While we strive to read the book of the universe, sometimes we look to the heavens, sometimes into the depths of the earth. Yet often the greatest lessons are hidden in the smallest creatures. The truth contained in a drop of honey may serve as a source of contemplation deeper than an entire library. When one looks closely at the bee, it is not merely an insect but appears as a teacher, an engineer, a doctor, an economist, a sociologist, a historian, and beyond all these, a sage.

The Qur’an presents this reality in the most eloquent way. In Surah al-Nahl it is stated:

“And your Lord inspired the bees: ‘Make homes in the mountains, the trees, and in what people construct. Then eat from all the fruits and follow the ways your Lord has made easy [for you].’ From their bellies emerges a liquid of varying colors, in which there is healing for mankind. Surely in this is a sign for people who reflect.” (al-Nahl, 16:68–69)

These two verses carry not only biological insights about the bee, but also signs of cosmic order, the interconnectedness of sciences, and humanity’s journey of learning. The final emphasis in the verse is no coincidence: “Indeed in this is a sign for a people who reflect.” This message is not only for biologists, but also for those engaged in different branches of knowledge, for all who produce ideas and endure the pains of thought.

Qur’anic, Biblical, and Torahic Perspectives

It is remarkable that the Qur’an singles out the bee. Surah al-Nahl is the 16th chapter in the Qur’an, and intriguingly, the honeybee’s chromosome number is also 16 (Çapan & Yılmaz, 2013). The verbs addressing the bee in the verse are in the feminine form, indicating that the work of producing honey, constructing the comb, and maintaining the hive is carried out by female worker bees—a fact fully confirmed by modern zoology (Çapan & Yılmaz, 2013).

The words the Qur’an uses for the bee are not merely descriptive of biology but carry a metaphysical message. The phrase “your Lord inspired the bee” refers not to prophetic revelation but to divine inspiration. The bee’s capacity for navigation, building combs, producing honey, and organizing its social life are all guided by an innate program instilled by God. In modern biology we call this instinct, but the Qur’an described it centuries ago with the more profound word wahy, which is the Arabic for both “revelation” (divine words revealed to Prophets as scripture) and “inspiration” (of a person or animal guided to do something) (Çapan & Yılmaz, 2013).

The verse also mentions: “From their bellies emerges a drink of varying colors.” This refers not only to honey’s diversity but also to the bee’s production of wax, propolis, royal jelly, and venom (Çapan & Yılmaz, 2013). Modern research has confirmed that each of these products contains unique healing properties for human health: honey’s antibacterial and antioxidant activity, propolis’ immune-strengthening effects, royal jelly’s role in hormonal and metabolic regulation, wax’s antiseptic qualities, and bee venom’s use in treating rheumatic diseases all testify to the miraculous depth of this Qur’anic statement (Bogdanov, 2017).

Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) also emphasized honey as a healing source: “Hold fast to these two remedies: honey and the Qur’an” (Ibn Majah, Medicine, 3452). Thus, honey is cited as nourishment for the body while the Qur’an is guidance for the soul.

In the Biblical and Torahic traditions, honey is likewise recognized as a source of nourishment and healing. The Book of Proverbs describes honey as both bodily and spiritual medicine: “Eat honey, my child, for it is good, and the honeycomb is sweet to your taste” (Prov. 24:13). Jewish exegetes note that this verse links the physical sweetness of honey with the strengthening of the heart and mind. Another verse states, “Pleasant words are like a honeycomb, sweetness to the soul and healing to the bones” (Prov. 16:24), further connecting honey with restoration and well-being. Across these scriptures, honey functions as both remedy and symbol, its sweetness reflecting divine kindness and its healing properties pointing to the Creator’s wisdom woven into nature.

The Qur’an’s reference to the bee offers not only a biological reality but also a methodology for learning across disciplines. Through the bee, we can open the doors of anatomy, physiology, ecology, engineering, chemistry, sociology, economics, history, and more. The phrase “a sign for a people who reflect” points precisely to this multidimensionality.

In its smallness, the bee carries the vastness of the universe. A biologist sees its indispensable role in ecosystems. An engineer marvels at the geometric perfection of the comb. A doctor discovers the healing potential of honey and other products. An economist studies the hive’s efficiency model. A sociologist admires its flawless division of labor. A historian explores how civilizations used honey. A teacher presents the bee’s diligence and sacrifice as a moral example. Each discipline finds in this tiny creature profound lessons about life and creation.

Bees and honey through different professions

1. The biologist’s perspective: Anatomy of creation

To a biologist, the bee is more than an insect; it is the heartbeat of ecosystems. Bees are responsible for up to 80% of pollination. Without them, biodiversity, food production, and the survival of countless plants and animals would collapse.

The bee’s anatomy is astonishing. Its body is divided into head, thorax, and abdomen. The abdomen, made of eight segments, functions like a factory line producing honey, wax, royal jelly, propolis, and venom. Its wings, four when resting, hook together like Velcro to form two during flight, enabling remarkable aerodynamic efficiency. Bees not only make honey, but they also build combs, regulate hive temperature, process pollen, and feed their young.

Fossil evidence shows that bees have existed for about 103 million years (Engel, 2011). Surviving climate changes and mass extinctions, they are living witnesses of Earth’s history. For the biologist, bees represent both the evolutionary stability and the ecological balance of a perfectly created organism.

2. The doctor’s perspective: A source of healing

To physicians, bee products are nature’s pharmacy. The Qur’an’s words “in which there is healing for mankind” (16:69) are affirmed by modern medicine.

Honey’s antibacterial properties have gained significance in an age of antibiotic resistance (Mandal & Mandal, 2011). Honey accelerates wound healing and combats resistant hospital infections. Its antioxidant and anti-inflammatory actions boost immunity. It is used in managing wounds, gastrointestinal disorders, cardiovascular and neurological diseases, cancer, and diabetes.

Propolis offers antiviral, antifungal, and antibacterial protection (Sforcin & Bankova, 2011). Royal jelly supports hormonal balance, and bee venom has shown promise in treating rheumatoid arthritis and multiple sclerosis (Wehbe et al., 2019).

The concept of “medical-grade honey” is now firmly established in modern medicine. FDA (Food and Drug Administration in the US) and CE (Conformité Européenne) have recognized it as a wound-healing medical device since 2008, and it has been patented in various formulations (Molamohammadi et al., 2019). Recently, international research collaborations have refined its standards further (Peters et al., 2025; Ozturk et al.).

With its low glycemic index, honey can be a safe sweetener for diabetics (Erejuwa et al., 2012). Prophet Muhammad’s (peace be upon him) and the biblical emphasis on honey’s healing aligns with modern clinical findings, affirming bees as biological and medical miracles.

3. The economist’s perspective: Efficiency and sustainability

For economists, bees embody an ideal production model. When collecting nectar, they always choose the most efficient source; if a flower’s sugar content falls below 17%, they no longer visit it. The hive produces multiple products—honey, wax, pollen, royal jelly, propolis, venom—without polluting, indeed enriching, the environment.

One kilogram of wax requires 8–10 kilograms of honey to produce, yet bees manage this with extraordinary efficiency, constructing hexagonal combs that maximize storage with minimal material. For humanity, the lesson is clear: true economics is not about producing more at any cost but about maximizing benefit from minimal resources.

4. The engineer’s perspective: Geometry and technology

Bees are among nature’s most ingenious engineers. The hexagonal comb, the most efficient geometric shape, has been constructed flawlessly for millions of years (Pirk et al., 2004).

Hive climate control is equally remarkable: bees fan their wings to ventilate, heat, or cool the hive as needed. Their wing-hooking mechanism has inspired aeronautical engineers. Bees also navigate using polarized sunlight and Earth’s magnetic field (Rossel & Wehner, 1984). Wax production itself is a marvel of energy efficiency: with only 40 grams of wax, bees build combs capable of storing 2 kilograms of honey.

5. The sociologist’s perspective: Social order in the hive

Bees form a “superorganism.” The individual exists for the community. Their division of labor—nurse bees, cleaners, guards, foragers, ventilators, attendants to the queen—is flawless.

When swarming, they display remarkable collective decision-making. Scout bees investigate locations, report by dancing, and the colony follows the majority choice—a model of natural democracy (Seeley, 2010). Hive boundaries are also strictly enforced: bees serve their own hive, rejecting outsiders to protect health and security.

6. The historian’s perspective: From remedy to civilization

Throughout history, honey and wax have been indispensable. In ancient Egypt honey was used in mummification; in Greece and Rome for medicine; in China and India as a remedy.

For millennia, honey was primarily a medicine. Only with the domestication of beekeeping did it become common on household tables. Early on, honey could only be “hunted,” making it rare and precious. The Egyptians (and others) called it the “Nectar of the Gods.” Indeed, honey is one of the few substances used medicinally across all known civilizations.

Hippocrates, Galen, and Avicenna all prescribed honey-based remedies (Crane, 1999). In every era, honey has been sought not just for taste, but for healing.

7. The geographer’s perspective: Mapping the world

Bees read the Earth like a map. They navigate using polarized light and Earth’s magnetic field (Towne & Gould, 1988). They have shaped vegetation worldwide; without them, most flowering plants could not reproduce, and human and animal survival would be at risk. For geographers, bees are invisible agents of biosphere sustainability.

8. The teacher’s perspective: Diligence and learning

For teachers, bees embody lessons in diligence, sacrifice, and cooperation. Each bee fulfills its duty with precision. Young bees learn tasks from elders. Duties—nursing, cleaning, ventilation, guarding, foraging—are distributed and executed with discipline.

Their dance language, conveying direction and distance of food sources, is a masterpiece of natural communication and instruction (von Frisch, 1967).

9. The psychologist’s perspective: Serenity of the soul

Beekeeping offers therapy. Studies show it reduces stress and strengthens bonds with nature. It has even been used effectively for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in veterans (Jordan et al., 2011). The hive’s hum, the fragrance of honey, and immersion in nature bring profound peace—a “Zen effect” for the soul.

Bee-honey-cosmos Connection

The bee, in its tiny body, reflects the order of the cosmos. Hive building, foraging, honey-making are not just biological acts; they are reflections of the universal laws. A colony functions as a superorganism: each member fulfills its role, sustaining the whole.

The Qur’an’s statement “your Lord inspired the bee” (16:68) underscores that all creatures act within divinely guided programs. Migrating birds, web-weaving spiders, navigating fish—all testify to this inspiration. The bee, then, symbolizes not only its own order but the harmony of the cosmos itself.

Reflection: Doors of knowledge

The Qur’an’s closing phrase, “a sign for a people who reflect,” indicates that the bee is a laboratory for all sciences. Biologists study its anatomy, engineers its geometry, economists its efficiency, doctors its healing, sociologists its social order, historians its cultural role, geographers its ecological impact, teachers its lessons in diligence, psychologists its calming therapy.

Strikingly, as science advances, Qur’anic insights about bees become more evident. Their use of polarized light, their hive climate control, the efficiency of wax—all align with modern discoveries. The Qur’an’s message does not fade with time but renews itself as knowledge grows.

Conclusion: Great lessons from a small creature

Reflecting on bees and honey leads beyond biology to the meaning of existence. Honey is healing for the body, bees are lessons for the soul. For thousands of years, honey was used first as medicine, only later as food. Today modern medicine formally recognizes “medical-grade honey,” echoing the Qur’an’s declaration that “in it is healing for mankind.”

The bee, a small creature, humbles humankind by revealing both our greatness and fragility. We build telescopes and microscopes to unlock the universe’s secrets, yet often overlook the truths embodied in a tiny insect. In the bee we see diligence, sacrifice, order, healing, efficiency, knowledge, and wisdom.

Thus, bees and honey remind humanity not only of nature but of the Creator of the cosmos. The verses in Surah al-Nahl are an invitation to interdisciplinary reflection. Our duty is to heed that call, to think deeply, and to learn.

So, why not look at these two verses through the lens of your own profession, and set sail into the ocean of contemplation?

