 |
|
|
|
Michael Mehta |
By Kristina Bergen
SPARK Writer
Imagine this scenario: you apply for a job, meet your potential employer, and soar through the interview with flying colours. But before you leave, you must submit a drop of blood for tests that will determine whether you are hired.
A new technology called 'lab-on-chip' could make it possible to read all the information contained in an individual's genetic code from one drop of blood. A hand-held, lab-on-chip device could also provide a way to stream and screen employees according to genetic strengths and weaknesses.
While it may sound like science fiction, scientists are currently investigating this technology to help in the early detection of cancer and other diseases.
Lab-on-chip is a product of nanoscience, the study and manipulation of atoms, which is leading to new developments in medicine, agriculture, manufacturing and telecommunications.
University of Saskatchewan sociologist Michael Mehta thinks lab-on-chip is a development that raises ethical questions about the use and regulation of nanotechnology.
"This technology may improve cancer research," says Mehta, "but what happens if insurance companies or employers start using it? We don't want people denied health coverage or jobs because they have a genetic predisposition towards certain diseases."
The drop of blood would be placed on a microfluidic chip that resembles a microscope slide. The chip has grooves throughout its layers that send the blood down different paths where it simultaneously undergoes multiple tests that provide a complete genomic profile. In theory, the grooves could be carved by synchrotron light, such as that generated by the Canadian Light Source now under construction at the U of S.
Mehta, Director of the U of S Sociology of Biotechnology Program, is concerned that the recent explosion of nanotechnology could destroy genetic privacy if the technology is not regulated by a governing body.
Currently, there is no regulatory body in Canada for nanotechnology and hence no rules as to how the technology is used or who can access it. And there's no one making sure that with nanotechnology devices, your genetic information remains private, he says.
"Scientific focus is usually on developing technology, rather than considering all potential uses of the end product," said Mehta.
"It is not the job of the sociologist to stifle technology, but to get scientists and others thinking about the social implications of this work."
He notes that genetic discrimination is "not as improbable as some people would make it out to be - it has been simmering since the 1920s."
While genetic discrimination may seem like a flashback to World War II Nazi Germany, it existed in Canada from the late 1920s to the early '70s. Both Alberta and British Columbia passed laws that forced mental patients - considered by some to be genetically 'flawed' people - to be sterilized, castrated, or to have a hysterectomy.
Mehta wants to ensure genetic discrimination doesn't happen again. He notes there is a large need for both social acceptance and ethical analysis of nanotechnology.
Mehta plans to develop educational programs that teach people what nanoscience is all about.
He will soon hold public forums to discuss nanotechnology, health and privacy safeguards that should be in place, and the need for standards and regulations.
"We must be sensitive to the fact that technologies don't exist in a vacuum," he says.
"All technologies have costs and benefits for certain user groups."
For more on Mehta's views on privacy and nanotechnology, go to website: www.arts.usask.ca/policynut/nano-pan.pdf
The SPARK (Students Promoting Awareness of Research Knowledge) Program is run out of Research Communications, Office of the Vice-President Research.
 |
 |
