Pros And Cons Of Gene Editing

magine, 20 years from now, sitting in a cold doctor's office deciding the genes of your unborn baby, what color hair, eyes, speed of metabolism, height would you even know what to pick? Impossible you might say but in this day and age technology is growing ever so rapidly that picking the genetic makeup of your baby is closer than you might think. The technology is called CRISPR. This technology doesn't only have the ability to change physical traits, but genetic traits specifically genetic abnormalities and diseases. 20 years ago, no one would have ever thought we would have the answer to, in theory, cure every genetic disease from sickle cell anemia to cystic fibrosis. However, with great scientific breakthroughs comes questioning and

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.

With modern technology comes the breakthrough of the decade by altering the human genes. This altering gene invention is called CRISPR/Cas9. However, this invention in the beginning stages of altering genes, began with rats until perfection. The process began early with the embryo stages to edit the genes. With the introduction of CRISPR surrounds a lot of controversy. Some people believe editing genes is playing with the hands of God and refuse to believe in CRISPR. With the article, “Let’s Hit Pause Before Altering Humankind”, by David Baltimore believes CRISPR is a tool with no good intentions. With this information the article should not be published with being against CRISPR.

In recent years genetic modification has been advancing. Genetic modification is when a living organism has been altered to a specific state of characteristics. So far scientist has made one attempt to modify genes from an embryo recently. Whether they were successful or not is question unanswered yet. Gene modification can be great and all. However, is it right to modify genes? Apparently, the population agrees to modify genes since there has been licenses of approval for gene modification. If Society cared about gene modification, then there would be signs of disapproval of gene modification. However, this is viewed morally wrong in my point of view. The pros of modifying genes are that defeating diseases, potential to live longer, genetic diseases, and able to select character traits of babies. The cons of modifying genes are failures on the way to perfecting genetic modification, genetic modification babies can have more greater problems, very expensive, and when does it stop?

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

Human gene editing has long been controversial topic; however, precise techniques that accomplish this feat have only recently been discovered. According to the Welcome Genome Campus in the UK, the most versatile and simplest technique, called CRISPR-Cas9, allows scientists to cut, alter, or add to sections of the DNA sequence of living organisms (“What Is CRISPR-Cas9?”). This astonishing technology has nearly endless applications, including the potential to eradicate genetic diseases in humans that currently have no cure. This could have vast implications for people who suffer with disease and the economy of the region in which they live, but the technology has yet to be commercialized. The

There have been many cases of accidental modification of healthy genes in the body, which could suggest that genetic modifications to human DNA is far from safe. “What the paper really emphasizes is that we are far away from using genomic editing because it’s not safe. The idea of using this for designer babies is very far-fetched. The technology is too far off,” said Dusko Ilic, a stem cell researcher at King’s College, London (Sample, Ian, ed).

The genetic engineering used for genetically modifying embryos and the thought of genetically modifying embryos is a technology that has caused an unethical dilemma within today’s society. This genetic technology comes at a risk, however, the most common way to genetically modify a human embryo, let alone anything living is known as CRISPR Cas9. This tool uses the enzyme Cas9 to cleave onto DNA to cut it, however according to Alex J. Maben a journalist who wrote an article on the flaws of this technology states “’The Cas9 enzyme that CRISPR uses to cleave DNA… could also make cuts where it’s not intended to, potentially causing cancer’(Kaiser, para5). Also, once CRISPR is in the body, it stays in the body” (Maben). This is an ethical dilemma because as stated above the CRISPR tool can cause cuts to

Fast forwards two hundred years and the science (or lack thereof) depicted is almost indistinguishable, a revolutionary new process called CRISPR (clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats) is allowing science to edit the human genome almost at will. With the announcement of US scientists creating the first genetically modified embryo, an outburst of ethical debate has arisen. While they are certainly not the first (a Chinese division won the achievement in 2015), this achievement was created through the CRISPR process.

Although highly controversial, I find germline editing extremely interesting. Just the thought of removing a gene from an embryo is fascinating. In the article they used an enzyme called CRISPR/Cas9 as their scissors in order to cut out the faulty gene, which could’ve lead to heart failure. This genetic editing could potentially save thousands, perhaps millions of people from heart problems. When injected with the CRISPR/Cas9, a RNA strand to direct the cut, and an added piece of DNA to help repair the cell. During this process something interesting happened. The embryo rejected the added DNA and healed itself using the healthy copy of its mother’s DNA. This posed many questions for me. One of the major questions I had was, are designer babies possible? Can someone choose what features their child gets? By continuing my research into this topic I found out that although it would be extremely difficult there is a slight chance that designer babies are possible. Although this possibility is very small and would take

The idea of eugenics as a means of improving human conditions through embryo manipulation, has been debated in many scientific and cultural communities for various reasons. One of them being its effect on society, specifically the societal views of genetically improved individuals. From a social and cultural perspective, the concept of eugenics varies between people of different cultures. With the results of different human eugenic trials and the increase of gene editing technologies such as CRISPR, there have been many contrasting reactions to the information. Recently, the topic of debate has been whether there should be limits on the development of gene-modifying technologies, specifically in embryo modification. This report examines the

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.

Today, with the recent discovery of CRISPR for gene-editing, it is very much a possibility. This rapid scientific progress has sparked a fierce debate about the ethics of germline modification. In December 2015, an international group of scientist convened at a three-day forum in Washington, DC and concluded by calling for a moratorium on the clinical use of CRISPR to modify the human germline (McCarthy, 2015). Several of those in attendance wrote “recommend that steps be taken to strongly discourage... any attempts at germline genome modification for clinical application in humans, while societal, environmental, and ethical implications of such activity are discussed among scientific and governmental organizations” []. One consequence of this disagreement is that some religious institutions remain skeptical about taking part in gene-editing research and limit opportunities for their students to get involved in this field. In this essay, I will show that germline modification is ethical, and make the case for why such schools should embrace gene-editing research. Specifically, I will try to convince the faculty and administration at Saint Louis University that they should offer federal work-study internships in partnership with Monsanto labs for students interested in learning about

Although still a very debated subject, genetic enhancement has been around for many years with the genetic modification of crops. Just this year, researchers from Sun Yat-sen University in Guangzhou were the first to modify the genomes of human embryos in order to find a way to eliminate genetic diseases. The researchers used the gene editing technique CRISPR/Cas9, which, in layman’s terms, cuts out the bad genes and replaces the gaps with healthy genes. While this is a major scientific advancement, there are many ethical reasons why people might be weary of this new development.

Our world is in a constant state of flux. Changes are being made every second of the day, and this is only natural to life. So it shouldn’t come to a surprise with how rapidly advance our medical science is becoming. Why does nature spew new innovations? Because in order to survive, all living things have to overcome numerous obstacles in life. Therefore, scientists are constantly developing new technologies to reduce the hurdles of humans. This includes the method of genome-editing that may alter human DNA. However, there are many concern about the consequences of genome alteration as this will affect the individual and their future generation (Wade). We don’t know for certain what lies beyond this. While it makes a highly promising invention for a multiplicity of uses, could we be tampering with nature?