| |
Medical Uses | |||||||||||||||
|
Would the medical community be equipped to handle the patient who walks in and announces there is a reasonable possibility that he is among the 20-30-40% of his race who is susceptible to an ancient genetic deficiency? What does that do to the organization of the medical profession and their approach to pre-treatment of a condition or disease which has not yet arrived on the scene? It's not exactly a universal vaccine that is required because it doesn't apply to most of the population. Not even to most of the isolated race. Yet, would it not seem reasonable, safer and less costly to treat the mutation rather than the inevitable, sometimes fatal condition? Or, could the patient at least wear a life name tag? Or, whoever thought of a surname? Politically and socially, we are still squabbling over the desperate needs of equality, affirmative action and similar activist pressures related to the human social success or otherwise. On the other hand, we are medically very different from one another, as the geneticists have proved and continued to prove. Over 4000 human maladies have been proved to be hereditary, and perhaps that's only the tip of an open umbrella. Our political postures surely cannot be allowed to inhibit our survival. How do we learn to wear the two hats of this dichotomy with equal force? Where do we begin? If mutations can be 1000's of years old, and at the same time only three or four generations old (or even be interconnected, one with the other) then the research cannot be limited to just the recent genealogy of five or ten historic generations that Aunt Mamie put onto her family tree, as the results of the two FMF test groups have just concluded. Nor is the human body limited to just one single mutation. |
Medical
|
||||||||||||||
Copyright 1996 Hall of Names International traceit@traceit.com Tel: 613.548.3406 Fax: 613.548.0673 US Only: 1-866-My-Roots