The Importance of the Wise Use of Genetic Engineering

I agree with your opinion in how genetic technology could leave a negative impact to our society. I believe the idea of genetic engineering is not natural. We have no idea of the harm that could result from this technology. Genetic engineering is another step in giving humans their desires. I believe that altering the DNA of any life form is not just. Genetically manipulating a life form could put an imbalance in nature and society. No one should have the right to manipulate the genetics of other life forms. The idea of genetic engineering is be consider unethical because it is enforcing animal cruelty. Furthermore, I am appalled that some parent choose their child’s appearance, rather than go through the ‘natural’ process, to prevent bullying and discrimination.

In recent years, a debate has sparked whether or not genetic engineering in children should be allowed. Genetic engineering is done to insure that children are born with certain genes. My belief is that genetic engineering should not be used for selfish reasons such as 'perfecting' our children. Genetic engineering should not be used to perfect the imperfections in unborn children. The idea that we as humans must fix everything wrong in our lives is somewhat normal.

Genes are a complex part of human life, and make each of us different and special. But what if there was a choice where you could genetically alter your child, making them disease free and astonishing athletes? It sounds almost too good to be true, to have your very own designer baby. For the good of human species, we should be allowed to alter human genetics. With all these amazing abilities and unlimited changes we could make to our children, it would be like shopping for clothes at a mall. This may sound like a dream come true, but it can lead to many problems in the near future. Trying to change human genes takes away each person's own individuality, and could cause people to segregate the people who were not genetically altered. Even if it can make beautiful, healthy children, it has too many problems than benefits to actually be any good for humans.

Human genetic engineering and eugenics have been a largely controversial topic over the past decades. Eugenics can be popularly defined as the science of improving and enhancing a human population or person through manipulating the human genes, selective breeding, and sterilization. The end goal and desired result of eugenics is to basically create a human race or people with more desirable biological, physical, or psychological traits. Eugenics and genetic modification is a current, pressing subject; in April 2015, a group of Chinese researchers, used a new gene-editing technology, called CRISPR to “[tinker] with the genomes of human embryos” (Adams). Presently, according to CQ Researcher, “New genetic technologies allow scientists to delete a mutant gene and insert a healthy one, which…has the potential to eliminate inherited diseases, such as cystic fibrosis.” However, these techniques have only been used on embryos belonging to laboratory animals. The big question here is whether or not science and technology are crossing an ethical boundary by using these techniques and performing genetic modification on human embryos. Do humans have the right to “play God” and alter nature?

Throughout the world, many intelligent minds exist. One, in particular, had something to say about Human genetic engineering. “Nuclear weapons need large facilities, but genetic engineering can be done in a small lab. You cannot regulate every lab in the world. The danger is that either by accident or design, we create a virus that destroys us” (Stephen Hawking). Hawking is considered to be one of the most intelligent people in the modern world. For this reason, his statement is not to be taken with a grain of salt. The concept of Human genetic engineering is surrounded with danger and controversy. There are several different positions on human genetic modification. Conservatives, or Traditionalists believe such innovation or change would be detrimental towards the human race. Conservatives say that families are the foundation of society so changing how families come to be would ultimately tear society apart (Foht). Others say that innovation of such magnitude would act as a boon to the human race. Concerning the danger of genetic engineering, it could definitely become an immense detriment. However, with the correct limitation and government oversight, the human race will benefit from it. Genetically engineering a Human embryo is a step that science will eventually take. Whether it be decades or centuries from now, genetically modified humans will walk the Earth.

Finally, my last reason why I do not support genetic engineering is because it will make some people enter a bad emotional state. In the movie GATTACA,when a person was perfect, but then later found out he had mistakes they would enter a suicidal state of mind. This happens because the person thinks they’re perfect but when they realise they are not they think they’re a failure. If we start genetically modifying our children they could experience something similar to this. We should just let everyone be

Scientists have recently brought up the idea of genetically engineering humans, as if we are machines that need to be tinkered with. Genetic engineering is the deliberate modification of the DNA of an organism. We have seen this type of modification in the food that we have consumed and in the animals that many purchase. It has never been proven to be 100% safe for humans to consume genetically modified food as it is not from nature and our bodies do not know how to react. Also there have been many cases where purebred dogs have been susceptible to numerous diseases because of the decreased gene pool they were modified from, which is the cause of inbreeding. Scientists must never engineer humans because we have seen the bad effects it has had

Genetic modification is a scientific advancement with lots of possibilities. The most compelling argument for genetic engineering is to improve the health of society. Simple genetic mutations can easily affect one’s health. If there are effective and efficient methods to cure this, shouldn’t we do so? Or should we object to this? On what grounds? When it is, after all, the logical next step to medical advancement. It has the potential to save thousands of people from diseased lives and early death. Objections are often based on the fact that it is “unnatural” or the fear of the unknown. But so are IVF and organ transplants. It is difficult to predict with a definite certainty of what will occur in the future as a result of the actions of the present. But when has that ever stopped us? Shouldn’t we have the right to eliminate genetic diseases and push human capabilities through genetic engineering? But at what point should we draw a line on genetic modification?

There is no denying the argument that it would be incredibly useful to have the ability to control and manipulate embryos in order to prevent diseases. However although there would be possible benefits, it is believed by many, including myself, that this huge medical step would cause more harm than good. On top of this, the concept of screening to prevent genetic disorders also suggests that a person with a disorder is somehow inferior, less desirable or not equal. Coming from a family that has lost many to the heartbreaking disease of cancer, I would love to see humans advance to a point where things like this were no longer a part of life. However, in my opinion, genetic engineering is not the solution to this nor is it the way of the future. In the article “ Engineering the perfect baby,” Antonio Regaldo quotes Edward Lanphier who says, “There really isn’t a medical reason.

