<doc.id=1095.a2>
<title> Stay away from our genes! </title>
Should people manipulate on genes or not? Some people might say that we need to explore our limits, and therefore investigate how good or bad we can get an animal or crops if we manipulate them. I say, let nature do the work for us!

When talking about gene manipulation, the biggest issue has always been the ethical one. Is it ethical to manipulate on genes in animal or in plants. It might appear to be more ethical to manipulate with plants than on animals because animals are living creatures. I am of the opinion that it is just as unethical to mess with genes in plants that it is in animals. Nature has "taken care of" the progress of making plants and animals better and to adapt to its surroundings for millions of years. Nature has made us what we are today. I can't see any reason why we shouldn't let it continue to do so. There is also a religious issue. Many people believe that God created everything. God or the evolution will make all the necessary changes for animals and human beings to survive. God didn't intend for us to inplant new "stuff" into things to make them better. If anything needs improvement, God will see to it.

	The dangers that I see in gene manipulation are many. For instance, if scientists try to create a new or a better type of vegetable, there is a possibility that the new plant turns into weeds or something else that was not expected. If it turns into weeds, the work and costs of weed control will increase for farmers and the use of chemicals to fight it will also increase, which could damage the environment. However, if the tests are a success, crops can be larger and grow much faster than before. But even if they do so the first couple of years, there is still nothing that says that they will continue to grow big forever. A vegetable can be resistance towards one sort of virus that is crucial for its survival in a specific environment. When manipulated with, it can lose its resistance towards the virus and therefore be extinct. The survival of the fittest theory is put out of play. One can compare this with the Australian farmers who imported frogs. The farmers had problems with insects who destroyed their crops. The frogs were supposed to eat the insects, but the frog propagated so much that it started to eat the crops as well to survive. In the end, the frog itself caused more trouble than it prevented.

	If a new, better, vegetable or cereal develops, what's going to be the reaction of those who consume it, animals and human beings? There is a possibility that we may get sick when we eat gene manipulated food, or even worse, our own genes can be rearranged. No one knows. Substances that might cause cancer might develop from the new creations. The substances might not be visible in the beginning, they might show after a few months or a few years. We can never be sure that a product which is not created by evolution is safe. 

	In the future, if we continue to manipulate on genes, we might find ourselves in the situation that you can take out patent for genes. If that happens, the big companies which have interests in big or better crops, will get too much power. Money will control. If you have a lot of money, you can basically decide what plant you want to create without thinking of the consequences. The companies can use their money in a way that insures them to make more money. The benefits will not reach the poor people who really need it. 

	The people who thinks that gene manipulation is good, argue that we can get medicine or create vaccine for diseases. But then again, I think that the money would control. Only the rich could afford these medicines. In that way, the money decides weather or not we should be able stay healthy.

To mess with genes are none of our business. Evolution has made both people and nature what they are today. If we let it continue to do so, I think that the world would become a better place to live in.
</doc>