References

• Çapan, E., & Yılmaz, İ. (2013). Kur’an’da Arılar ve Bal. Kur’an ve İlmi Hakikatler -2. Işık Yayınları. ISBN: 978975278533.
• Crane, E. (1999). The World History of Beekeeping and Honey Hunting. Routledge.
• von Frisch, K. (1967). The Dance Language and Orientation of Bees. Harvard University Press.
• Engel, M.S. (2011). Systematic Melissopalynology and the Fossil Record of Bees. Annual Review of Entomology, 56: 221–238.
• Mandal, M.D., & Mandal, S. (2011). Honey: its medicinal property and antibacterial activity. Asian Pacific Journal of Tropical Biomedicine, 1(2), 154–160.
• Peters, L.J.F., Majtan, J., Mossialos, D., Szweda, P., Mateescu, C., Ozturk, F., Wagener, F.A.D.T., Cremers, N.A.J. (2025). Medical-grade honey: its definition and refined standards. Journal of Wound Care, 34(6), 412–423. doi:10.12968/jowc.2024.0206
• Sforcin, J.M., & Bankova, V. (2011). Propolis: is there a potential for the development of new drugs? Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 133(2), 253–260.
• Wehbe, R., et al. (2019). Bee venom: Overview of main compounds and bioactivities for therapeutic interests. Molecules, 24(16), 2997.
• Erejuwa, O.O., Sulaiman, S.A., & Wahab, M.S. (2012). Honey: a novel antioxidant. Molecules, 17(4), 4400–4423.
• Pirk, C.W.W., Hepburn, H.R., Radloff, S.E. (2004). Honeybee combs: construction through a liquid equilibrium process? Naturwissenschaften, 91, 350–353.
• Rossel, S., & Wehner, R. (1984). How bees analyse the polarization patterns in the sky. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 154(5), 607–615.
• Seeley, T.D. (2010). Honeybee Democracy. Princeton University Press.
• Towne, W.F., & Gould, J.L. (1988). The spatial orientation of foraging honeybees. Naturwissenschaften, 75(10), 564–566.
• Jordan, J., et al. (2011). Beekeeping as therapy for veterans with PTSD. Journal of Agricultural Therapy, 3(1), 25–34.
• Bogdanov, S. (2017). Honey composition and health benefits. Bee Product Science.
• Molamohammadi, M., et al. (2019). Honey-based wound dressings: From traditional use to modern applications. Pharmaceutical Biology, 57(1), 1–12.

Decisions within the cell: mathematical and algorithmic character

In order to enable Escherichia coli bacteria to use lactose (disaccharide), the genetic information of the enzymes that have role in transporting the lactose into the cell and converting it into glucose is coded in the bacteria’s genome. The binding and decoding structure which enables the genes to be transcribed at the right time in the appropriate amount is called the operon. The operons are model mechanisms which work on the synthesis or destruction of every chemical molecule (metabolite). One of these, lactose operon, is a good example that demonstrates how the decoding information contained in DNA is regulated and controlled in the bacteria. E. Coli is equipped with a system that distinguishes lactose and glucose when they are combined and this system functions perfectly. Primarily, all of the existing glucose is consumed before the start of the production of those enzymes that splits lactose into glucose and galactose. It has been discovered that this operation in the bacteria is followed by an interaction between DNA sequences located on the upper part of the lactose gene and various molecules. The DNA sequences on the upper part of the gene are the signals that format DNA for transcription. These signals cause the decoding of the genes that interact with the transcription factors. While some of the signals in the relevant region of the genes are common in most genes, some others are specific.

The most basic interaction system of the genome-proteome (all proteins in cell) is the suppression of the lactose operon that is observed in E. Coli. This process depends on DNA-protein interactions which are based on a mutual relationship and it requires the existence of repeated DNA sequences. Tetramer lac1 protein control the lac operon binds to four repeating binding regions on the DNA. Since one dimer can be connected to one operator sequence, two dimers are connected to two operator region units, and as a result the result is a loop formation in the DNA structure. Consequently, because of the access of RNA polymerase to the promoter region, the pre-coding process of genes is hindered. If the hindering protein is in the form of a monomer, the operator displays a weak interaction with half of the sequence. In the dimer form there is a stable binding. For this reason, many procedures in the cell occur by working together and making a union of molecules. Since the loop shape of DNA stabilizes the structure, it prevents the RNA polymerase from being connected to the promoter region. In order to eliminate the blockage on the lac operon, the mutual relationship must be prevented by stimulatory molecules, such as lactose.

There is metabolic information in cells that measure and control the physiological condition. The sequences on the regulatory region of the lactose operator and the data concerning the physiological condition of the lactose and glucose metabolisms are analyzed in the cell which perceives the presence and the amount of glucose through the changes in the system that transports the glucose into the cell. The molecule that announces the presence of glucose in E.coli is cyclic-AMP and concentration of this molecule in the cell is inversely proportional to glucose. The level of this signal affects both the coding and regulation of genomic information. The protein that transports glucose into the cell contains a phosphate group; as it transports glucose into the cell, this carrier protein phosphorylates the glucose molecule thereby loosing its phosphate group. As a result, the proportion phosphorylated transport protein and those without phosphate provides information about the glucose level in the cell. The phosphorylated form of the carrier protein activates the adenosine cyclase enzyme. Through this enzyme, ATP is converted into cyclic-AMP. The cyclic-AMP level increases in the cell. Consequently, the situation that concerns the increasing concentration of the phosphorylated transfer protein and the cyclic-AMP is interpreted as non-existence of glucose in the cell. The CRP protein that binds to regulatory region of the lactose can only bind to this region in the presence of cyclic-AMP. The cyclic-AMP-CRP complex which is tied to the promoter region of the lactose gene speeds up the transcription of the lactose operon. Transcription rarely happens when there is no lactose. This is because the lactose repressor protein lacI, hinders the RNA polymerase reaching the lactose promoter region by binding to the operator of regulating region. The cell can sense the existence of lactose in a circuitous manner. Low levels of coded Permease enzyme on the lacY region transfer some lactose into the cell. The coded beta galactosidase on the lac Z region alters them into a sugar called allolactose. The allolactose is bound to the lacI repressor protein and changes its conformation. The allolactose –lacI repressor complex can not bind to the operator region. The promoter region, called LacP, of Lactose operon is set free for transcription. In fact, every one of these molecular interactions is an incident of information being transferred. All these incidents demonstrate that an algorithm (If there is no glucose and only lactose exists, then transcribe the lacZYA enzyme) that is able to distinguish the difference between two sugars exists in bacteria cells and that it functions perfectly.

In short, the signal transfer in lactose operon occurs with the activation of chemical molecules that represent the experimental data pertaining to the physiological environment of the cells. For example, the levels of cyclic-AMP, allolactose and protein phosphorylation indicate the existence of glucose and lactose. The regulating network system, on the other hand, combines many aspects of cell activity (transport, enzymology, energy metabolism) in order to make the transcription decision. Briefly, it is impossible to show that arranging the order of the genome in any cell occurs independently from physiological or biochemical processes.

The principle of “using combinations in the arrangement of specific binding regions” is commonly used in metabolic signal networks that control cell physiology and the differentiation of cell (morphogenesis) that are oriented towards tissue formation. Such an interaction takes place on these network paths between proteins and DNA sequences to ensure that the cell is allowed to process molecular information and to calculate whether it will transcribe a specific genetic sequence. The common binding regions on DNA have vital roles in the coordinated control of various genetic loci, and it is then that the decoding of genes in a harmonious (symphonic) manner becomes possible. Various combinations of these regions are also used in making more complex decisions. As an example, protein-binding regions that are involved in the lowest level of genomic indicators have a role in decoding genes. The proteins that bind to these DNA sequences can become active when they form a group that has an interaction with more than one protein molecule. For instance, each one of the lacO and CRP regions on the lactose operon shows a palindromic sequence structure (the DNA sequence remains the same when the sequence is read from either end). Similarly, the lacP region has two lower regions that are appropriate for the binding of RNA polymerase and are separated from each other by a 16–17 base pair. In all living beings, the proteins and DNA sequences interact with each other. For example, the LacI repressor, which is in charge of controlling the lactose operon,has separate regions for not only binding the DNA region, but also for creating protein-protein binding as well as the binding of allolactose stimulator. The unique combinations of this region on the genome sequence result in a unique protein synthesis.

The genetic engineering procedures in cells

Some of the genetic engineering procedures that take place in the cells are as follows: Recombination systems (mutual material exchange) that are observed in homologous chromosomes (the chromosome pair derived from each parent), recombination specific to a particular region; separation of DNA sequences specific to those regions (fusion of gene pieces, VDJ recombination of genes as appointed in the immune system); the existence of systems that combine end points in non-homologous chromosomes (the binding of broken DNA parts, the formation of new genetic fusion, the formation of sequences that are open to hyper mutations); DNA transposons (DNA sequences that can insert themselves into different DNA sequences or can copy themselves there and leave a copy); the RNA sector that can control the transcription and signals that are responsible for the maturing transcription; the signal sequences that cause the rearrangement of neighboring DNA sequences (such as amplification, deletion, and inversion); and finally, controlling the transcription with micro RNAs.

None of the above phenomena which cause in-cell changes are random. Each of the genetic engineering functions is planned in a way that makes specific changes and arrangements. In the processes of insertion, i.e. when a specific amount of DNA is added to a different region of the genome, or deletion, i.e. when a specific amount of DNA is severed, there should be arranging, cutting and coding sequences that will bind the cut part to its new place in an appropriate way. On the genome, special regions that are suitable to mutation are created in order to produce variety and to respond to adaptation. When all these molecular engineering functions are thoroughly analyzed, it can be seen that even the point mutations, which up until now were thought to have happened by chance, are not coincidence; rather, they occur through the divinely designed genetic engineering functions. Most of the mutations that are thought to occur by chance in the cell have been removed by the repair systems and fault correction functions in the cell. Thus, the changeability and variety in DNA sequences are shaped by the power and will of God the Almighty according to a planned, programmed genetic schedule.

The R&D department of the genome

Depending on the stimulation received, God-given genetic engineering functions are arranged in the cells and a decision is made about which parts of the genome should be changed. Some of the changes inside the cell appear on a large scale. Inside the genome, different and far removed regions can be rearranged. The changes are related to one another and are in no way disconnected. One mechanism can produce more than one change. The reconstruction of changes in some organisms is a part of the normal life cycle. In the Cornelius protozoan, the embryonic genome is regularly decomposed to a thousand slices. Then, through processing and rearranging in the cells, a functional genome with a distinct system structure is created.

While the genome is reshaped, there is the production of new different sequences rather than the sequences that they regulate and which have the code for the continuity of existing phenotype features. The organization of the genome along the system base emerges with the functions of the genetic molecules, such as cut-paste-rearrange. For example, in immune system cells, there is a planned disposition to mutation and the specific antibodies are rearranged to recognize an infinite number of different antigens. The life cycles of lymphocytes demonstrates both the control of the DNA rearrangement improvements and the specificity of mutations. It is estimated that the new sequences which do not change the existing structure operate like a research center for the genome.

The God-given genetic engineering systems imposed in the cells, when analyzed from the perspective of the population, are molecular mechanisms that carry out basic changes to ensure adaptation. The duty of reconstructing the genome during adaptation has been assigned to the divine genetic engineering functions imposed in the cell. The divine genetic engineering tools and mechanisms, which are placed in the cell with active nucleic acid elements that carry information, change the genome in parallel to the changes in both the inner and outer environment; this change occurs not only on one point of the genome, but rather on every point of genome. The functions of the DNA elements, which allow for the exchange of genetic information (both horizontally and vertically, in species and between species, between types and classes), are arranged by domestic cell signal transfer and data process networks. The signal network systems that are in charge of rearranging and controlling in-cell procedures not only control when the genome is rearranged, at the same time it decides where these rearrangements take place inside the genome. The selection of the target is planned, it is not random. For instance, R1 and R2 retrotransposons which are established in the DNA region that codes 28S ribosomal RNA have specific recognition regions and the information of endonuclease cutting DNA region on specific points that it had settled down. Eukaryotic cells have more complex decision making systems. The cells continuously create responses in response to DNA damage, cell physiology and outer-cell reproduction factors. One of the critical questions and answers is whether the damage will be repaired or whether programmed death will take place. If the cell avoids giving an answer, then genetic indecisiveness appears and abnormal cell reproduction, i.e., cancer, begins. From this perspective, cancer is a result of pathology in the signal and information process in the cell. The changes in gene expression without any changes in the DNA sequence (epigenetic) as well as the divine genetic engineering functions are clear proof demonstrating that every single action in the cell occurs with a certain aim that is based on knowledge and calculations.

Hamza Aydin holds a PhD in biology.

References

• Shapiro J. A.(2001). “Genome Formatting for Computation and Function: Genome Organization and Reorganization in Evolution: Formatting for Computation and Function.” Presented at the “Contextualizing the Genome” symposium, Ghent University, Belgium, November 25–28, 2001 (Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci., in press).
• –. (2005). “A 21st century view of evolution: genome system architecture, repetitive DNA, and natural genetic engineering.” Gene 345 (2005) pp. 91–100.
• Shapiro J. A. and Sternberg R V (2005). “Why repetitive DNA is essential to genome function.” Biol. Rev. (2005), 80, pp. 1–24. Cambridge Philosophical Society. DOI: 10.1017/S1464793104006657.

