Researchers at the Virginia Commonwealth University Massey Cancer Center and the VCU Institute of Molecular Medicine recently published findings that give hope in the fight against pancreatic cancer, one of the most deadly forms of cancer because of its resistance to treatment. Using a new chemoprevention gene therapy, the researchers were able to kill pancreatic cancer cells. The technique was able to not only stop the growth of the cancer, but also to eliminate existing tumors.

Despite this breakthrough, a Google search for “gene therapy” will likely turn up more results related to the use of the technology in sports. Gene doping, or permanently altering genes to enhance athletic performance, has become a popular subject of late as the world celebrates athletic competition in Beijing. Some fear this could be happening during these Olympic games.

The headlines say it all: “Finding the Golden Genes,” “Genetically Modified Olympians?” and “Will Gene Therapy Destroy Sports?” to name a few.

Since the beginnings of gene therapy research in muscular degeneration, people have seen the application to sports. In a review of two early breakthroughs in gene modification to grow muscles in mice, David Epstein of Sports Illustrated reports that both teams of scientists received calls from not only people with diseases like muscular dystrophy, but also from athletes interested in test-driving the techniques.

The World Anti-Doping Agency has banned the practice of gene doping and is looking for a way to detect it. It’s not as easy as testing for an ingested steroid, and the agency has invested heavily in researching detection techniques. So far, there are no surefire ways to tell if someone has dabbled in DNA reorganization.

Gene doping in sports raises the familiar questions of cheating, ethics, and pushing the limits of athleticism and humanity. Would the Olympics be as interesting if we knew certain athletes made changes to their DNA? Would we be as impressed with medal counts? As Epstein asks, “What is it we seek to gain from sport? Do we want to see larger-than-life behemoths swatting 600-foot home runs? Or do we prefer to see people more like us pressing the limits of their strength and skill?”

Another concern is the safety of anyone pursuing gene doping. The science is still new and not extensively tested in humans. Some human trials have had tragic results. FDA has not yet approved a gene therapy treatment, but monitors research in this area. The agency’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research is currently overseeing 210 investigational new drug gene therapy studies. Experts are afraid that athletes will try gene doping anyway, just to have the competitive edge.

As we approach the time when gene manipulation becomes more advanced and more common, safety and an ethical perspective become increasingly important. I would say that preventing cancer with gene therapy is an example of the “right” way to use this technology, but I question whether gene manipulation to make a person run faster is really necessary. Where do we draw the line between what’s a life-improving technique and what’s a superficial use? Or, should a line be drawn at all? Who is to judge?

And who will answer these questions as we head down this road?