The process is aesthetic in nature and unnatural. This carries more weight than the fact that an individual can eradicate certain genetic diseases (Wivel&Walters, 1993).Through the process of genetic modification, doctors can even change the sex of a fetus as long as their clients pay for it. That is very unnatural. As the technology advances, it will be possible to change many features of a fetus like its eye colors and even develop certain desirable traits in them like a good personality, height, skin color, hair color, academic abilities, athletic skills, and so forth. The ethical aspect of such developments is questionable. The born child will be unnatural (Kogan, Doherty,&Gitschier, 1987). Thus, the morality of the technology is not acceptable. Moreover, since the science is imperfect, the desired traits in a child may fail, and the parents would develop resentments towards the child in future. It is also worrying how a genetically modified kid would behave once it learns that it is not natural like everyone

Genetic engineering, sometimes referred to as genetic mutation, is a process in which DNA is altered in the genome of an embryo. The reason scientists use this research is to test the possibility of a cure to end potential diseases and harm to the developing human being. One reason that genetic engineering is unethical is simply because they are potential living human beings. According to the article “Act For Libraries,” “The human being, or Homo sapien, is defined in both biological and spiritual ways. In the biological definition, the human being is defined as different from other species based on genetic makeup, namely DNA. This definition places importance on the physical nature of the human being, the body, where as the spiritual definition offers an alternative view.” These embryos will eventually become human beings, so why would scientists believe that it is okay to mutate these beings into something totally different just to have a more “aesthetic world”? Adolf Hitler tried to create a ‘perfect race’ using Eugenics a very long time ago, and that got him nowhere. Biotechnologists should not manipulate nature and change it into something that it isn’t just to make the world more pleasing to the eye.

The issue at hand is that scientists are in a period of enlightenment with the human genome and with no standard line of ethics pertaining to editing human embryos in research development other countries are taking liberty to beat around the bush to explore this concept of eugenics. After the cloning of dolly the goat and China cloning two monkeys without a genetic blood disease through a process called CISPR society are asking the same question. Are scientists taking this too far before it is ready? Anyone who plans on reproducing or has genetic diseases in their family may want to consider a side in this debate because they may find themselves with the option of “editing” their baby with the ideal gene pool. This issue is prevalent because the entire world is tempering with human genes and is working towards introducing a whole new set of humans by this technology. Gene manipulation is an important topic because of the ethical and spiritual beliefs that it challenge. Changing genetic material to where there is no disease would affect the entire next population of humans and their future children. While scientists now know how to change our physical traits and handicaps they cannot take out traits like ambitiousness which is what makes manipulating the human genome so dangerous. The risks is that this chase for curing disease could turn into a quest for the ideal human where in the future parents can grocery shop their child or countries can create the ultimate human race.

Genetic Engineering is the editing, erasing, or replacement of a gene to evoke positive change in a patient’s health. This is a serious moral conflict in today’s society where scientific research and experiments have yet again attempted what was once the impossible. It is incredible that we are capable of creating life saving devices and tools, but at some point we need to find a limit. Sometimes research and curiosity exceeds its boundaries and can become harmful to other people. Genetic Engineering is controversial because it is intended to be beneficial to one’s health but it may eventually expand from preventing disease to choosing your baby’s eye color and intelligence levels. These babies with unnecessary changes to their phenotype are called “designer babies” because their parents are picking traits rather than trying to escape pain and disease. This technology is not fully developed and commonly used today, it is more theoretical for future testing.

What would happen to human population if all disabilities and diseases were gone forever? Could it even be possible? This may seem unrealistic, but genetic engineering (eugenics) has now made it to the realm of human possibility. Genetic engineering is a process where “a gene for a desirable trait is taken from one organism and inserted into another, it gives the ‘recipient’ organism the ability to express that same trait” [1]. This gave rise to eugenics, which uses the process of genetic engineering to improve human population by increasing desirable inherited traits. The history of this phenomenon began when Sir Francis Galton published his article titled “Hereditary Talent and Character” in which he suggested that the principle of artificial selection could be applied to humans. “He realized that high quality intelligence and abilities were inherited through generations with an efficiency of 20%. He then theorized that the human population could be improved by selecting individuals with desirable traits and encouraging them to have more children” [2]. While artificial selection could increase desired traits through mating, it is not fully certain that the offspring will express those genes. Thus, with the use of eugenics it can be certain that those desired genes will be expressed because they are physically inserted into the DNA. Although eugenics may seem like it would be the ideal solution for creating a perfect society, it should be impermissible for use on human

Human genetic engineering should be banned because it harms the human race since we would be reducing our genetic diversity through this radical process. Human genetic engineering simply eliminates the “undesirable” traits and encourages specific “desirable” traits. With the endless possibilities of choosing what to eliminate, inevitably the “desirable” traits are picked and chosen on whim decisions such as blonde hair, blue eyes, a slender figure, and tall height (Act For Libraries). According to the British Medical Journal, this idea of designing a baby based on cosmetics is called unrealistic and arbitrary standards of perfection (Caplan). Unrealistic and arbitrary standards of perfection will create identical genomes among humans. Obviously, there would be a tremendous drop in genetic diversity as a result of this. Moreover, when defective genes are replaced with functional genes inevitably, there is a reduction of genetic diversity and causes the human population, as a whole, to be more susceptible to disease and virus (Patra). As shown by this, the “undesirable’ traits are annihilated and “desirable” or functional genes in this instance are promoted. Although scientists for genetic engineering will promote the “eradication of genetic disorders and diseases,” once they are diminished to the best of their ability there would still be a yearn to “perfect” the human race. Instead of annihilating disease we would also be annihilating cosmetic traits we don’t want to see in