How Can Developments In Modern Genetics Be Used To The Advantage Of Mankind?

As a race, humanity is an inefficient and wasteful organism. We are also the only entity on the planet which adapts the environment to suit ourselves rather than adapting ourselves to suit the environment. This is an important point which should be considered when we live in an environment where the resources we rely on and consume are finite. For example, I own a small fishing colony 4 miles south of my home town. We lead a comfortable life, catching and eating as much fish as we feel is necessary. One day, a group of migrant families decide that my fishing colony is the perfect new home for them and as a result, they move in. I suddenly have more mouths to feed so I order the fishermen to catch more fish every day. Why did I not just tell everyone to simply develop bodies which digest and use food more efficiently? Why did I not tell the men and women to use their water sparingly, but not to dehydrate? How could I stop them using more energy every evening to cook their fish? The answer to all of these questions is genetic modification of humans to such a degree that we evolve billions of years faster than we normally would so we can adapt to an environment rife with limits, and become as efficient as we could possibly be. When we think of sustainability, we often relate this concept with the image of a tree or being green. Plants sustainably produce food through the conversion of light energy, carbon dioxide and water into glucose and oxygen. This means that the only reagents being used from the environment are carbon dioxide and water, but even these will be replaced when the plants respire. The only substance that plants actually use to produce their food and energy is sunlight. So why can we not have a human which has been genetically modified in such a way that they can photosynthesise? Why can't our advances in the modification of the human genome be used to produce the first solar powered humans? The advantages would be innumerable with modest victories such as having to eat only so rarely but also colossally huge such as solving world hunger. If this method of gene splicing proves to be cheap and effective, it could mean the end of modern day poverty. The Canadian Institute for Advanced Research recently published a journal stating that it is possible to change chlorophyll (the pigment in plants which give them their green colour) to any desired colouration. This would eliminate one key disadvantage of being a photosynthetic human - being green! Water is another finite resource in need of conservation, but how can we alter our genetics to make ourselves more water efficient? Let's take a moment to think about a camel. They are physiologically adapted to living in low water abundant environments, but what parts can we emulate through genetics to become equally adapted? To further explore this idea, let us consider why we need water in our body. One main reason is to maintain the fluidity of our bloodstream, so a loss of water can cause a loss of this blood fluidity. In fact, a human only needs to lose 15% of their water volume before they suffer from cardiac arrest. But a camel will only suffer from cardiac arrest after it has lost an entire quarter, or 25% of their water volume. The key is the genetics. A camel's genetics determine the shape of its red blood cells which are oval, compared to the circular shape for every other mammal. This allows a camel's blood to flow in its blood vessels at lower water concentrations. Genetic modification of red blood cells could be a major factor for a human living in a water scarce environment and a possible hindrance for hosepipe-ban enthusiasts. When it comes to energy efficiency, we need only look at a light bulb. A light bulb is powered by electricity, which is generated most of the time through the burning of fossil fuels. We can think of these fossil fuels as the food we eat and the electricity as the ATP (adenosine tri-phosphate) used to power our muscles, like how the electricity powers the light bulb. Burning the fossil fuels to generate the electricity is not efficient since not all of the energy we get by burning the fuels is converted into electricity. Likewise, the electricity is not efficient either since not all of this energy is converted into light. Going back to a human, this means that not all the food we eat is converted into ATP, and not all the energy from the ATP is used to power our muscles. In order to make ourselves more energy efficient, we need only look at the food we eat. An average human eats approximately 900g of plant material a day - but we are unable to digest most of it. Cellulose, the carbohydrate which makes up the cell walls in plants, cannot be fully digested by humans because we lack the specific enzyme to do so. If we were able to digest cellulose, it is possible that demand for meat, which takes up 80% of the world's farmland and produces 18% of all man made greenhouse gases, would drop since the plant matter we eat will provide a much longer lasting source of energy. In order to digest cellulose, we would need the help of the enzyme, endoglucanase. It is perfectly possible to alter the human genome to make this possible. Endoglucanase is protein and will therefore be coded for by one specific gene in our chromosomes. Inserting this gene into our genome may be a solution to the energy efficient human. The benefits include less strain on the world's farmland and will put a cap on greenhouse emissions. Eating greens will really be the green way to go. However, would advancements in genetic coding really solve world hunger and drought? I want to linger on this concept for just a little longer. The main question that comes to mind when the idea of photosynthetic humans and water sparing beings are presented as a way to make the world a better place is if this level technology is affordable. Surely the people who require this treatment are going to be the people who cannot afford or produce enough food for themselves? In a world where 78% of all malnourished children under the age of 5 live in countries with a food surplus, is it acceptable to assume that this potentially expensive advancement can become available to the masses? Upon the initiation of the Human Genome Project (a scheme aiming to read and store the DNA sequences of every human on the planet), the price tag to read the base pair sequences of a single person exceeded $3bn. However, as time went by, the cost decreased. Now, it costs just short of $5,000 and is forecasted to decrease further to the price of a blood test. Drugs and food are becoming more readily available to third world countries as the developed countries relearn the importance of philanthropy and as a result are more informed about world issues and will take more active roles in ensuring the positive development of their global society. That is what it is. A global society. The world is a much smaller place where eventually the tight knit communities governed by separate nations are bound to open and embrace the modern values of democracy and liberalism. With these ideas tied together, it is more than possible that the genetic design of a human, no matter what their social standing is, can be altered for the sake of themselves and world's natural environment. Ethics and morals are important considerations wherever genetics, whether in plants, animals or humans, are considered. A prominent argument against my ideas for the human race would be that to change our genetics is an unnatural act. Others may say that cost will put developed countries over the developing world. The slippery slope argument could be put into action whereby research of this sort could lead to the birth of much more dangerous technology. However, my personal opinion is that ultimately, this field of research is for the wellbeing of the human race. With freedom and technology comes choice and with that choice comes great responsibility. I think once you have the option to change something, if you choose not to change it, you are responsible for the consequences that will lead from your decision. In a world where our population is showing signs of exponential growth, I think it is time we changed the human instead of the land and finally take the strain away from the natural environment.