In general, the most common approach in tissue engineering is to develop tools as needed. Physicians treat patients and define the requirements for a better cure. Then, biologists study the targeted problem and learn what the mechanism is that caused the failure. Later, chemists and materials scientists manufacture the tools needed to treat the problem. Finally, the tools are delivered to doctors to treat the patients. Thus, tissue engineering requires a good understanding of how body parts work and come into existence, and this involves precise and sensitive application. Precise, aware and regular study of the interactions involved in tissues and organs must be practiced by the researchers who are interested in developing techniques for the manufacture of potential body parts. One of the first scientific approaches used for tissue engineering is to simply inject the body with molecules, such as growth factors, which are known to promote organ formation.

The growth factors are naturally occurring proteins which are assigned for cell proliferation and differentiation. Different parts of the body require different types of growth factors to signal to the cells to multiply or to replace the cells which have died or have been damaged. For example, it has been discovered that bone morphogenic proteins are responsible for the beginning of bone cell reproduction. For someone with a fractured bone that can not heal on its own within a reasonable period of time, the injection of bone growth factors to the site can direct the body to where bone cells are needed to be produced to repair the fracture.

In more severe conditions, the body may not receive the signal only with a simple injection of the growth factors. In this case, there is a need for more intricate treatment. Another way to treat organ malfunction starts with the harvesting of cells from the patient. The harvested cells can be multiplied in an artificial scaffold to eventually be implanted into the wound site. Because cells inhabit a different world than we do, we need a way to speak their language. The artificial scaffold should provide everything a cell needs and be able to direct the targeted cells toward the desired purpose. Basic knowledge gained from biology can help us to design potential artificial environments for cells.

A critical challenge in tissue engineering is how to design and make the artificial scaffolds. The cells must be fed through the blood vessel and are grown in the scaffold by the body; the scaffold should be able to communicate with the cells and finally the scaffold should disappear when its mission has been completed. The best example of a perfect scaffold is the natural environment of the cells, the extracellular matrix (ECM). The ECM provides support and anchorage for the cells and regulates communication between cells. There are various biological signals found in the ECM that help cell survival. For example, proteins called collagens provide mechanical support for cells through adhesive proteins in the ECM and the handles on the cell surface, known as integrins. Cell adhesion is crucial for cell survival and proliferation. Growth factors are also found in the ECM for cell organization. Some growth factors promote blood vessel formation, which can provide nutrients for cells. Therefore, a simple artificial environment should include various biological signals found in the ECM.

Currently, there are natural and synthetic scaffolds that are being used to generate the optimal environment for cells. Natural polymers such as collagen, chitosan or glycosaminoglycans, and synthetic polymers, including polylactic acid, polyglycolic acid, polycaprolactone or self-assembled nanofibers, are some of the materials used or considered for scaffold production. Natural polymers can be obtained easily, however biological contamination is a concern since they are produced using components from animals or microorganisms. Synthetic polymers can usually avoid the problem of contamination. Sometimes the ability to process the polymers can be problematic. Researchers have developed self-assembled nanofibers to overcome the problems that arise with synthetic and natural polymers. These nanofibers are composed of small molecules which are programmed to come together under control and to form larger structures. The nanofibers in the solution can form a three-dimensional network and convert into a self-supporting gel which can encapsulate cells as an artificial scaffold. In general, small bioactive molecules can be conjugated to the self-assembled molecules or can be encapsulated in situ in the 3-D network of fibers.

One of the recent uses of tissue engineering is to replace tissue that has been damaged by cancer. Cancer surgery is one of the most challenging types of surgery in that the defective tissue must be reconstructed afterwards. Improvement in surgical technology gives the chance of transferring a tissue from different sites of the body but unfortunately most of the time it is not the same tissue, and does not have the same texture or function. Reconstructing a resected tongue or the feeding tube is possible with the use of skin from the leg or forearm. But this skin does not provide the normal mucosal function, so it does not enable taste or sense to be perceived in the same way nor does it produce mucus in the same way. Together with advances in tissue engineering surgeons have started using the tissue-engineered mucosa of patients to reconstruct the mouth and feeding passage defects, instead of using the skin from chest, leg or forearm skin. These clinical applications of tissue engineering are in their very early stages, but it would not be surprising if we were able to reconstruct a lost organ from a similar one in the future. It would be exciting to be able to replace the tongue of a tongue cancer patient with a brand new tongue grown from his/her own tissues produced in a laboratory. Tasting the same…sensing the same…moving and even articulating the same…instead of having a piece of meat from another part of the body…

Innovative and imaginative work which has been inspired by natural materials demonstrates how the treatment of organ malfunctions is feasible. Efforts in biotechnology to develop tissue-engineered products will benefit many people who are searching for a healthier life. Potentially, in the near future, tissue-engineered products will be more widely used to treat bone fractures, serious skin burns, spinal cord injuries, diabetes, and heart diseases. Before implanting the tissue-engineered products, it is vital that there be extensive testing of the materials to be used. Toxicology and efficacy studies should be performed on the materials to prevent damage to the original healthy cells, and the new cells and regenerated tissue must be compared to original healthy cells and tissue.

Mustafa Guler has a PhD in chemistry. He is currently a research associate at Northwestern University, Chicago, IL. Joseph Coreman is a medical doctor at the Ohio State University Medical College, Columbus, OH.

References

• Khariwala SS, Vivek PP, Lorenz RR, Esclamado RM, Wood B, Strome M, Alam DS. Swallowing outcomes after microvascular head and neck reconstruction: a prospective review of 191 cases. Laryngoscope. 2007 Aug; 117(8):1359-63.
• Sauerbier S, Gutwald R, Wiedmann-Al-Ahmad M, Lauer G, Schmelzeisen R. Clinical application of tissue-engineered transplants. Part I: mucosa. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2006 Dec; 17(6):625-32.
• Hotta T, Yokoo S, Terashi H, Komori T. Clinical and histopathological analysis of healing process of intraoral reconstruction with ex vivo produced oral mucosa equivalent. Kobe J Med Sci. 2007;53(1-2):1-14.
• Ratner, Buddy D. “Biomaterials Science – An Introduction to Materials in Medicine” Elsevier, 2004.
• Lanza, Robert P., Robert S. Langer, William L. Chick, “Principles of Tissue Engineering”, Academic Press, 1997.
• Alberts, Bruce, Alexander Johnson, Julian Lewis, Martin Raff, Keith Roberts, Peter Walter, “Molecular Biology of the Cell” Garland Science, 2002.

The role of mathematics in understanding nature

Mathematics is a discipline of thought. It helps to develop our way of thinking and is an exercise in improving our intelligence. Mathematics can be considered as another kind of language, a language very different from that of a spoken language. When it is hard to convey our thoughts in terms of words, or our words become insufficient to express our thoughts, mathematics may be used as an alternative. On some occasions, expressing ideas via mathematics might be more concise, much clearer and more understandable. Although mathematics is considered to be a separate branch of science, in fact it is related to all branches of science. Nowadays, even in biological and social sciences, extensive studies are being conducted using mathematics.

Engineering was one of the earliest application fields of mathematics. It has strong links with mathematics as well as physics. Many engineering problems can be considered as an application of mathematics and hence applied mathematicians and engineers share common research areas. Engineers try to improve the quality of life by designing new products and in the design process, geometry and mathematics play a vital role.

Since the first day of existence on the world, mankind has tried to understand and formulate the surroundings and events that take place around them. They have investigated the world and the cosmos and accumulated knowledge. Each question that was answered yielded more questions to be answered and the more the knowledge that was acquired the better the extent of our ignorance about the universe was understood.

The universe has been established in a very complex orderly manner. The magnificent order observed cannot be expressed well in words, but may also be expressed using mathematics. A person who develops their knowledge of mathematics can understand more about this supreme order. For example, the universal gravitational law, which describes the movement of planets, can best be understood through mathematical equations, while the solutions of the equations yield the well-known elliptic paths. The concept of infinity that is attributed to the Creator can be realized through the concept of infinity that is frequently used in mathematics. So mathematics is an essential tool in developing our understanding of the nature and universe. It is essential also in applying the principles of physical laws in nature to improve our quality of life. The design of an airplane requires extensive mathematical calculations and applications of physical laws.

Finally, it should be noted that mathematics also has its limits, as it is something that has been developed by human beings and may not be sufficient to express the total order and all physical laws. Chaotic motion, a very complex order, was developed recently to understand some phenomena that do not obey the rules of deterministic motion. A daily example of such motion would be atmospheric motion. With even super computers and satellite technology, the path of the hurricane Katrina could not be predicted precisely due to its largely chaotic behavior and these errors cost thousands of lives.

Basic engineering principles and their applications in nature

First, let’s briefly describe some of the fundamental engineering courses and their aims. Dynamics is the science of motion. It models motion, describing the relation among displacement, velocity and acceleration. The specific type of motion and its causes, such as forces, movements, impulses etc. are examined. Dynamics deal with solid bodies while fluid mechanics basically deals with liquids and gases.. In the context of fluid mechanics the rest states of fluids as well as their motions are investigated. The strength of materials deals basically with the design of structures and mechanical parts to loading conditions. Under a given loading condition, what would be the best design for withstanding the loads while using the minimum amount of material? Materials science deals basically with the mechanical properties of various materials and the causes (microstructure etc.) of those properties. Proper selection of the materials to perform the required task is another important issue.

Living organisms can also be considered as some sort of design, but of course they are different from man-made designs. Living organisms, whether they are plants, animals or human beings, are designed to perform a specific predetermined task. The organism has to move, find food, safely operate and resist the forces that act on it throughout its life, and it must reproduce. Therefore, organisms have to be designed (or more precisely created) according to the principles of engineering. The development of technology drew attention to creatures and the underlying engineering principles in their structures. Extensive research on living creatures revealed a clear conclusion: Designs applied in nature are much more sophisticated then the ones humans come up with.

Bernoulli’s principle is a fundamental principle in fluid mechanics. Basically, the principle states that when the velocity of fluid increases the pressure drops and visa versa. The lift force generated in the wing of a plane is explained with this principle. Air separates in front of the wing and reattaches at the back. When the upper surface of the wing is slightly curved and the bottom flatter, the air particles in the upper part travel a further distance at a higher velocity and meet the particles traveling under the wing at the back. The relatively higher velocity on top causes a pressure difference in the lift direction and this lift force balances the weight of the plane. Many applications of Bernoulli’s principle can be found in living organisms. A fish moving in water is a good example. In particular, fish that swim at great speeds, like the tuna, have distinctive body shapes: The mouth of the fish is at the front where the fluid comes to rest and the pressure is very high, making the fluid intake of oxygen easier. The heart is located at the minimum pressure point to make it easier for it to beat. The eyes are located on a precise saddle point, a place which is not affected by velocity changes. Since the pressure is constant for all ranges of velocities, vision is not distorted by movement. Another example is the human body. When one breathes in the fluid velocity in the nose increases and pressure drops. The outer pressure is higher than the inner pressure and the walls tend to collapse. If bones were found at the tip of the nose, they might easily break when excessive force was present. We need some other material to sustain the shape yet be elastic enough not to break down. Cartilage is the best choice in this case, as it has both strength and elasticity. Our ears are also made from the same material. If bones were used instead of cartilage in our ears, resting our head on one side would be painful or even cause damage to the ears.

Insect flight is another important issue and has attracted considerable research recently. Fluid scientists now realize that insect flight is much more developed than our flight techniques. Turbulence is the main issue. In turbulent flow, the fluids move in erratic paths colliding with each other, forming eddies and irregularities. This is a dangerous state, especially for planes, and increases the friction forces between fluid and structure. Therefore the maintenance of a regular flow (laminar flow) over the wings is advantageous. However, all insects benefit from turbulence and some portion of their lift is gained from eddies that are formed over their wings. Mechanical insect robots are built to understand insect flight. Insects have movable elastic wings, but aircraft only have immovable rigid wings. Movable elastic wings would certainly improve the flight of planes and their maneuverability, but extensive research has to be done before these designs can be safely implemented.

The bumps on the fins and heads of some whales are not accidents of nature. They were given to them by the Creator for some very special purposes. They decrease the friction (drag) force by 10% and increase the lift by 5%.1 When some have the effect of decreasing drag, they can also decrease lift and visa versa. This effect of both decreasing drag and increasing lift, which can be observed in whales, is very uncommon in fluid mechanics.

Streamlining is a very important issue for an object that moves in a fluid. Fluid particles move around an object that follows a path. Roughly speaking these paths are streamlines (in a steady motion) and it is a general rule that abrupt distortion of these streamlines should be avoided. Smooth changes in the streamline help to reduce the friction force between the object and fluid. All organisms, particularly those that move at greater speeds, have been created in accordance to streamlining principles. In these you can find many species of birds and fish, such as dolphins, sharks, whales etc. The friction reduction caused by the shape of a dolphin is still a controversial issue in science and the underlying mechanism has not yet been well understood.

