Pro And Cons Of Genetic Modification

Genetic Modification is often perceived as the answer to humanity’s faults because it will enhance human abilities, prevent the survival of incapacitating disabilities, and guide the innovation of the future. Sounds pretty good, right? That is not the reality. Genetic modification is not the solution to the ubiquitous problems of the human race, but rather infringes on individual rights, decreases diversity, permits too much power to the human race, and contributes to overpopulation.

You are probably familiar with GMO’s (genetically modified organism) and scientifically modified food that has had its DNA changes. There has been debate on GMO’s has been going on for a few decades, whether GMO are safe and even ethical. However, there is another debate that far surpasses GMOs and has a potential to radically shake society: the issue of genetically modifying humans. Changing our DNA could limit health issue or create a new Frankenstein’s monster among humans. Frankenstein had the wrong intent when he set out to create his monster. He only cared about himself and advancing his future. If Genetic engineering is sought after to just create something new there will be another monster. However, genetic can be safe and ethical if its intent and use is for medical purposes. We need to help the sick in society and one way to do that is with genetic engineering. With this purpose genetic engineering is not overstepping our authority like Frankenstein did.

Imagine a world where maladaptive genetic diseases have ceased to exist, parents have the ability to alter and improve their unborn child’s attributes such as height, intelligence, and attractiveness, and each generation becomes healthier, smarter, and stronger. Sounds like an unfeasible utopia, does it not? However, due to scientific advancements in the field of embryonic gene modification, this fantasy may soon become a reality. In a nutshell, embryonic gene modification refers to scientists altering the genome of an embryo in vitro for a multitude of reasons, ranging from eliminating harmful genetic diseases to altering superficial characteristics. Although embryonic gene modification may seem like a dream come true to many, it is not without ethical concerns that require intense debate.

Technology is developing every day. The automobile was revolutionary, and then they introduced the plane. Cell phones can connect us with people around the world. Self-driving cars are in development today! Revolutionary inventions are the expectation nowadays, but a new discovery is sparking controversial questions in the science world. Is it acceptable to alter a baby’s genes to make it a better human? Genes are the instruction book of the body, and they determine everyone’s attributes and how people act in their environment (Medical News Today). Some people say that everyone is different for a reason, and others think customizing the genes of children was meant to happen. Altering an infant’s genes is acceptable to prevent hereditary diseases, but the line should be drawn at making an artificially smarter, stronger, or prettier human.

The contemplation of designing your very own baby by picking and choosing specific traits may seem very intriguing, and most beneficial or exciting as a parent. Although as a repercussion of it can cause harm towards the parents themselves and the child. However, genetically modifying babies can result in benefits if used properly, but negative effects come along with the process of it all that can result from it. Genetically

Ronald M. Green who wrote “Building Babies From the Genes Up” has a different opinion to the use of genetic modification. He is saying that “if we understand the genetic causes for diseases we could use the technology to fix the bad gene in the DNA; no one has to suffer from diseases such as dyslexia, or Huntington” (570). Hayes argues that “why should a child struggle with reading difficulties when we could alter the gene responsible for the problem” (570). He said that having more knowledge about our gene could give us more freedom in term of biological obstacles that every new generation faces. He also mentions that genetic modification has worrying social effects, but he says “it will help close the gap in social class”(571). He said that

“Advances in genetic science could change the basic nature of human beings by allowing people to alter their genetic makeup or the genetic makeup of their children” (Kahn). Since editing human genes is an extremely controversial topic with great consequences, laws concerning gene editing vary worldwide. In the United States there is no ban on gene editing, however, the government cannot fund embryo modification. Altering human genes is wrong because it could lead to societal problems, create new genetic diseases, and it is immoral.

New technological advances and scientific methods continue to change the course of nature. One of the current controversial advances in science and technology is the use of genetically modified embryos in which the study exceeds stem cell research. Scientists have begun planning for research involving human embryos in the genetic modification field. Many technological developments are responsible for improving our living standards and even saving lives, but often such accomplishments have troubling cultural and moral ramifications (Reagan, 2015). We are already beyond the days in which virtually the only procreative option was for a man and a woman to conceive the old-fashioned way (Reagan, 2015). Genetic modification of human embryos can be perceived as a positive evolution in the medical process yet it is surrounded by controversy due to ethical processes. Because this form of genetic modification could affect later born children and their offspring, the protection of human subjects should be a priority in decisions about whether to proceed with such research (Dresser, 2004). The term Human Genetic Engineering was originally made public in 1970. During this time there were several methods biologists began to devise in order to better identify or isolate clone genes for manipulation in several species or mutating them in humans.

