ftlouiea
06-29-2005, 10:46 PM
Based on 'Colour-coded cures' article in one June issue of New Scientist magazine.
A huge row is blowing up over the first ever race-specific medicine.
Basically, since the recent decoding of the human DNA sequence by HUGO (The Human Genome Project), scientists have been able to pinpoint specific sections of the DNA sequence which give you such or such diseases or impairments.
This thursday, or last thursday, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) were supposed to decide whether or not to approve BiDil, a first ever race-specific medicine. This drug, is a treatment designed for heart failure directed at black people ONLY. This selective market of patients is due to a key biological difference between white and black citizens. Some say that BiDil is a new wave of personalised medicine in which patients get carefully targeted drugs to ensure maximum response rates and minimum side effects. However, others argue that this drug only reverts from the fact that the real causes of heart disease among African Americans are poverty, ill health and poor access to healthcare. Statistics show that those from ethnic minorities, particularly African Americans, tend to have worse health and die younger than white people. The drug, in itself, is no new drug; its 2 constituent drugs have been prescribed to people of all race for decades, to lower blood pressure and to treat heart failure.
I could explain more about this, but here's to the argument. This isn't a matter of race, though this example does use it to explain so.
1. Should scientists use the newly founded DNA sequence coding to create specific drugs aimed at specific groups or is this considered as discrimination of some kind?
2. These developments in scientific research, has its advantages or disadvantages?
Personally, I can see this new personalised treatment having an incredible effect on all patients worldwide. Previously, drugs that had been tested on a portion of the population which did not surpass a certain percentage of 'effective' treatment were discarded. Now, those drugs can be used regardless, if they are shown to be useful for specific types of people, race etc. Though this means that any exploitation of any kind of your 'identity' as such in your DNA sequence is relatively easy.
Secondly, I have this uncomfortable feeling that science is developing at such a fast pace, no-one can foresee its future. But thats how we improve our society, right? So in response to my second question, I can see no wrong in saving people's lives, but this may lead to people passing there 'best before' date and the human population on Earth will increase indefinitely.
That's my say, and yours?
A huge row is blowing up over the first ever race-specific medicine.
Basically, since the recent decoding of the human DNA sequence by HUGO (The Human Genome Project), scientists have been able to pinpoint specific sections of the DNA sequence which give you such or such diseases or impairments.
This thursday, or last thursday, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) were supposed to decide whether or not to approve BiDil, a first ever race-specific medicine. This drug, is a treatment designed for heart failure directed at black people ONLY. This selective market of patients is due to a key biological difference between white and black citizens. Some say that BiDil is a new wave of personalised medicine in which patients get carefully targeted drugs to ensure maximum response rates and minimum side effects. However, others argue that this drug only reverts from the fact that the real causes of heart disease among African Americans are poverty, ill health and poor access to healthcare. Statistics show that those from ethnic minorities, particularly African Americans, tend to have worse health and die younger than white people. The drug, in itself, is no new drug; its 2 constituent drugs have been prescribed to people of all race for decades, to lower blood pressure and to treat heart failure.
I could explain more about this, but here's to the argument. This isn't a matter of race, though this example does use it to explain so.
1. Should scientists use the newly founded DNA sequence coding to create specific drugs aimed at specific groups or is this considered as discrimination of some kind?
2. These developments in scientific research, has its advantages or disadvantages?
Personally, I can see this new personalised treatment having an incredible effect on all patients worldwide. Previously, drugs that had been tested on a portion of the population which did not surpass a certain percentage of 'effective' treatment were discarded. Now, those drugs can be used regardless, if they are shown to be useful for specific types of people, race etc. Though this means that any exploitation of any kind of your 'identity' as such in your DNA sequence is relatively easy.
Secondly, I have this uncomfortable feeling that science is developing at such a fast pace, no-one can foresee its future. But thats how we improve our society, right? So in response to my second question, I can see no wrong in saving people's lives, but this may lead to people passing there 'best before' date and the human population on Earth will increase indefinitely.
That's my say, and yours?