An example of the strength of natural materials can now be given. Our bones are optimum structures, combining strength with lightness. In modern buildings, 60-70% of the buildings consist of the skeletons, which carry the loads and moments. In our body, our skeleton is only 1/7th of our body weight. Bones have inspired a new generation of lightweight structures. For instance, a bridge inspired by the backbone was recently designed.2 When a longitudinal cross-section is taken from a femur, some curved lines are observed. Recent numerical simulations revealed that these lines are to be found in one exact place and their configuration increases the strength of the bone. Our backbone and the muscles around it withstand very high loads, equivalent to 7,000 Newtons or approximately 700 kilograms of weight.3 The bones of mammals are hollow inside to increase strength. The inner to outer ratio of the radii is at the optimum range, between 0.4 and 0.7.4

Hardness is another important issue in some applications. Seashells are the leaders in this issue. Their microstructures are being investigated under electron microscopes to invent new materials with extreme hardness properties. Micro-cracks inside a material grow over time, finally leading to failure. This is a major problem in turbine blades and this phenomenon is responsible for some plane crashes. In seashells, micro-crack inhibiting mechanisms are inserted to prevent crack growth. Inspired by spider silk and the microstructure of bird feathers, a new generation of bullet-proof waistcoats has been developed.

Owls are very silent flyers; they need to be so in order to approach rodents as rodent ears are highly sensitive to sound. Recent investigations have shown that the special geometry of their wings results in this silent flight. Their feathers are placed to form fringes on their wings. The technology might be mimicked to reduce the noise generated in planes.5

A recent engineering discipline is robotics. There are industrial robots, which are designed to perform some very special tasks. But there are also robots inspired by living organisms. A new robot is designed to mimic caterpillar motion so that it can be stable enough in a hazardous region, pass through small gaps and detect humans who are alive under debris.6 By mimicking the motion and body of a scorpion, a military robot was designed with a camera and sensors to safely operate in a battle region.7 Of course there are human-like robots that are designed to mimic our motion and activities. The developments in robotics teach us a very important lesson: All animals are much more sophisticated in their locomotion, actions, and behavior and it is extremely hard to mimic those. A robot that can move freely like a cat and climb a tree yet maintain its balance has not yet been produced. Our robots are very slow in motion, and their stability in movement is an important technological issue that requires extensive sensors and control designs.

Newly developing engineering branches

As mentioned above, one of the newly developing branches of engineering is robotics. Day by day, better robots are being designed and those designs try to better mimic animals and humans. Some 50 years ago, a human walking might be considered a simple issue, but now we know that comfort in walking and excellent balance in such movement are very complex issues.3 Each new design in robotics adds to our knowledge of understanding animal locomotion and behavior and how miraculous their designs are. Some people think that robots may take control of the world in the future. Yet this is simply not possible: If humans are to design them, there is no way that such machines can be superior to the designers.

Other promising new fields are the MEMS (Micro-electrical machinery systems) and nano-technology. These are design attempts on extremely small scales which actually mimic some micro biological systems and micro-physics. A vertebrate consists of an enormous number of cells, while the chemical and physical events that take place inside the cells and their establishment as a system are crucial parts of staying alive. It is extremely hard to design at the micro and nano scale and it is likely that research in this field will reveal more about understanding the art of God.

Notes

1. M. Le Page, “Speed Bumps Give Humpbacks a Surprise Boost,” New Scientist, 13 January 2001, p. 22.
2. I. Sample, “A Bridge with Backbone,” New Scientist, 16 September 2000, p. 7.
3. R. Mc Neill Alexander, The Human Machine, Colombia University Press, 1992.
4. R. Mc Neill Alexander, Optima for Animals, Princeton University Press, 1996.
5. C. Seife, “Deadly Hush,” New Scientist, 6 march 1999, p. 10.
6. C. Zandonella, “Wriggle into Rubble,” New Scientist, 10 November 2001, p. 22.
7. D. Graham-Rowe, “Walk Like a Scorpion,” New Scientist, 21 April 2001, p. 18.

The discipline in which medicine and engineering truly meet and face new challenges is the field of “biomedical engineering,” an emerging discipline that is only a few decades old. In each sub-specialty of biomedical engineering, researchers study the human body, develop new materials and structures using engineering sciences, either as a treatment method for disease (e.g. artificial bone implants, artificial blood, vascular stents, cardiac valves, etc.) or to diagnose them (e.g. imaging methods and other diagnostic instruments in hospitals). Biomedical engineers face the incredible challenge of developing materials and devices that are compatible with biological systems and capable of working inside the human body to substitute bodily functions. Needless to say, the extreme complexity of the human body makes it impossible to mimic the original system or function of the organs in any way. However, even a poor replacement part or a functional improvement provides great benefit to the patients.

One of the most complex systems of the human body is the nervous system, which consists of the central area (the brain and the spinal cord) and the peripheral parts. The branch of biomedical engineering that deals with the nervous system is “neural engineering.” In this article, we will touch upon a specific subject in the broader area of neural engineering, that is, “neural prosthetics.”1 As the name implies, neural prosthetics is an area where engineering knowledge is utilized to treat neural disorders.

The building blocks of the nervous system are called “neurons.” Neurons generate electric pulses to communicate with each other. The fact that these electric pulses can be elicited by artificial means, i.e. by applying small electric currents to the neurons externally, forms the very foundation of the field of neural prosthetics. Neural engineers can input information into the nervous system by taking advantage of this phenomenon, called “neural stimulation.” Likewise, the information content of neuronal activity can be deciphered by recording the electrical pulses from the neurons and interpreting them according to neuronal function. This two way traffic, monitoring and controlling the neural activity, allows researchers in this field to develop methods of treatment for some sensory, motor, and psychological disorders.

Some of the most successful neural prosthetic applications have been in deep brain stimulation in Parkinson’s disease,

cochlear prosthesis in hearing impairment, bladder emptying and respiration in spinal cord injury, and vagus nerve (10th cranial nerve) stimulation in epilepsy and psychological depression. These are neural prostheses that are readily available as a treatment method for the given ailments. There is a whole host of others that are in the research and development phase. We will review a couple of examples.

In certain diseases of the inner ear hearing is lost as a result of damage to the hair cells inside the cochlea. In normal cochlea the sound information reaches these hair cells after traveling through the ear drum (tympanic membrane) and the structures of the middle ear, causing them to vibrate. This vibration of the hair cells is mechanically transported to the spiral ganglion cells that form the hearing (auditory) nerve. The hearing nerve carries the sound information to the brain in the form of electric pulses. The ganglion cells are healthy and functional even if the entire population of hair cells has been lost as a result of disease. Neural engineers take advantage of the fact that the spiral ganglion cells (which normally accept input from the hair cells) can be electrically stimulated, thus mimicking the function of the hair cells and producing the sensation of sound.2 During a simple surgical operation, the surgeon inserts an electrode into the ear canal which spirals into the lumen of the cochlea so that the sites where the electric current emits from the electrode are adjacent to the spiral ganglion cells (Figure 1). To summarize the principle of the operation; the audio signals are captured by a microphone, processed, converted into electric pulses (A in Figure 1), and transmitted to the implant over a transmitting antenna (B in Figure 1), or headpiece, held in place by magnets. The implant (C in Figure 1) applies the signals to the ganglion cells in the cochlea through tiny electrodes (D in Figure 1). The hearing nerve (auditory nerve) carries the sound information to the brain, where it is “heard.”

Even though the human spiral ganglion has tens of thousands of nerve cells that provide a rich sense of hearing, the cochlear implant, using only six stimulation contacts, can produce auditory perception with sufficient fidelity to enable a deaf individual to use an ordinary telephone.3 Individuals with cochlear implants can also improve their hearing with practice. Thousands of patients have been implanted with cochlear prostheses to date, including children.

The second neural prosthesis application we will review is the retinal prosthesis, which, unlike the cochlear implants, is still in the research phase. Retinitis pigmentosa and age-related macular degeneration both lead to photoreceptor degeneration in the eye and result in a significant visual deficit or blindness.4 A growing body of research supports the feasibility of replacing the function of the photoreceptors with an electronic device. 5–7 A retinal prosthesis is analogous to the cochlear implant in many ways. In a healthy retina, the photoreceptors initiate a neural signal in response to light. In a retinal prosthesis, electrical pulses are utilized to initiate a neural response in the remaining cells of the retina, the bipolar and ganglion cells. It is hypothesized that the perception of shapes and images will be possible through pattern stimulation of the retina. Initial results are encouraging, but the quality of vision that can be attained with this approach is still a question to be answered. A conceptual retinal prosthesis system is shown in Figure 2. The system consists of an external unit coupled to an implanted stimulator with a wireless link. A video camera in the external unit captures an image and converts it to digital data. The implanted unit receives the signal, recovers power and data from the signal, and generates the stimulating current. The stimulus pattern is applied to the retina via the electrode array, which contains distinct electrodes that interface at many locations on the retinal surface. Recent implants in human subjects suggest the feasibility of this approach where individuals attain perception of bright dots in the visual field called ‘phosphenes.’ Furthermore, blind subjects are able to perceive edges when a few of these bright dots are lined up in their visual field.

Figure 3: A conceptual diagram of a Brain-Computer Interface for high level spinal cord injury or patients with ‘locked-in syndrome’ (adapted from Wolpaw et al., see note 9). The recorded neural activity from the motor cortex is processed and converted into command signals to control, for instance, a wheelchair, or to generate electrical signals to activate hand muscles for grasping an object.

Both cochlear and retinal implants are sensory prostheses, i.e. aids for sensory impairments. Another family of neural prostheses deals with motor impairments. Severe motor disability results from high level spinal cord injuries (quadriplegia) where most of the body is paralyzed, sparing only some face, neck, and shoulder muscles. Quadriplegic individuals are in extreme need of a means to control their environment; they need to be in control of their wheelchairs, bed, the room temperature, lights, TV, etc. Because of the level of paralysis it is impossible for them to generate any control signal, except perhaps by sipping or puffing on the end of a tube, which produces a very poor control signal. In the case of a ‘locked-in syndrome’ the condition of the patient is even more serious, with only some functions remaining in the facial muscles. The term ‘brain-computer interface’ has been coined to refer to attempts whereby the motor output of the brain is recorded and interpreted to generate the control signals needed by these patients (Figure 3,9). The ultimate objective of this research will be accomplished when the patients are able to control anything they need to control in their environment, including a computer. The brain-computer interfaces vary in the invasiveness of the approach. The least invasive methods utilize the electroencephalogram (EEG) signals recorded from the scalp. Unfortunately, the signal quality is poor and only ‘on/off’ type of command signals can be generated using this method. In the most invasive, yet most successful applications, an array of electrodes is implanted directly into the motor cortex of the brain at a depth of a couple of millimeters. The recorded signals contain volitional information as the patient makes intentions to move their arms or legs. These signals can be controlled by the patient, and they can in turn be used to control their environment. The current level of success in this type of BCI allows the user to have three dimensional control of a robot arm. This is of invaluable benefit to a quadriplegic individual.

Concluding Remarks: Reflections on Divine Wisdom

Even the subtlest parts of the nervous system are extremely complex. Just to name a few examples, from the highest centers in the brain down to the skeletal muscles in a descending order; the neural circuits of the short-term memory in the hippocampus, fine motor control circuits of the cerebellum, central pattern generators in the spinal cord, and even the control of skeletal muscles in graceful movements of the limbs are impossible to reproduce by artificial means. The Seal of Divine Design is clearly visible in these neural systems, as they are far more complex, far more compact, and far more functionally efficient than any system engineered by mankind. If anything, the growing experience in neurosciences teaches us that the vertebrate nervous system is full of wonders of engineering design. Therefore, it is a great blessing to be a student of both neurosciences and engineering disciplines. This bestows neural engineers with a unique perspective to understand the beauty embroidered into the human nervous system and contemplate on the Divine Wisdom. In spiritual terms, we may think of the human nervous system as a window opening to the works of Divine Wisdom, with manifestations of His Beautiful Names at the brightest level. It is an overwhelming joy to be able to open this window a crack, once in a while, and take a little peek.

