What Are The Pros And Cons Of Gene Editing?

Although the intentions of genetically modifying DNA in human embryos is aimed to rid society of genetic defects, it is still essential that this scientific discovery remains ethical. In an article on NPR.org, Rob Stein describes an experiment that scientists have been conducting in which they modify human DNA in order to eliminate life threatening genetic diseases that could be passed on for generations (Stein). In Portland, at Oregon Health & Science University, Paula Amato, an associate professor of obstetrics and gynecology, explains “that their work is aimed at preventing terrible diseases, not creating genetically enhanced people...much more research is needed to confirm the technique is safe and effective before anyone tries to make a baby this way”(Stein). Because scientists like Amato realize their research is controversial, they are taking every precaution to assure what they are doing is morally correct, they are not intending to corrupt society. Although their intentions are good, it is their job to make sure their research is being used in an ethical way. If not, millions of people, who are already obsessed with the idea of perfection, will be able to do something about

We are God’s people and we were created in his image. He made us each unique and beautiful. Altering our features or appearance would be disrespecting his gift to us. In addition, we could alter future generations permanently. These changes could prove negative or positive. In a survey done by Antonio Regalado, the results show that 83% of people believe that we should not edit genes for intelligence (Doc. 4). We would change the lives of many people without their approval. To build, the embryos that die are undeveloped human souls who deserve a chance at life (OI). We are basically killing off human souls, even if they never had a chance to fully develop. What does this say

To start, human embryos should not be genetically modified. I believe this because the outcome could be either good or bad. For example, changing a certain gene “can prevent a baby from carrying out signals for pain” (Doc. 2). It can prevent people from experiencing pain, which could be harmful to the organism.

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.

However, with the statements being made in the Shorthorn article there are strong arguments. One being the designer babies instead of finding out at birth. It ruins the purpose of a surprise for the parents. Also the lack of consent to the offspring is unsettling. With the process of gene alteration there is a risk of genetic mutation but, would be solved with CRISPR. The concept of designer babies strips originality of an individual. CRISPR is still in the beginning stages as well so there will be trial and error. If the wrong gene were to be deleted would the side effects be permanent or temporary?

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.

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?

Editing human embryos can in some ways be beneficial, such as when cropping out diseases, but can also raise ethical questions such as when opening the door to designer babies. Being able to edit the personal characteristics of a human being is unethical and leads down a dangerous path. Every aspect and characteristic of a human makes that person who they are, and editing any of those characteristics that one doesn’t like, may very well ruin everything that makes them who they are. It may very well ruin everything that makes them a

To begin with, Genetic modification changes the way of life in physically and the meaning of life. If we achieve genetic modification, then what is the meaning of life then? Would our meaning of life change or not be the same anymore? Humans will lose their way of life. In order to achieve human modification then there would be a lot of blood on our hands. Genetic modification is far from perfect. The road to genetic modification will be a painful one for the embryos. Even if they are not fully

Even though gene editing has been discussed and thoroughly gone through and examined, many scientists are still very skeptical and refuse to even do it especially on embryos.

There are other types of gene editing out there but research shows us that CRISPR is fast, precise, and simple. Researchers are developing a way for CRISPR therapy to help with Alzheimer’s all the way to HIV. There are two categories the researchers and people have put CRISPR in: practical and philosophical. The researchers say that the immediate barrier is practical. During the tests, CRISPR has found targets in other parts of the DNA that need fixing other than the intended part of the DNA. Because of this, it may take at least a generation to ensure that it is safe. Some people oppose CRISPR because the oppositionists say it lets people play god but getting medicine every time you get sick with the same thing obscures the natural order of things. The opportunities are getting pushed ahead for treating cancer, childhood diseases that are genetic, and how to understand diabetes better. The one question some people have is whether it’s right to edit genes that are

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.

Many people think that it is a terrible idea to mess with the way God makes children. When one tampers with genes, there is a large amount of embryos that are used to make sure that at least on will turn out the way that the parents want it, and the embryos that are not used are just thrown in the trash; scientists are throwing human life forms in the waste basket just because they didn’t have a certain trait that the parents wanted (Brownlee 31). Another ethical question is whether or not parents own their own off-springs, and if they even have a choice in the genetics of their baby. Some agree that using screenings of the embryo would help take out the chances of having a kid with Down Syndrome, but most think that discarding these embryos causes judgement towards the kids that have different conditions that are not considered normal. Another reason that this doesn’t follow ethics is that the scientists are planning on creating Savior Siblings, and the purpose of them would be to save the life of their sibling that has a lethal disease; most are concerned about the embryos that contain the disease or are not a match to the child that needs saved because they are just discarded with no hesitation. The big problem with gene editing is that it conforms to the ideas that are put upon this generation; it suggests the idea that everyone needs to

The genetic engineering may not correctly which can seriously affect how the baby turns out. An unborn baby is very delicate and when changing its DNA, if not done correctly there is a large chance the embryo will be destroyed which will completely backfire the whole experiment to create a better future for the baby; If the baby's life ends, there’s no future for it. Also using genetic engineering by modifying certain genes to be enhanced can create negative effects on other genes. Creating a baby with no autism could infact lead to a greater number of problems such as reproductive disorders or anger management. Doctors have also seen worse outcomes such as cancer, organ damage, premature aging and immune imbalance. The process also involves altering chromosomes which effectively causes a good percentage of health issues. This technology is easily being overlooked and should definitely be rethinked in a safer manner. Even if the quality of life were to be upgraded by not having independance from certain things, it’s always just too dangerous to attempt with the life of a loved one on the line. A parent should love their child no matter what they look

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.