What do you think?
Rate this book
Genethics: The Clash between the New Genetics and Human Values
Genethics is the most lucid and authoritative guide for general readers to modern genetic technology and the myriad ethical issues it raises.
Paperback
First published January 1, 1989
2 people are currently reading
41 people want to read
About the author
David Suzuki
118 books251 followersDavid Suzuki is a Canadian science broadcaster and environmental activist. A long time activist to reverse global climate change, Suzuki co-founded the David Suzuki Foundation in 1990, to work "to find ways for society to live in balance with the natural world that sustains us." The Foundation's priorities are: oceans and sustainable fishing, climate change and clean energy, sustainability, and David Suzuki's Nature Challenge. He also served as a director of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association from 1982-1987.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
November 25, 2025
The book proposes 10 ethical principles in a fairly straightforward way. I agree with 7 or 8 of them outright and think the others are probably acceptable. I worry some of what's in here may be outdated, however.
I read the first 50 pages closely and then started skipping around a bit at page 53. I did skim/read through in spots to make sure none of the information was stuff I didn't already know or assume. I started reading closely again at page 90. I thought the Hardy Weinberg equation was fascinating, then chapter 5 deals with recombinant DNA, which was very interesting hard science.
Chapter 6 starts to get into ethical arguments, starting with what I'll call the "pobody's nerfect" argument: defects, even those linked with extreme violent behavior, must be tolerated, because every human genome is complex and flawed. Chapter 7 appeals to principles of privacy, freedom, and equality of opportunity. Individual freedom here is specifically the right of an individual to pursue work that they may not be the most genetically well suited to do. The argument for this often comes down to the fact that it's impossible to screen for suitability to most tasks accurately, and often it is done based on false or mistaken information. Expression due to environment cannot be tested for, and moreover, the author makes the argument that all people have a right to a non toxic workplace.
Chapter 8 runs through the details of human gene therapy, with a note that alterations should be confined to somatic cells and not allowed in germ (reproductive) cells. There's also an interesting note that even "bad" genes - like the sickle cell allele - are somehow beneficial for human survival. Chapter 9 speaks against the production of biological weapons, which, I think everyone can agree, is a good take.
Chapter 10 is about mutagenic damage, which is frequently caused by exposure to the sun. While this is theoretically morally neutral, the author condemns the release of environmental pollutants that may cause widespread mutagenic damage.
Chapter 11 talks quite a bit about the crown gall bacterium, which can actually inject and alter genes in the plants they infect. They're the only prokaryotic that can do this to a complex organism. This bacteria has already been utilized to genetically modify crops for yield and even to create a pesticide. The author expressed concern over using these techniques to immunize crops to herbicide, warning of unintended consequences, exploitation of corporations for profit, and "ecological havoc." He goes on to caution against human-led interspecies genetic exchange.
Chapter 12 praises genetic diversity, which I agree with. It focuses on maize. I skimmed. I found that the subchapter sections rarely referenced each other, so it's easy to skip around. I'm not sure I agree that genes that are "proven over generations" have an inherent value that new recombinant DNA lacks. I think I'm less terrified of experimentation than the author.
Chapter 13 covers gene mapping. I would assume much has changed and developed since the publication of this text.
The epilogue discusses the limits of science, advocating for myth and, dare I say, morality? Specifically "non western" moral paradigms. I agree that people can't necessarily perceive the complexity of whole systems but I don't think that means we should be scared to act. I think a lot of big risks are acceptable in pursuit of the satisfaction of curiosity.
I read the first 50 pages closely and then started skipping around a bit at page 53. I did skim/read through in spots to make sure none of the information was stuff I didn't already know or assume. I started reading closely again at page 90. I thought the Hardy Weinberg equation was fascinating, then chapter 5 deals with recombinant DNA, which was very interesting hard science.
Chapter 6 starts to get into ethical arguments, starting with what I'll call the "pobody's nerfect" argument: defects, even those linked with extreme violent behavior, must be tolerated, because every human genome is complex and flawed. Chapter 7 appeals to principles of privacy, freedom, and equality of opportunity. Individual freedom here is specifically the right of an individual to pursue work that they may not be the most genetically well suited to do. The argument for this often comes down to the fact that it's impossible to screen for suitability to most tasks accurately, and often it is done based on false or mistaken information. Expression due to environment cannot be tested for, and moreover, the author makes the argument that all people have a right to a non toxic workplace.
Chapter 8 runs through the details of human gene therapy, with a note that alterations should be confined to somatic cells and not allowed in germ (reproductive) cells. There's also an interesting note that even "bad" genes - like the sickle cell allele - are somehow beneficial for human survival. Chapter 9 speaks against the production of biological weapons, which, I think everyone can agree, is a good take.
Chapter 10 is about mutagenic damage, which is frequently caused by exposure to the sun. While this is theoretically morally neutral, the author condemns the release of environmental pollutants that may cause widespread mutagenic damage.
Chapter 11 talks quite a bit about the crown gall bacterium, which can actually inject and alter genes in the plants they infect. They're the only prokaryotic that can do this to a complex organism. This bacteria has already been utilized to genetically modify crops for yield and even to create a pesticide. The author expressed concern over using these techniques to immunize crops to herbicide, warning of unintended consequences, exploitation of corporations for profit, and "ecological havoc." He goes on to caution against human-led interspecies genetic exchange.
Chapter 12 praises genetic diversity, which I agree with. It focuses on maize. I skimmed. I found that the subchapter sections rarely referenced each other, so it's easy to skip around. I'm not sure I agree that genes that are "proven over generations" have an inherent value that new recombinant DNA lacks. I think I'm less terrified of experimentation than the author.
Chapter 13 covers gene mapping. I would assume much has changed and developed since the publication of this text.
The epilogue discusses the limits of science, advocating for myth and, dare I say, morality? Specifically "non western" moral paradigms. I agree that people can't necessarily perceive the complexity of whole systems but I don't think that means we should be scared to act. I think a lot of big risks are acceptable in pursuit of the satisfaction of curiosity.
Displaying 1 of 1 review