References

1. Wise, K.D. ‘Silicon microsystems for neuroscience and neural prostheses,’ IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society Magazine, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 22- 29, Sept.-Oct., 2005.
2. G.E. Loeb, ‘Cochlear prosthetics,’ Annu. Rev. Neurosci., vol. 13, pp. 357–371, 1990.
3. J. Helms, V. Weichbold, U. Baumann, H. von Specht, F. Schon, J. Muller, B. Esser, M. Ziese, I. Anderson, and P. D”Haese, ‘Analysis of ceiling effects occurring with speech recognition tests in adult cochlear-implanted patients,’ ORL J. Otorhinolaryngol Relat. Spec., vol. 66, no. 3, pp. 130–135, 2004.
4. E.L. Berson, ‘Retinitis pigmentosa. The friedenwald lecture,’ Invest Ophthalmol. Vis .Sci., vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 1659–1676, Apr. 1993.
5. E. Zrenner, ‘Will retinal implants restore vision?,’ Science, vol. 295, no. 5557, pp. 1022–1025, Feb. 2002.
6. J.F. Rizzo III, J. Wyatt, J. Lowenstein, S. Kelly, and D. Shire, ‘Perceptual efficacy of electrical stimulation of human retina with a microelectrode array during short term surgical trials,’ Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., vol. 44, no. 12, pp. 5362–5369, 2003.
7. M.S. Humayun, J. Weiland, G. Fujii, R.J. Greenberg, R. Williamson , J. Little, B. Mech, V. Cimmarusti, G. van Boemel, G. Dagnelie, and E. de Juan, Jr., ‘Visual perception in a blind subject with a chronic microelectronic retinal prosthesis,’ Vision Res., vol. 43, no. 24, pp. 2573–2581, 2003.
8. Weiland, J.D. and Humayun, M.S., ‘A biomimetric retinal stimulation array,’ IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society Magazine, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 14-21, Sept.-Oct., 2005.
9. Wolpaw J.R. et al., ‘Brain-computer interfaces for communication and control,’ Clinical Neurophysiolology, vol. 113(6), pp. 767-791, 2002.

Genetic engineering is one of the fastest developing fields of science. It continues to impact our lives in many ways: the Green Revolution, the quest for perfect animal stock, disease treatment, or human reproduction. But success also has brought concerns. Plants have become insect resistant and also more toxic. Genetically engineered cattle produce more milk but have mutated and overgrown. When scientists opened the window for asexual human reproduction, life became a commodity that could be produced in a culture dish.

And it all started when a monk experimented with some sweet peas…

From Mendel to Dolly

Modern genetic engineering dates back to 1865, when the Austrian monk Gregor Mendel performed a series of experiments with sweet pea plants. These experiments led to changes in the plants’ genetic construction. Genetic engineering, also known as bioengineering or recombinant DNA technology, is a general term referring to any alteration of an organism’s genes in order to make them produce new substances or perform new functions.(1) During the following years, these little experiments developed into a new field. The genes of plants and small-sized organisms were altered through crossing, but other than that research was limited.

In the 1930s, industrial corporations like America’s Rockefeller Foundation or, 20 years later, Germany’s Volkswagen Group (VW), discovered a different approach to raise economic efficiency. At the same time, motives of social control and surveillance directed the Rockefeller Foundation’s interest in the human body to the individual and the collective levels.(2) The Rockefeller Foundation outlined its rationale for supporting genetic research as follows: For the last 100 years physics and chemistry have reigned supreme, and the question of human behavior had been neglected. The new goal was to accomplish social control through understanding and knowledge of the very basic elements of the human body.(3) With the promise of benefit for their own corporations, they started sponsoring this new subfield of biology. The National Institutes of Health, private corporations, institutes, and universities established research laboratories. The idea was that if more actors and institutions shared and exchanged knowledge, the more molecular biology’s narration of life would be consolidated, disseminated, and legitimized.(4) 

Soon discoveries were reported from the science frontier. In 1953, M. Wilkins, F. Crick, and J. Watson discovered DNA’s double helix model while working at the University of Cambridge in England. In 1962, they received the Nobel Prize for their discovery. In 1968 Nirenberg, Khorana and Holley received a Nobel Prize for their interpretation of the genetic code and its function in protein synthesis.(5) 

The first frogs were cloned in 1970. In other words, an artificial copy of their embryo was produced. Soon this fast developing field of biology turned into a new industrial sphere. In 1980, industrial biotechnology emerged after the Supreme Court case of Diamond vs. Chakrabarty. In this case, Chakrabarty engineered and wanted to patent a certain kind of organism. After his request was denied, he went to court and received a favorable ruling. This decision led to the establishment of copyrights for living organisms, which ultimately industrialized the field. Producing and patenting new organisms were two crucial factors in the biotech industry’s development. Consider Steen Willadsen, who cloned the first sheep in 1984 from an embryo.(6) One year later, he mass-produced prize cattle embryos for Grenada Genetics in order to raise a perfect stock.(7) However, that project soon was stopped because of the cloned cattle’s high and death rates and abnormal behavior.

Since the biologic make-up of many mammals had been unveiled, scientists now had a new goal: exploring the human being. Therefore the U.S. Department of Energy launched the human genome project. Soon biotech giants like Celera and many private institutions got into the race. Their goal was to map the entire human genome in order to identify and eliminate disease-causing genes. This project raised certain concerns about what would be done with an individual’s DNA information, who could access it (e.g., insurance companies and employers), and genetic discrimination.

The first human embryos were cloned in 1993. Four years, later the whole world got to meet Dolly, the first sheep cloned from an adult cell. This was an important development, for it opened the door to asexual reproduction. But despite the great enthusiasm with this achievement, some people started wondering about possible dangers. Finally in June 2000, Bill Clinton announced the completion of the human genone project.

Applications and drawbacks

Genetic engineering has penetrated into various parts of our life. Agriculture has seen a Green Revolution. Herbicide-resistant plants were engineered to have built-in pesticide resistance and to convert nitrogen directly from the soil. By April 2002, the approximately 50,000 rice genes had been discovered. Scientists already are working on ways to alter rice, the main food of the world’s population, so that it will be more nutritious and resistant. Insects are being engineered to attack crop predators. Researchers are growing agricultural products in the laboratory using genetically altered bacteria. A major commercial role for genetically engineered plants as chemical factories is also envisioned, such as organic plastics.

Some drawbacks of this revolution are increased toxins and diseases, which are causing the resulting organisms to become resistant to antibiotics. Increased toxins in plants were designed to make insect-resistant plants. Nuclear physicist Dr. John Hagerlin testified in Washington, DC, at the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) public hearing that increased toxins trigger unanticipated allergic reactions. The resulting gene pollution threatens the environment, for it breaks down genetic barriers put in place by Nature.(8)

Industrial mistakes in production or insufficient research in engineered food ingredients also can cause serious problems. The Tryptophan food supplement, an amino acid marketed as a natural tranquilizer and sleeping pill, was mass-produced from genetically altered bacteria. It killed 37 persons and permanently disabled over 1,500 others with an incurable nervous system condition known as eosinophilia myalgia syndrome (EMS).(9) When these technologies were applied to livestock, farmers first were pleased that the engineered cattle produced more milk, grew faster, and yielded more meat. However, cases of mutation and rampant overgrowth have caused scientists to reevaluate the effectiveness of these procedures.

Another important issue is inserting human genes in animals. What percent of human genes does an organism have to contain before it is considered human? If humans have a special ethical status, does the presence of human genes in an organism change its ethical status? What about a genetically engineered mouse that produces a human sperm that is then used to conceive a human child?(10) Or a pig that contains human genes in order to grow organs that can be transplanted to humans?(11)

It is shocking that the FDA issued guidelines in September 1996 that allow animal-to-human transplants, even though a group of 44 top virologists, primate researchers, and AIDS specialists, opposed it. They attacked the FDA guidelines, saying that based on knowledge of past cross-species transmissions (e.g., AIDS, Herpes B, Ebola, and other viruses), using animals was not adequately justified for use in a handful of patients. Vast numbers of people could be injured or even killed if a new infectious agent were to be transmitted.(12) The FDA puts the responsibility for health and safety on local hospitals and medical review boards.

Recombinant DNA technology also has been applied directly to the human body. After mapping the entire genome, scientists discovered some disease-causing genes. They are now working to isolate those genes and develop molecular-level treatments. Although curing Alzheimers, nuscular dystrophy, and many other inherited diseases would make patients happy, unexpected results may occur. When applying gene therapy, a one-to-one correspondence between the gene and its function is assumed. Since genes interact in a horizontal manner, as scientists have shown, introducing a new gene could have unforeseen effects.(13)

Genetic manipulation in human beings always encompasses the possibility of designer genes that manipulate a child’s appearance, IQ, or behavior. According to a March of Dimes survey, 40 percent of Americans would use gene therapy to enhance their children’s looks or intelligence. Even picking your child’s gender has become a question of money. A Fairfax, Virginia-based genetics and in-vitro fertilization institute offers family balancing for approximately $3,000. Known as microsort, the male sperm is separated from the female one. In 2001, the institute treated around 60 couples a month and planned to double its production. Fortune Magazine calculated that the microsort market could be worth $200 million.(14)

There is also talk that people could be exploited as producers of certain substances. For example, a biotech corporation applied to the European Patent Office for a patent on a so-called pharm woman. The idea was to genetically alter women so that their breast milk would contain specialized pharmaceuticals.(15)

Related debates

There are many other largely debated topics in this field, but the most controversial one of all is human cloning life. This is divided into therapeutic cloning and reproductive cloning.

In therapeutic cloning, scientists produce embryos in culture dishes to harvest their stem cells. These then are used in further research, the long-term goal of which is to produce replacement organisms. Stem cells are undifferentiated and primitive cells that can be found in embryos as well as in an adult body.(16) Researchers intend to isolate stem cells so they can serve as a starter stock for growing replacement nerve, muscle and other tissue that might one day be used to treat patients with various diseases.(17) Even though this procedure sounds very promising, we should not overlook the fact that embryos are mass-produced to harvest stem cells. Once these have been isolated, the embryo becomes useless and disposable. The ethics of this procedure are questionable, since stem cells also could be harvested from an adult human body.

Reproductive cloning intends to implant such a cloned embryo into a woman’s uterus. Although this procedure is not safe for either the mother or the child, Severino Antinori announced that he and his team will soon produce the first cloned child. The Whitehead Institute of Biomedical Research revealed that cloned mice possess subtle genetic defects that could eventually wreak havoc on the animals system. This means that even though a cloned child might appear completely normal at birth, it has to expect serious health problems later in life.(18)

There also are potential psychological risks for a cloned child. Dr. Thomas Murray worries about the child’s self-identity problem once he/she finds out that he/she is a clone and how he/she was conceived.(19) George Johnson, a professor at Washington University, opposes cloning because genetic variation is the chief defense our species has against an uncertain future. If we strip ourselves of it even partially, it is to endanger our species.

Conclusion

Recombinant DNA technology faces our society with problems unique not only in the history of science but also life on the Earth as well as legal approaches towards them. It places in human hands the capacity to redesign living organisms. It presents probably the largest ethical problem science has ever had to face. Our morality up to now has been to go ahead without restrictions to learn what we can about nature. Reconstructing nature was not part of the bargain. Going ahead in this direction may not be only unwise but also dangerous. Potentially it could breed new animal and plant diseases, new sources of cancer and novel epidemics.(20)

Since creation is in a perfect balance, interventions might have unforeseen effects. A book must be written by an author, a picture must be painted by an artist, and a poem must be written by a poet. Each piece of art has an artist who has an encompassing knowledge of his/her creation. If we do not understand that nature is a perfectly composed book, our writings will be no more than scribbles between the lines.

Footnotes

1. http://209.52.56.28/lexicon/g.html.
2. Lily E. Kay, The Molecular Vision of Life: Caltech, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Rise of the New Biology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993), 26.
3. Herbert Gottweiss, Governing Molecules: The Discursive Politics of Genetic Engineering in Europe and the US (Cambridge MA: The MIT Press, 1998), 42.
4. Ibid., 46.
5. www.nobel.se/medicine/laureates/1968/index.html.
6. www.dartmouth.edu/artsci/courses/coco25/Cloning/The_History_of_Cloning.html.
7. http://library.thinkquest.org/24355/data/details/1985.html?tqskip1=1&tqtime=0508.
8. www.netlink.de/gen/hagelin.html.
9. www.psrast.org/jftrypt.htm.
10. Surrogate Fathers, New Scientist (31 Jan. 1998).
11. Robert Pool, Saviors, Discover, (May 1998): 53-57. (special issue.)
12. IP/BiodivNews, 1-24-97 or http://online.sfsu.edu/~rone/GE%20Essays/Redigning.htm#40.
13. Horizontal gene transfer refers to the transfer of genes to unrelated species by infection through viruses, through pieces of genetic material, DNA by being taken up into cells from the environment, or by unusual mating taking place between unrelated species. (Mae-Wan Ho, Genetic Engineering: Dream or Nightmare, 2d rev. [Continuum Pub Group: 2000),
14. The Economist (14 Apr. 2001): 22.
15. Andrew Kimbrell, The Human Body Shop: The Engineering and Marketing of Life (New York: Harper Collins, 1994), 191.
16. Popular Science (Jan. 2002): 58.
17. Scientific American (Jan. 2002): 45.
18. Gunjan Sinha, Popular Science (Jan. 2002)
19. Thomas Murray, Talk of the Nation broadcast, 24 Feb. 1997.
20. George Wald, The Case Against Genetic Engineering, in The Recombinant DNA Debate, eds. David A. Jackson and Stephen P. Stich (Prentice Hall College Div: 1979), 127-28.

