The gene modification technology on humans is no a longer science fiction. In the past decade this new technology has progresses quite fast after the much-criticized success of GM foods. But this revolutionary technology is still in its infancy and thus has faced backlash regarding to safety and whether genetically engineered human is ethical within the beliefs of our current society. The phrase “designer babies” refers to genetic interventions into pre-implantation embryos in the attempt to influence the traits the resulting children will have (bonnie steinbock 2008).
Technology and Merits
- First let’s see the technology behind all of this. Designer babies are babies originated from embryos created by in-vitro fertilization (IVF) and selected because of the presence or absence of particular genes or a baby created by genetic interventions into pre-implantation embryos in the attempt to influence the traits the resulting children will have
- mtDNA replacement therapy was developed and it has just been approved in the United Kingdom to be used in the clinic as a therapy. The therapy involves the transfer of the nuclear genome from the pronuclear stage zygote of a mitochondria disease carrier to an enucleated healthy donor oocyte/
- engineering nucleases is a novel technique had been developed by using genetic engineering nucleases to destroy the mutated mtDNA in mice embryos to increase the percentage of functional mitochondria and reverse the disease status.
- Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR). Through CRISPR, genetic modification is rapid, inexpensive, and effective in an unprecedented way. (N.Juth 2016)
Now most of this technology works by Genetic modification, which can be (and has been) done in the sex cell (gamete) or early on in the embryonic stages — that is, before or in conjunction with the start of the existence of a human being. If done at this early stage, the modification will not only affect the growing organism; if this organism is born and eventually procreates, the modification will also be passed on to her offspring. That is, it will be a germline genetic modification. specifically, in human germline modification, you could either target a germ cell (a sperm or an egg, i.e. a gamete) or a newly fertilized egg, likely a zygote at the one-cell stage, i.e. an (early) embryo. At this level, the CRISPR editing technique can be applied. Now, as mentioned, targeted parts of the DNA can be cut out. But one can also (so to speak) repair it by inserting a different snippet of DNA [12]. Hence, all sorts of editing of the genome are possible through CRISPR, both ‘‘knocking out’’ and ‘‘knocking in’ ’genes. This technology has the capabilities of vastly improving lives. Imagine being able to spare your children of genetic diseases and give them a healthy life, it’s truly amazing. Also, another “possible” application is designing babies. With the possibilities of “knocking in” genes, we can add favorable genes to offspring, literally designing a baby. Perhaps, you want smarter, stronger or even taller children its all theoretically possible. Guess those sci-fi movies weren’t so far fetched after all. Although this idea is met with criticism in regard to human ethics which will dive into later. There is no doubt that this technology is of great merit to human, it can change lives, even save unborn lives of unwanted diseases which are genetically inherited. But its not so simple. There are crucial drawbacks. What are they?
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
Drawbacks
Keeping in mind that this technology is quite knew they are a lot of uncertainties about how changes in the genes will carry on for generation, whether unforeseen effects of generational mutated genes could occur down line and affect innocent lives gravely. It is quite the gamble that many are not willing to take. Some argue for the sake of science it must be done and that is the only way progress will occur and the technology will develop for the better. In fact, in spring 2015, the first CRISPR experiment on a human embryo was reported by a Chinese research team. They tried to repair a mutation that causes a very serious anemia (B-thalassemia), using a non-viable embryo (very likely to avoid at least some accusations of unethical conduct). So there is already proof of principle: human germline gene modification through CRISPR is possible (N.Juth,2016). However according to the study, the experiment was not entirely successful because they were off-target mutations that occurred, which means that they could be unexpected mutation that may occur, but gene interaction is still limited and its uncertain. Furthermore, one of the biggest drawbacks is also a moral ethical issue. Whether a change in genetics can change you as a person. As you can imagine this unfathomable to many scores of religions believing man to be playing god and interfering creation, which is in a word blasphemy or even evil. But for the sake of argument lets dive deeper. As (N.Juth,200) puts it tin the text- We are now armed to tackle the question: does modifying our genes, e.g. through CRISPR, end the existence of a human being, by changing the genetically modified being into a numerically distinct being? Or, put differently, does genetic modification make someone into someone else? The argued that the change of at least a single should not disrupt an individual’s identity. For instance, if the genes that determine the color of my eyes were altered, perhaps due to genetic therapy of some sort, so that my eyes turned brown instead of blue, I can see no reason why this should make me think that I have ceased to exist(N.Juth,2016). This argument does make sense, but the Ruth cannot say whether multiple gene alteration could give an entirely different human being as it is such an abstract case and is quite beyond human understanding. The paper did go quite deep into animalism, Psychological view and when an embryo is conscious and whether gene effects can be applied between 1 or 2 weeks after fertilization but that is a whole other argument for another day.
Conclusion
The genetic germline technology is new and promising and I believe it will continue to progress regardless of the resistance. The potential good is far greater than the fears of the present although the cost is very high. Tampering with human life is not a light matter and is a very sensitive matter but just like medicine trials and errors have led to the success of today and it is a matter of scientists progressing very carefully and steadily so that this groundbreaking technology could improve many lives. In matter of ethics it really comes down to one’s values and beliefs, but in the matter of designing babies with favorable traits is not the purpose of this tech and should not be considered in the discussion until gene modification has been perfected. I see a day where healthy babies are of the norm and genetic diseases are of the past, but truly on time will tell.
Stuck on your essay?
