Should the Government allow Gene Therapy Research?

Unknown impact from shortcutting evolution
Since the initial gene therapy trial 20 years ago, there have only been 1,700 clinical trials of mixed results. Compare that with other more established cross-human procedures such as skin grafting and blood transfusion, it is easy to see why the government should not allow gene therapy. Skin grafting has been in practice as far back as 3,000 years and established as a standard medical procedure half a century ago. Yet, cases of rejection in the well established bio-transplant procedures remains common. For even the well know procedures, the rejection consequence can even be severe enough to be out of control.
At the delicate genetic level, tests are much harder to be conducted, and gene therapy in these limited number of trials has not been proven to be completely safe, and can have very serious health risks, such as cancer, toxicity, inflammation, and many more undiscovered risks since the technology is still relatively new.

Ray of hope for terminal conditions (video)

Despite the risks, gene therapy does shine a ray of hope for terminally ill conditions and those currently non-curable born disease or cancer. In those medical cases, reaching back to complete health is not so much a goal but rather life extension, and hopefully by extending the life human body's own miracle process can have a chance to kick in. Encouraging news as reported from Discovery News have happened back in 1990 in a young girl with naturally born disorder and diabetic dog.

Leave the door ajar
Genetics in nature have evolved over a long natural process to reach a delicate balance. Not everything is thoroughly researched on an abrupt change, since not all trial outcomes are favorable. Although it may be able to cure an inherited disease, it may have different effect that is still unknown. For hopeless conditions, gene therapy does provide a ray of hope but must be undertaken after deep evaluation and great care. Government laws should not close the door of hope, but also need to ensure laws have no loopholes to enable abusive practice. This would be disastrous since it is one mistake fixing another, which would make the second mistake harder to cure.


Sources:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23618815
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6753699
http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/handbook/therapy?show=all#safety
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLI1Gfb0ynw

Pictures:
http://www.engage-science.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/shi_julie_graphic.jpg