The brain is probably the most complex organized biological structure in existence. We think, learn, compute, memorize, feel, show emotion, and love. The brain is the center of all these activities, and of many other mental and physical functions as well. Each human being has a unique personality, and each individual behaves in a certain way. Our behavior reflects how our brain thinks.

Throughout one’s life, a person’s brain constantly learns. Each input, such as events that affect us, leaves its traces in the brain. We recollect these events later. But how do we learn? How do we remember things? What is the physical dimension of learning, feeling, and remembering? What is the physical significance of brain dynamics? Some of these questions are probably the most difficult questions for neuroscientists and other interdisciplinary brain researchers to answer.

Studies of the brain are as old as the practice of medicine. Although advancements in medicine, with the help of engineering and computer technologies, have been significant in recent years, brain research progresses much slower. Brain research has been a focus of such interdisciplinary sciences as neuroscience, biomedical engineering, electrical engineering, medicine, artificial intelligence, and psychology. However, an exact and detailed understanding of the brain’s dynamics and associating its neuronal activities with certain physical phenomenon remains largely beyond our grasp. The fact that the human brain cannot be used for experimental purposes is another factor in brain research.

THE BRAIN’S STRUCTURE

The brain is considered the human body’s central commanding unit. Along with the spinal cord, it forms the human being’s central nervous system. It poses a modular structure, each module of which is known to be responsible for certain functions, and possesses its own respective complexity. Readers wanting to know more about the brain’s structures should check the literature produced by specialists in the field of neuroanatomy.

Figure 1 illustrates the brain’s structure. The cerebral cortex, essentially a biological sheet of tissue covering the brain, is about 0.08 inches (2 mm) to 0.24 inches (6 mm) thick, and gives a geometrical representation of the brain’s shape. The brain’s stem (not shown) is the area between the thalamus and the spinal cord. It is the center of the most of the brain’s basic functions, such as breathing and the heart rate. The area behind the brain stem is the cerebellum. Located at the brain’s base is the hypothalamus, which, among other things, controls the body’s temperature. It reacts to hot and cold temperatures by sending out signals to adjust the body’s temperature. The thalamus serves as a sink for sensory information, and communicates the received information to the cerebral cortex. Although not proven in human beings, the thalamus serves as the center of sleep spindles, sinusoidal signals emitted by animals while they sleep.

NEURONS

Neurons, the brain’s building blocks, are the only cells that do not renew themselves (all other cells die and are replaced). Each human being is born with approximately 100 billion neurons in his or her brain. Thus, a certain neuron in the brain of a newborn human being is the same neuron when he or she is old. A normal brain loses 3 to 5 neurons each second. Stress, drug and alcohol consumption, and aging may cause more neurons to be lost. For an ordinary human being, however, the total number of neurons lost during an average lifetime is very negligible.

Neurons are probably the most complex and intelligent communication networking ever created. The brain contains billions of cells, each one of which is connected to another. All of them share and transmit and, more importantly, process the information. This feature introduces the intelligence of neurons, the nature of which is not yet completely known to scientists, who remain fascinated by the engineering behind this intelligent networking.

To better understand neurons’ functionality, imagine yourself cruising in your convertible on a two-lane road. As you start to pass the car in front of you, you suddenly notice a car coming toward you. You have no more than 2 or 3 seconds to evaluate the options and respond accordingly: you either accelerate and complete the pass, or slow down and get behind the car you were passing. In either case, you have to consider the speed of the oncoming car, its distance, and some other safety parameters. You eventually evaluate your options and reach the safest decision in less than 2 seconds.

What is the big deal? This is just another ordinary event that we are used to experiencing every day. Behind this seemingly ordinary event, however, a tremendous amount of communication and computation is taking place among the neurons. Stimuli invoked by visual information (the oncoming car) observed by the eyes make their way through the central nervous system to the brain. Neurons receive the stimuli, evaluate them, and pass their response to nearby neurons by electrochemical polarization. Billions of neurons are involved in the process.

This information flow among neurons depends on learning (one’s driving experience). The response, the final decision of neuronal computation combined with learning and consciousness, is delivered to central nervous system so that it can act. The nature of consciousness and how it is linked to neuronal computation remain unknown.

These processes are so automated that we do not consciously realize that each physical, mental, and emotional function is governed by our brain, which, in turn, is governed by its tiny component neurons. These neurons enable us to make such judgments every day, and to communicate with the surrounding environment through sound, sight, touch, smell, taste, emotion, feeling, thinking, and so on.

THE HUMAN BRAIN AND COMPUTERS

The human brain and computers are two different things. One is a living, thinking, learning, feeling, crying, and loving organism. Happiness and sadness, in the form of marginal emotions, are reactions of the brain. Such terminology makes no sense to computers. In that sense, it might be misleading to compare the human brain and computers. However, there are some common functionalities that make such a comparison logical.

Both the human brain and computers have memory. Memory in human brains is defined as “stronger synaptic connections,” whereas computer memories are formed by semiconductor chips. Both can adapt and learn. The human brain can learn easier and faster than a computer, which can only “learn” certain tasks by being programmed with special algorithms. The nature of such “learning” is very limited.

On the other hand, computers can perform many complex tasks much faster than human brains. For example, try multiplying two numbers, dividing the result by 7, and then subtracting 9 from that result. The computational speed of a human brain is much slower than that of a computer.

Due to their high speed, computers perform parallel jobs relatively faster. The human brain also can perform parallel tasks at the same time. For example, it controls the heart rate and blood pressure while performing computational tasks. In addition, the human brain is better at interfacing with the outside world and coming up with new ideas; computers only do what they are instructed to do, regardless of the task’s simplicity or complexity. The human brain distinguishes itself from computers by its extraordinary capability in the areas of imagination and innovation.

Another common functionality is that both transmit information. Computers use semiconductor switches that are either on or off. Everything inside of a computer is represented by either a one (1) or a zero (0). Although neurons in the human brain are either on or off, meaning that they are or are not firing an action potential at a particular point in time, an accumulated charge that activates neurons gives the human brain more flexibility. Neurons are more than just on or off, for their excitability is always changing as they constantly receive information from other cells through synaptic contacts. As stated earlier, this information is carried through electrochemical polarization. Although this electrochemical process does not always result in an action potential, it may alter the chance that an action potential will be produced by raising or lowering the neuron’s threshold.

Another important distinction between computers and the human brain is that the human brain never rests, while computers do after they have been turned off. Even during sleep, the human brain continues to work dynamically. Indeed, it produces distinct signals, called sleep spindles, that may be observed externally while the person is asleep. While an individual’s body rests during sleep, his or her brain recollectively refreshes itself.

UNDERSTANDING THE BRAIN’S DYNAMICS

All activity inside the human brain is conducted through electrochemical polarization, a process that can be observed by placing electrodes on an individual’s scalp. The brain’s dynamics can be observed in the form of an electroencephalograph (EEG) or a magnetoencephalograph (MEG). An EEG, which is relatively less sophisticated than a MEG, maps the brain’s dynamics into electrically recorded brain waves. Multiple electrodes are systematically placed on the scalp, and potential differences are measured with respect to a reference point. In the case of a multichannel EEG, the number of electrodes may be as high as 64 or even 128. Figure 2 shows a single-channel recorded EEG. Potential differences measured through electrodes are sampled and stored in a computer for analysis.

The challenge presented to researchers is how to read multichannel EEGs and extract the information that really reflects neuronal activity. If the patient is epileptic, brain abnormalities may be easily distinguished in a multichannel EEG. From the location of electrodes, it may be possible to identify the general part of the brain giving rise to epileptic EEGs. In clinics, neurosurgeons usually open the patient’s scalp and measure the EEG directly by placing electrode grids over the cortical tissue. Even then, it is a real challenge to identify the defective region and proceed accordingly.

The EEGs of epileptic patients distinguish themselves from other brain activities by their relatively high amplitude. But what about other physical and mental tasks? Can we detect and identify those EEGs that reflect a certain mental task? Scientists from many disciplines are focusing on such questions. Many researchers are combining EEGs, MEGs, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and such engineering tools and algorithms as digital signal processing and spectral analysis to identify and understand the brain’s dynamics. The clinical need for such solutions are in high demand.

THE HUMAN BRAIN AND INTERDISCIPLINARY SCIENCE

The human brain has been a research focus of scientists from many disciplines. Scientists in medicine, neuroscience, engineering (electrical engineering and biomedical engineering), mathematics, physics, physiology, and computer science have been conducting either sole or interdisciplinary research for many years. The brain has so many dimensions that no single discipline can cover all of its aspects. Some of these disciplines are described below:

• Artificial intelligence attempts to build knowledge representation on the hypothesis that intelligent systems act intelligently. Hence, if the human brain’s intelligence were represented in a finite domain, this domain could be used by computers to mimic human intelligence. This approach faces a major challenge: human intelligence cannot be represented to the degree that artificial intelligence requires to mimic human intelligence.

• Computational intelligence, on the other hand, approaches the problem from the perspective of such engineering tools and algorithms as neural networks, fuzzy logic, and genetic algorithms. Neural networks and genetic algorithms can learn an underlying task to some degree, whereas fuzzy logic relaxes information representation by providing one more degree of freedom to the binary representation of information: a membership function concept. In this concept, the information has a probability of being a member of a certain class. The human brain’s electrochemical process may not always result in an action potential for a certain neuron(s). The binary concept cannot represent this phenomenon, whereas fuzzy logic may be helpful in modeling the chance of a neuron to produce action potential.

• Engineering provides technical tools and algorithms for conducting research on the human brain. Electrical engineering provides signal processing tools and algorithms for filtering and imaging, and other tools to process EEGs. Many scientists use these tools and algorithms to understand and localize EEGs. It would be very effective to localize human brain abnormalities with the help of engineering tools and algorithms.

Each science and method mentioned above has its own limitations. Combined interdisciplinary research provides more promising results for understanding the brain’s dynamics. Many other methods not mentioned in this article also are being used to study the human brain.

SOME FACTS

An average adult human brain weighs about 3 pounds (1.36 kilograms). A stegosaurus weighed about 3,528 pounds (1,600 kilograms) but had a brain that weighed only about 0.15 pounds (70 grams), or just 0.004 percent of its total body weight. In contrast, an adult human being weighs about 154 pounds (70 kilograms) and has a brain that weighs about 3.1 pounds (1.4 kilograms), or about 2 percent of his or her total body weight. That makes a human being’s brain-to-body ratio 500 times greater than that of the stegosaurus.

DISCUSSION

This is only a very brief description of the human brain and its functionality. As scientists and researchers learn more about the human brain, they realize that what they know is very small when compared with how much they still do not know. All scientific efforts undertaken thus far have opened only a small window on a large universe: our own galaxy, located inside our brain, with the neurons as its stars. Let each neuron be a moon. How much do we know about the moon compared with the universe in which it resides? The answer is the same for the following question: How much we know about the human brain’s neurons and the universe in which they reside?

REFERENCES

• Chudler, E. H., S. Pretel, and D. R. Kenshalo, Jr. “Distribution of GAD-like immunoreactive neurons in the first (SI) and second (SII) somatosensory cortex of the monkey.” Brain Research (1988) 456:57-63.
• Nunez, P. L. “Neurocortical Dynamics and Human EEG Rhythms.” New York: Oxford University Press, 1995.
• Figures 1 and 2 are courtesy of Eric H. Chudler, Research Associate Professor, University of Washington.

The first revolution began when scientists agreed that DNA is the genetic material. Study showed that a DNA molecule is made up of nucleotides, in turn made of deoxyribose sugar, a phosphate molecule and one of the four nitrogenous bases: adenine, guanine, cytosine and thymine. Each DNA molecule has two strands that are twisted in a helical form, as discovered by Watson and Crick. The sequence of nitrogenous bases in the two strands determines the genetic information inherited.

The second revolution was the discovery in bacterial cells of special enzymes, the restriction enzymes, which have the property of being able to cut DNA at a specific point in the sequence.

Recombinant DNA technology was initially developed as a tool to allow scientists to obtain many copies of DNA segments so that it could be studied further biochemically. It actually began with the first studies of the genetics of bacteria and viruses that infect bacterial cells, bacteriophages. A bacterium can accept segments of new DNA and incorporate this foreign DNA into its own chromosome. To a genetic engineer this is a desirable property. The incorporated DNA is henceforth replicated and transcribed along with the cell’s original, native DNA.

Usually foreign DNA is not added directly into a bacterial genome, but into a plasmid, a small circular DNA molecule that exists outside the main DNA of the bacteria. Plasmids are cut by restriction enzymes that cleave the plasmid. In addition, foreign DNA is cleaved with the same restriction enzyme and then combined to the plasmid which is now called a vector. Such a combination is possible only if both DNA molecules are cut by the same restriction enzyme, because of the complementarity of the single strand sequence obtained after the cut. The vector is then injected to the bacterial cell. If this foreign DNA contains a gene, then the cell will acquire new characteristics and is said to be transformed, as a new product, not found in normal bacterial cells, has been produced.

