terminology is not fully convincing, the discussion about reviewing current policy to clarify the boundaries is compelling. The contradiction between the current view of gene formation and legal limits is a valid concern that may cause problems with using the law in the future.
Reference
Brandt, R. (2022). The ethical gene. Bioethics, 36(4), 403-410. Web.