In 2004 the term “Genetic Babies” made it from sci-fi movies and weblogs to the Oxford dictionary which reflects the term becoming part of our everyday culture. The process can change genes, traits and defect particular defects, and ensure a healthy start to a child’s life. The forever growing strength of genetic technology may one day allow parents to adapt their unborn children, in order to spare their descendants from disease or, conceivably, make them tall, well-muscled, intellectual or otherwise gifted with appealing traits. However along with any new medical, high-tech treatment there is bounteous amounts of advantages and disadvantages that follow. Are the technologies of genetic modification safe

Parents wish for their children to be perfect and, more so, healthy. Through the advancement of modern technology and science, giving birth to a child of desired hair color, body type, and without any physical or mental ailments could be a reality for all parents, whether or not they are carriers of certain genes. Genetic modification, sometimes called “germline editing,” has the potential to allow for medical doctors and scientists to not only change certain characteristics of a human embryo, but to also alter the future of humanity itself. While this process has many proponents, the modification of the very essence of human life has some people worried. This is, in fact, uncharted territory in the scientific world, and the extent of the possible

Genetic enhancement is just another form of enhancement which has the benefit of the child in mind. There are many others: education, medical care, extra-curricular activities, etc. As Goering puts it, a parent does not blink when they give the child vitamin supplements, vaccinations, and dental enhancements (e.g., braces) [Goering, 2]. Imposing parental treatment is a part of being human and is ethical when the intentions are beneficent. There is no real difference in changing attributes of a child for the better at the genome level, or once the child is born. If administering growth hormones to young children to prevent them from being too short [Simon] is justifiable, then so is germline genetic modification of height to produce the same result. Or, if parents are fine with the installation of braces to straighten their child’s teeth, then they should be fine with genetic manipulation instead to produce the same outcome. The two actions are basically the same; the latter is perhaps even better as it eliminates the discomfort of being forced to wear braces.

For example, according to Richard Hayes from In The Pipeline: Genetically Modified Humans, “Genetic engineering provides the ability to add or delete specific genes within a living cell nucleus. Gene modifications can have an impact solely on a single person, or on a person's child and all subsequent descendants” (Hayes). What Hayes is trying to say is that using genetic modification can either be beneficial or non-beneficial to people. Changing ones’ genes can not only affect them, but also affect their future kids as well. Being so, their future children may not have anything wrong with them and have their genes react differently to these previous treatments. This is one risk parents must think about when deciding whether to change their child’s genes’ to better their

The advancement in technology has not only allowed people to test and diagnose diseases in human embryos, but technology has also given parents the ability to genetically modify their future kids. Parents may now ensure that no disease is carried on in future generations, correct inherited defects, enhance certain traits such as intelligence and athleticism, and choose eye color and gender(“Cho”). The process in which people alter human embryos is called genetic engineering, but the diagnosing of inherited defects and diseases is known as genetic screening(“Designer”). Through genetic engineering parents create the coined term “Designer Baby”. A designer baby is a baby whose embryo has been genetically altered. Many argue that genetic engineering is unethical, because some people may abuse the intended therapeutic use and create above average humans unfair to the rest of the population. The public, at large, also claim scientist should not “play God”, because they are interfering with biological processes and altering the natural course of human evolution. Many people believe only the rich may be able to afford genetic engineering; therefore, genetic engineering creates inequality. Some of the public distrusts genetic engineering, because it is in its earliest forms of development. Regardless, institutes and universities have proven the success of genetic modification; thus, showing the safety of genetically modifying a baby(“Screening”). Although some people and ethics may go against genetic engineering, genetic engineering increases human potential and quality of life. Regardless of ethics and disagreements on genetic engineering, it would be unethical to have a child with cystic fibrosis or Tay-Sachs disease, knowing it could have been prevented with genetic engineering. Genetic engineering may be the best route for humans to take for the betterment of life and human capability along with ensuring no disease is inherited and defects are fixed.

The subject of genetic engineering attracts controversy as a powerful, honey-covered magnet might attract a metallic bear. Since the dawn of the genetically modified organism, companies in the biotech industry have battled dedicated protesters and tenacious lobbyists who strive to put an end to the production of genetically modified, or “GM” crops. The pros and cons of genetic engineering are highly motivating to ambitious food corporations and protest movements alike. In the light of the divisiveness of the matter, and its effects on the environment and economy, consumers should have the ability to decide whether or not to spend their grocery money on GM produce. Consumers may gain this freedom of choice through enacting compulsory GM food labeling in supermarkets.

Sure, the kid might be prone to a few diseases and smarter, but part of having a family is making a child with your same traits, which is what makes us as humans unique. Take for example, a couple: a man and a woman both with black hair and green eyes. They decide to have a genetically modified baby. Since sources claim that people with blue eyes and blonde hair get better jobs and have better social lives, they decide to give the baby these traits. Now, throughout this kid’s life he has to be burdened with the question: “Did your mom have an affair or like were you adopted because like you look nothing like