Since the first day of its discovery, recombinant DNA technology caused dramatic changes not only in the field of genetics, but also in many other fields where it has useful applications. The most important of these are such medical applications as production of useful proteins on a commercial scale. In 1982, human insulin, produced by bacterial cells that contain human insulin gene transplant, reached the market. Insulin is a hormone needed daily by millions of people with diabetes. This insulin is also better for some patients who cannot tolerate the slight differences between human insulin and previously marketed insulin taken from pig and cattle livers. Another protein produced in this manner is human interferon, so called because it interferes with replication of viruses in the human body. Genetic engineers were also able to synthesize, by the method explained above, the enzyme urokinase. This enzyme is responsible for dissolving blood clots in blood vessels, the brain or lungs.

Secondly, genetic engineering offered a solution to a number of pollution problems. Scientists were able to transform some aquatic bacteria and introduce into them the characteristics of other bacterial cells found in oil wells. These transformed bacteria can consume oil spills present in water which contaminate the aquatic environment and endanger aquatic life.

There are many other applications of this new and fast-developing technology. Among them: safer vaccines made by engineering a weaker version of the disease-causing agent; enzymes for industry and pesticide accidents produced by engineering bacterial cells that have an enzyme to convert the waste to harmless substances; creating improved strains of crops and farm animals; and replacing defective genes in the human genome.

Not surprisingly, this scientific revolution has raised questions in many people’s minds about its possible negative effects. First, are the transgenic crops safe to eat? Since the new genes and the proteins they encode contain the same nucleotides and amino acids found in all our food, there seems to be little risk from most new genes. However, new crops must be checked to ensure that any new protein produced does not interact with the plant normal chemistry to produce toxic substances. In addition, any plant engineered to produce toxins that fend off insects or disease must be tested to see if the toxin content endangers human consumers. Several experiments are already under way in which genetically engineered plants have been tested outdoors. Researchers watch to see whether such plants are as good under field conditions as in the laboratory, whether they die out or become established and whether they stay put or spread beyond application sites. Genetically engineered crops are also being field-tested.

There has been considerable controversy about the safety of such experimental release of genetically engineered plants into the environment. People have also worried about the possibility of an accident in a genetic engineering laboratory. Suppose a strain of bacteria for a dangerous toxin were let loose on the world? Most workers feel that the chance of this happening is slight because safe-guards and safety procedures are already in place. The bacteria used in recombinant DNA technology experiments are usually E coli, a species universally found in the human intestine. Further, the genetic strains used in the laboratory have been developed so as to be unable to survive outside their test-tube homes. The danger is further reduced by the regulation of laboratories doing DNA recombination research.

However, the biggest anxiety was over the aspiration, expressed by some scientists, to clone human beings. Such a possibility, if ever realized, would undo one of the most important characteristics of our species, the non-existence of two absolutely identical human beings. Some people tried to justify investigation of this possibility by saying that it could ‘duplicate’ geniuses like Einstein!

But first, how is such cloning done? The removal, by special techniques, of the haploid nucleus of an unfertilized ovum; then the addition to this anucleated ovum of a diploid nucleus taken from any somatic cell. The new ovum then acts as a fertilized egg and starts to divide and develop in the uterus of the female to whom it is injected. Dr J. Gordon, from Stanford University, said that these experiments were done on frogs and two identical frogs were produced, albeit after a great many trials. And lastly, as everybody must have heard, the identical of a sheep was also produced in Scotland. However, scientists guess that they will be able to perform such experiments on humans in the not unforseeable future. An indication of this came when Dr Jerry Hall, of George Washington University, and his colleagues, were able to produce several identical embryos from only one fertilized egg. This experiment was done by replicating the genetic material of a fertilized egg and introducing it to another unfertilized anucleated ovum.

Another fearful dimension of genetic engineering lies in the possibility of adapting and amending certain characteristics, thus of producing a ‘superbreed.’ Dr Samia Timatmi, Professor of Human Genetics in the National Centre for Scientific Research in Egypt, has said that scientists have found that it is possible to change particular human characteristics, such as eye colour and height, even intelligence. However, she adds that the aim of scientists at this stage is to seek cures for different genetically carried defects and diseases. Dr Yahya Zakariya, of the same institution, is less sanguine about what is possible. He considers that changing human characteristics is not so easy for many reasons. First, the attempt to change one gene might lead to unknown consequences. Second, he points out that usually a single characteristic is not controlled by a single gene but by a complex set of genes. Because scientists do not yet know and cannot isolate these genes, it seems that the notion of producing a ‘superbreed’ still belongs to the realm of science fiction not fact.

The general public’s unease over genetic engineering experiments has not always stopped at the level of verbal protest. It turned into action when hundreds of people demonstrated near the laboratories of George Washington University against the work of Dr Jerry Hall and his colleagues. Demonstrators described this work as scientific chaos and called for the prohibition of such fearful experiments.

In view of such unease, it is only proper to ask how the Islamic religion considers such experiments and possibilities. How does it regard the positive aspects of genetic engineering? Do Muslims consider such experiments and research to be in conflict with Islamic beliefs and Qur’anic verses or permissible under the general Qur’an injunction to human beings to make observations and experiments, to study and reflect on nature?

Before trying to answer these questions, we should first note that research in this field is still very new. Most Islamic legal experts have therefore paid little attention to this field. They seem to regard the research as if it were only hypothetical and not something that is opening up practicable options and doing so very rapidly. For example, Dr A. Abu Farha, Head of the Qur’anic Sciences department in Al-Azhar, having said that Islam urges man to study and experiment so long as this is for the benefit of the human race, added that the Islamic attitude towards such research is caution. However, other jurists have realized the importance of recombinant DNA technology, and the need to regulate it to secure its benefits and to contain its dangers. As a result, they called for more attention to be given to this subject in particular and to the field in general. Dr Ahmed Sharaf-Eddine showed, in his paper submitted to the Conference on Reproduction in Islam, held in Kuwait in 1983, that the danger of such experiments lies in their consequences for unique, distinguishing human characteristics such as mind and self, which are highly esteemed in Islam. He argued that research in this field must, because its results are going to be applied to the human race, be governed by the basic rules of the Islamic religion.

A view widely held among Islamic scholars is that new concepts in science will never be contradictory with Islamic fundamentals because any new hypothesis will not become established fact or truth unless it falls in agreement with the Qur’an and Sunna. Even though neither the Qur’an nor the books recording the Sunna are scientific books, and though the decision for every single eventuality is not directly stated in them, they do contain general rules that can be applied to every eventuality and enable a rational decision to be taken. God says: Nothing have We omitted from the book (6.38). By using the different sources of legislation, scholars can work out appropriate decisions for different or new situations. However, no one individual scholar can give a detailed, specific decision concerning genetic engineering experiments, especially in these decades, where legal decisions concerning the new developments in science are taken in annual conferences where contemporary Islamic scholars assemble.

Some scholars have initiated the task of applying the general principles of Islamic Law to the recent advances, in order to facilitate a final ruling on both the positive and negative sides of genetic engineering. Dr Abdel Satar Abu Guda, in his paper submitted to the Conference on Reproduction in Islam, stated that, if the aim of such experiments is to cure and help the victims of genetically inherited diseases, then one can say that Islam encourages such technology or at least permits it, since such action falls under the general Islamic injunction to treat disease and bring benefits to the human race. According to the well-known saying of the Prophet, upon him be peace, that for every ailment (except old age) there is a remedy, the search for cures to inherited diseases must be legitimate. In addition, genetic engineering applications on plants are, according to Dr Abu Guda, permitted in Islam as they aim to increase the benefits to mankind from plants, which falls under the Qur’anic verse (31.20): Do you not see that God has subjected to your use all things in the heavens and on earth?

The general consensus of the scholars on the aspirations to change human nature by playing with the genetic make-up of human beings is negative. They are of the opinion that experiments so directed are but the response to the orders of the devil since they aspire to change the innate quality of the human race. God says (4.119): They call but upon Satan, the persistent rebel. God did curse him, but he said I will take of Thy servants a portion marked off. I will mislead them and I will create in them false desires; I will order them to slit the ears of cattle and to deface the fair nature created by-God. Whoever forsaking God, takes Satan for a friend has surely suffered a loss that is manifest. Because God has created humans in a perfect way (We have indeed created man in the best of moulds (95.4)), no human experiment

can create a better human being. Also God prohibited anything that can alter human consciousness transiently such as alcohol, drugs, and witchcraft, the effects of which can cause people to ruin themselves in body, mind and character, as well as financially. By analogy, scholars argue that the same general principle of preserving human character should apply to attempts to alter character by genetic intervention.

Shaikh Muhammad Al-Ghazali expressed a very clear opinion on the attempts to produce a ‘superman.’ He said: ‘If we consider human fancies and use medicine to realize them, what is likely to happen? We will damage this world.’ He added that we should master ‘ethical engineering’ rather than genetic engineering. Dr Muhammad Al-Mutajali considered that cloning human beings and seeking to produce a ‘superman’ are to be prohibited on the bases of the verse, No change there is in the work wrought by God (30.30), which proscribes such fundamental alterations. He added that such an action could led to the confusion of lineages and ancestry.

Broadly, the consensus seems to be that the use of science for the benefit of the human race is acceptable in Islam, but that fundamental changes in the fundamentals of human nature and (consequently) human relationships are not acceptable. Man should not think that because he has been able to modify the genetic content of plants, he is at liberty to do all that he desires to do in this life. God says (10.24): The likeness of the life of the present is as the rain which We send down from the skies: by its mingling arises the produce of earth which provides food for men and animals till the earth is clad with its golden ornaments and is decked out in beauty. The people to whom it belongs think they have all powers of disposal over it. There reaches it Our command by night or by day and We make it like a harvest clean-mown as if it had not flourished only the day before! Thus We explain the signs in detail for those who reflect.

Scientists at the end of the Conference on Reproduction in Islam recommended that it is legal to use recombinant DNA technology to produce chemicals and drugs needed for the benefit of society and for the elimination of harm. However, the recommendation is general. It is not restricted to human recombinant DNA technology, i.e. there is no detailed ruling on every specific aspect of these new experiments. (The decision may be contrasted, in this respect, to that taken in Makka a decade ago concerning in vitro fertilization.) What is clear from the recommendation is that human cloning is prohibited because it does not fall within the ambit of the general legal principle: ‘The removal of harm and the obtaining of benefits.’ Also, human cloning would result in many unanswerable questions. For example, How can we regulate the relation between the original person and his copies? A person could, in theory, be his or her own parent! What are the consequences for the laws of inheritance? Moreover, human cloning, if ever realized, would annul human relationships based on the family, as marriage would no longer be the way to get children, something that plainly ignores or even contradicts the law of God who says (30.21): And among His signs is this that he created for you mates from among yourselves, that you may dwell in tranquillity with them and He has put love and mercy between your hearts. Verily in that are signs for those who reflect. How would humanity fare without love and mercy between the hearts of men and women? What would be the character of children reared in the absence of a family environment or one lacking in such qualities?

There is a further, also fearful, dimension to the problem. What are the likely consequences between nations if one nation is able, long before the others, to realize this dream of producing a ‘superbreed’? Or the likely consequences within even a single nation? Clearly, only the ‘best’ citizens with ‘perfect’ mental and physical health, will be cloned, or would it be only the richest and most powerful? In either case, discrimination is inevitable and will inevitably lead to conflict.

The hope of producing a ‘superbreed’ or cloning ‘supermen’ is based upon a wildly optimistic estimate of the capacity of human scientific knowledge and of human wisdom in the use of it. It cannot but lead to (if it does not already derive from) a denial of Divine authority and power.

The Qur’an states (76.1-3): Has there not been over man a long period of time when he was a nothing not even mentioned? Verily We created man from a drop of mingled sperm. In order to try him We gave him the gifts of learning and sight. We showed him the way: whether he be grateful or ungrateful.

In sum, not all genetic engineering applications are prohibited and not all are allowed. Those directed towards the benefit of the human race are allowed, but those used to fundamentally alter human nature and God’s work are prohibited. Science must be controlled by religion and ethics because a scientist with no restraints is but a devil.

References

• Al-Jundi, Ahmad, Conference on Reproduction in Islam. Ministry of Health, Kuwait, 1983.
• Beck, Liam et al., Life, 3rd edn. Harper Collins. New York. 1991. ‘Genetic Engineering’ Ahidati, 20 (52). p.15.
• Mashing, Abel Rahman, ‘Transplantation of identical human embryos’, Al Moslemoon, 12 Nov 1993, no 458, p.7.
• Verma, I. ‘Gene Therapy’. Scientific American, Nov 1990 V 263 No 5, pp.34-41.

