Could Colorblindness Cure Be Morally Wrong?

destinyland writes "One in 12 men suffers from colorblindness, though '[t]he good news here is that these folks are simply missing a patch of DNA ... which is just the kind of challenge this Millennium is made for. Enter science.' But NPR's Moira Gunn (from Biotech Nation) now asks a provocative question. Is it wrong to cure colorblindness? She reports on an experiment that used a virus to introduce corrective DNA into colorblind monkeys. ('It took 20 weeks, but eventually the monkeys started distinguishing between red and green.') Then she asks, could it be viewed differently? 'Are we trying to 'normalize' humans to a threshold of experience?'"

Comments

Re:WTF? Just ask the patient.

[snowgirl]

But the fact remains that color blindness is a disability, even though it is a lesser disability than most.

You're an idiot. When someone registers statistically perfect scores on entrance exams and is then told that due to colorblindness they can only work in data entry, it is a disability.

When someone is completely removed from any opportunity in biology or area research, it is a disability.

We don't all aspire to be hip-hop thugs.

I learned sign-language from a deaf-from-birth friend. He did not see deafness as a disability.

Likewise, each individual person needs to make an individual choice about this matter. For some it is a profound disability, and for others it is no big deal.

Welcome to the world of "the patient must provide consent to treatment."