Therefore, the products existing in nature should be far more sophisticated than ours. Investigating any species of plant or animal whether it be a microscopic or a giant creature, we reach the following conclusions: They have been specially designed to adopt their environment. They own the precise and perfect skills, organs and defence mechanisms, needed for their survival. They are so perfect that none of our engineering skills are enough to produce anything even approaching the quality of these organisms. We need also to mention that products in nature are alive, a concept which has not yet been precisely understood or described despite all our advances in technology and science. Examples supporting the above argument are innumerable, covering all branches of science. I will present only a few for illustration purposes. Fish flow in a medium of liquid. They are exposed to two components of pressure while swimming, the static pressure and the dynamic pressure. The static pressure is directly related to the weight of the water above them and does not vary while swimming at constant depths. However, this is not the case with dynamic pressure. It increases or decreases depending on the velocity of the liquid flow around the body. Researchers have found that the eyes of fish are precisely located on the body so that the dynamic pressure is always zero. This means that vision is not distorted while the fish are swimming at varying speeds. The heart of the fish is located at a point where the dynamic pressure is most negative. This enables the functioning of the heart to be much easier at high swimming speeds. The mouth is placed at the very front of the body where the total pressure is highest. This high pressure makes it easier to take water for oxygen during fast swimming. Consider another example, the octopus, which is one of the more primary creatures in the so-called evolution process.

For thousands of centuries, the octopus has been using the conservation of momentum principle. The octopus takes in water and propels it through a narrow pipe in a direction opposite to its line of movement. This jet propulsion principle has been effectively used in man-made motors only in this century. It should be evident then that these sophisticated designs and techniques cannot be generated by those animals themselves, still less randomly produced by the trial and error of blind (unguided) natural forces. The physical laws and the perfectly adapted designs must originate from the same source, the Supreme ‘Engineer’. This explanation is the most rational and logical. Other explanations, which attempt to attribute design and engineering skills to plants and animals or to blind and deaf nature, make no sense at all. Another example is the development of the embryo. From the manufacturing point of view, this development can only be explained by the term miracle. In engineering practice, the size of each part in a product is predetermined and manufactured separately. Those parts are then assembled together to form the final product. Let us call this type of manufacturing static manufacturing, since the sizes of the parts remain the same during assembling. In the case of an embryo, the sizes of organs are changing with time while a continuous assembling takes place under those conditions. New organs are created inside, without any interference from outside, developing in size over time, yet holding the assembly in a perfect condition at each interval of time. This process is an example of dynamic manufacturing which is, to put it bluntly, quite impossible for us to achieve. In usual manufacturing, the size of a part is smaller than the raw bulk of material from which it is produced, and some of the material is wasted. In some cases, moulds are used to achieve the desired shapes. In the creation of an embryo, however, there are no moulds at all, no spare parts thrown away, no wastage.

These manufacturing techniques are by far beyond the limits of humanity. Note that we have not yet mentioned the events that take place at the micro level inside the cells. Even a general glance at the global events shows us how extraordinary the development of an embryo is. A final example will be given from the mechanics of materials. For birds to be able to fly, they must balance minimum weight with maximum strength. Their bones can be considered as hollow pipes. Calculations reveal that the ratio of the inner radius of the bones to the outer radius is selected in the optimum way precisely so that, with minimum weight, maximum strength is achieved. We have not mentioned the macro creation process (cosmos, galaxies, solar systems etc.) since these topics are more related to pure sciences such as physics, astronomy, chemistry, biology etc. An understanding of creation, even then not comprehensive, requires knowledge of these pure sciences together with knowledge of engineering and design. The Creator of the earth and cosmos describes Himself as ‘the Best of Creators’ (Mu’minun, 23.14). The reader may consider what we have said here as a tiny effort towards understanding this verse. 

The movie might be a fad, or a nine days’ wonder, simply another Spielberg special, like Jaws or E.T. However, this time the messages that the movie addresses have far-reaching consequences for mankind.

Thanks to Jurassic Park, our attention has been drawn to the recent achievements made in molecular biology and we have the opportunity to ponder how genetic engineering, in the hands of scientists who are apparently unrestrained by moral and ethical values, could threaten the ecological equilibrium of the planet and our very survival.

Let us consider the scientific advantages and ethical disadvantages of the advance of genetic engineering, by taking a look at the various applications of this knowledge in the modern world.

In Jurassic Park, John Hammond, played by Richard Attenborough, inspired by motives of forwarding the causes of science and making a profit, undertakes a scheme to clone living copies of dinosaurs from DNA extracted from fossilised, blood-sucking insects, preserved in amber. The origin of this idea was first proposed by George Poinar and his team at California University, Berkeley. In the last twenty years there have been many scientists working on the extraction of DNA from fossilized remains and the notion of obtaining dinosaur DNA in this way became feasible. Ironically, on the eve of the release of Jurassic Park, Poinar announced that his group had, in fact, extracted the first samples of genetic material from the age of the dinosaur. Using liquid nitrogen to crack open a sample of amber, DNA had been obtained from a weevil trapped 120 million years ago. Using gene-amplifying techniques, scientists are now able to make billions of copies of any piece of DNA.

I would like to draw your attention to two aspects of these scientific endeavors; firstly to the religious dimension and secondly to the wider ethical considerations of genetic engineering.

We must first ponder the notion that if it is possible for mortal human beings to produce synthetic RNA, one of the master-molecules in the nuclei of all cells, or to reproduce extinct animals by the retrieval of their DNA, surely it is possible for God, the All-Mighty, to recreate us from our bones on the Day of the Resurrection.

There are, of course, more secular ethical considerations in the application of genetic engineering. Today, scientists are experimenting with gene sequences and seem to have the ability to switch particular genetic codes on and off. By this means, science is on the brink of producing hybrid organisms in vitro. One recent experiment reported in The Economist (18th September 1993: pp.119-20) described how scientists were able to change the function of developing organs in four-hour-old fly embryos. One claim made recently is that the difference between man and chimpanzees is a few critical genes affecting intelligence. Are we to allow scientists, once these genes have been isolated, to create a hybrid intelligence? Are we ready to have these hybrid creatures living in our midst?

Will the Beast (Dabbah) mentioned in the Qur’an (al Naml, 27.82) be the result of such unrestrained scientific enquiry? What are the moral, ethical and religious implications of these advances?

When recent experiments on human cloning were publicized people seemed to worry, and worry deeply, about the horrific implications of duplicating a human embryo. This experiment is not the Jurassic Park-type cloning many might imagine. The worrying thing is that such technology really could pave the road to embryo factories to selling foetuses, freezing cloned foetuses for ‘spare organs’ that might be needed, or to be giving birth to genetically the same child at intervals, even to ‘maturing’ a twin cloned and stored for later use. According to Time’s survey 63% of people asked said human cloning is against God’s will; 90% of women stated that they would not be interested in cloning an embryo: a 58% said it is morally wrong (Time, 8 November 1993, pp.63-8).

In Jurassic Park, chaos theoretician Ian Malcolm, played by Jeff Goldblum, insists that what God has put asunder, no man should join together. Man should not interfere with the order of nature ordained by God and Malcolm says: ‘God created dinosaurs, God destroyed dinosaurs. God created Man, Man created dinosaurs’. Viewed in this perspective, can we foresee the consequences of interfering with this divine order, created by Allah in perfect balance? (al-Rahman, 55.8).

Today, genetic engineering is becoming a commercial enterprise in the hands of avaricious entrepreneurs and ethical considerations are being subverted by the desire for profit. The same technology is also being investigated to make tailor-made human organs, for transplantation into human patients. The specificity of these engineered organs would, in principle, avoid problems of rejection, as well as the practical and moral problems associated with human donors. This sounds good, but are we allowing ourselves, unhampered by moral considerations, to pave the way to a greater calamity?

Great advances have also been made in the field of agricultural genetics, with scientists trying to find answers to the problems of feeding a spiralling world population and of growing crops and raising cattle on poor soil or in adverse weather conditions. The Malthusian nightmare of populations being decimated by starvation has, to some extent, been averted in this century, although most of the benefits of these advances have been felt in the West where intensive farming of hardy crops and animal breeds have produced huge surpluses of food. For example, bovine growth hormone can be injected into dairy herds to give higher milk-yields and hybridization of crops has been used to produce strains which will grow in areas thought to have been useless for large-scale farming.

Genetic engineering in the field of producing vigorous or hardy varieties and breeds has signalled a new departure. Instead of the long, hit and miss processes of traditional hybridization, scientists are now able to isolate and transfer genetic material to improve the vigor of an organism or to increase its resistance to disease, insect damage or weed killers. Plants have been produced which fix their own nitrogen, as do natural legumes, and strains of bamboo have been reproduced which grow faster than the ‘natural’ varieties. All of this progress seems to suggest that yet another watershed has been reached in the realms of technology and productivity, which might offer benefits to all of mankind.

There is, however, another side to this coin. For example, hogs which have been treated with growth hormone are subject to gastric ulcers, arthritis, dermatitis and other diseases, making their already shortened lives a pain-ridden misery, and producing animals possibly unfit for human consumption. In Arable farming too, the production of herbicide-resistant crops encourages the indiscriminate spraying of chemicals on the land, increasing pollution of land and waterways. The agro-chemical companies are simply creating a ‘treadmill’ whereby new formulas are constantly needed to combat the new mutants of resistant pests.

Another environmental concern is that biotech agriculture will encourage the evasion of fundamental ecological reforms. If crop species can he easily bred to thrive in inhospitable conditions, farmers may fail to see the need to prevent environmental damage and simply wait for the scientists to engineer new crops or beasts to suit the new conditions. Would fish, genetically modified to flourish in acidified lakes, undercut the determination to clean up the air and water? Perhaps scientists should be concentrating more on the fundamental problems of the environment, rather than inventing palliatives to deal with the ravages of mankind. Surely it is better, for example, to find ways of conserving the rain forests than to invent ways of recreating their extinct flora and fauna?

Because of the limitless possibilities offered by the application of gene technology, DNA has become a corporate resource which can be patented and owned, designed in the laboratory and used to replace raw materials. This tendency may lead to the monopolization of genetic resources, placing control in the hands of multi-national giants whose main motive is profit, rather than with the people who need to use the technology to live.

Biotechnology will introduce a new era, greatly changing the way we live and the structure of our national economies. Food production in the laboratory will mean that traditional farming jobs will disappear–the EEC have already issued directives setting strict quotas for this type of production (EC Commission Directives 90/219 and 90/220). Consumers will also be directly affected and there is already a growing ‘grass-roots’ opposition to genetically engineered plants and animals. In the United States, for example, there have been moves to boycott such products and some restaurants have refused to serve genetically engineered foodstuffs. On 3rd October, l993, legislation came into force in Chicago obliging all food outlets to label genetically engineered food.

Studies in genetics are not confined to medicine and food production. In 1986, Professor Alec Jeffreys, of Leicester University in England, discovered that DNA is as individual as a finger-print and his research led to the genetic finger-printing techniques now established in forensic science. Samples of DNA taken from body fluids or tissues can provide an unmistakable ‘identity card’ and so assist in the conviction of offenders, particularly in cases of physical violence or sexual assault. DNA recovered from the victims of such crimes is now regarded by the British judicial system as highly reliable evidence and its use in the conviction of suspects is spreading, very rapidly, worldwide.

Even this seemingly overpoweringly beneficial use of genetic science has its dark side. The possibility of creating global genetic databases, with genetic information on all known criminals would appear to be an ideal solution in these times of escalating crime. However, there are issues of civil liberty to be tackled, and there is public resistance to such information being collated, using much the same arguments as have been used to resist the issuing of identity cards. There is also the problem of information held on these databases finding its way into the wrong hands. Again, mankind is faced with moral and ethical questions concerning the use and the abuse of technology.

Further Reading 

• BBC2 SERIES Cracking The Code: The Mouse That Laid The Golden Egg.
• HURREL, M. (1992) ‘Criminals Could Go On To World Blacklist’, The Times, 8 May, p.26.
• KENNEDY, P. (1993) Preparing for the Twenty-First Century, Harper-Collins Publishers, London, pp.65-8l.
• NASH, J. M. (1993) ‘How Did Life Begin?’, Time, 11 October, pp.53-9.
• RICHARD, M. et al. (1993) ‘Archaeology and Genetics: analyzing DNA from skeletal remains’. 25 (1) World Archaeology, pp.18-28
• TEICHMAN, D. L. (1993) Regulation of Recombinant DNA Research: a comparative study, 6 (1) Loyola Los Angeles International & Comparative Law, pp. l-35.
• TRUX, J. (1993) ‘A Case of Unmistakable Identity’, Observer, 13 August.
• WALKER, J. (1990) ‘DNA Profiling and Police Powers’, Criminal Law Review, pp. 479-93.
• TIME, (November 1993) ‘Cloning: Where Do We Draw The Line?’, pp.63-8.