Parents want nothing but the best for their children. Would some parents go through a screening of their embryo to detect diseases, deformations, and even go as far as picking the traits they would want their child to have? Advances in recent genetics propose that we are potentially close to parents being able to screen their embryos and make an alteration to genomes. The use of CRISPR/Cas9, gene editing technologies, are stirring up ethical debates. There are many arguments in favor and against this possible development in science and human life. Those against gene editing say, it is unnatural and dangerous and may cause unintentional edits to genomes of unborn fetuses without their consent. Those in favor say that it may lead to a decrease in the occurrence of many serious diseases, decreasing human suffering.
One of the biggest ethical arguments against gene editing is that it is unnatural, unsafe and “amounts to playing god” (“Pro and Con: Should Gene Editing,” 2016). I feel that for as long as humans have been living on this earth, we have been reproducing without any knowledge of what deformations, diseases, other life-threatening illnesses or even the eye and hair color that one could be born with. Until recently there has been no way that embryos could be screened for parents to know what complications they might encounter after the birth of their child. Today, the use of a technology called pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) used in in vitro fertilization
A Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) is a test that “allows future parents to detect genetic defects that cause inherited disease in human embryos before they are implanted.” One of the most ethical questions that one might ask before considering the PGD is whether the benefits of genetic knowledge outweigh harmful effects that occur to the embryo? Is it really worth manipulating embryos genes in order to achieve the desire of the parents? Often times we have to take into considerations the risk and benefits of each situation. I believe that the PGD test should be only be done to detect genetic defects, but it should not be used to manipulate genes in order to make what to them is a “perfect” child. As stated in our text, “ In the united Kingdom alteration of an embryos genes, even for gene therapy or cloning embryos is illegal.” By manipulating genes its like going against Gods wishes. In the eyes of God every person that comes into this world is equally seen as a human being because they are all created in “ the image of God.” In this case the parents should not be allowed to manipulate the genes of their unborn child just to accommodate to their
Modern technologies are constantly advancing in a multitude of ways to the degree that scientists have gained enough knowledgeable about the human genome to be able to find specific genes during the embryonic stage of reproduction. Scientists have already begun to use this knowledge to allow parents the ability to select the sex of their child and screen for genetic diseases via preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) with in vitro fertilization (IVF). Sex-selection has already created world-wide discussion regarding the ethics of such a situation. However, scientists are now looking toward germline engineering which will essentially allow parents to select and alter genetic traits of their children before implantation of the embryo into
DNA are like legos, they work together to build the traits of living things. They are the building blocks of the body. Many scientists today have been figuring out different ways to manipulate, change, add, and subtract genes from the DNA in living things; this is process is called genetic engineering. Some of the living things being experimented on are live people, plants, and animals. Today scientists are debating on the morals of genetic engineering due to what the community thinks of it, because of the christian 's viewpoint of genetic engineering. To some christians it may pose a threat to their, but to others it may be a blessing or a gift. Genetic Engineering is a growing breakthrough in the science community. “Over the last 30 years, the field of genetic engineering has developed rapidly due to the greater understanding of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) as the chemical double helix code from which genes are made. The term genetic engineering is used to describe the process by which the genetic makeup of an organism can be altered using “recombinant DNA technology.” This involves the use of laboratory tools to insert, alter, or cut out pieces of DNA that contain one or more genes of interest.”(Pocket K No. 17) Scientist have yet to unlock the full potential of genetic engineering, but the information and the use they have found for it today has reached farther than anyone 's expectations.
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.
Genetic engineering is the figurehead of the ethical concerns of scientists in the 21st century. Nothing is more engrossed with criticism and dislike than the idea of altering the baseline for living organisms. Many people are skeptical of genetic engineering due to the versatility it exhibits. A scientist could use a genetic editing tool, such as CRISPR, to remove the genes for a hereditary disease in an embryo, but they could also utilize it to alter the physical characteristics of a human baby. This thought provoked the flood gates of ethics to unleash a multitude of unanswered questions and concerns about the usage and further development of genetic engineering. The field of genetic engineering is
Japanese internment camps from 1942 to 1946 were an exemplification of discrimination, many Japanese Americans were no longer accepted in their communities after the Bombing of Pearl Harbor. They were perceived as traitors and faced humiliation due to anti-Japanese sentiment causing them to be forced to endure several hardships such as leaving behind their properties to go an imprisoned state, facing inadequate housing conditions, and encountering destitute institutions. The Bombing of Pearl Harbor occurred on December 7, 1941 (Why I Love a Country that Once Betrayed Me). This led president Roosevelt to sign the executive order 9066, which authorized the army to remove any individual that seemed as a potential threat to the nation (“Executive Order 9066”) This order allowed the military to exclude “‘any or all persons from designated areas, including the California coast.”’ (Fremon 31). Many Japanese opposed to leave the Pacific Coast on their own free will (Fremon 24) . Japanese Americans would not be accepted in other areas if they moved either.Idaho’s governor stated, Japanese would be welcomed “only if they were in concentration camps under guard”(Fremon 35). The camps were located in Arizona, Arkansas, Wyoming, Idaho, Utah, Colorado, and California where thousands of Japanese Americans eventually relocated. (“Japanese Americans at Manzanar”) The internment lasted for 3 years and the last camp did not close until 1946. (Lessons Learned: Japanese Internment During WW2)
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
Science is now able to better improve human health and safety thanks to the advanced modern technology and medicine that are available. Yet with today's technology being implemented into science comes the questions of human morality, or bioethics. One of the bioethics debates is on the coined term “Designer babies”; on if or where society should draw the line on genetically altering our children before they are born. With the technology able to stop hereditary diseases, the scientific development’s are able to change the child’s “eye color, hair color, social intelligence, right down to whether or not your child would have a widow’s peak” before the child is born. From the options on choosing whether or not your child will look or act a certain
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.
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
whereas they do not have control over other countries governed laws. Allowing the United States to fall behind other countries technical and medical enhancements is not a wise decision. The United States would be taking a drastic step backwards by not saving lives, like this technology has done before(Farahany). Scientists have finally found a safer form of genetic modification and are not being allowed to perform these procedures because of safety regulations that no one can improve without funding to understand what exactly is the problem with this technology.
In 1990 the first gene therapy procedure gained approval and a four-year-old girl with SCIDs disease was finally able to fight off a simple cold. She is now able to live a normal life with the help of continued treatment of gene therapy. Although gene therapy is an innovative and ideally favorable procedure when it comes to treating diseases, cancer, or inherited disorders, it is still a delicate procedure and is continuously studied to insure it is not only effective but also and most importantly safe. In order to insure the safety of patients a gene therapy drug must get the approval of the FDA before becoming available, as every drug must do. Since gene therapy is still very experimental; there are only a few gene therapy drugs that have been approved by the FDA to treat patients. However, on August 30th, 2017 history was made when the FDA approved Kymriah, the first CAR-T cell therapy drug to be available in the United States. Kymriah is a one-time treatment for patients with B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia, it was developed through the research collaboration of Novartis and the University of Pennsylvania, and it is manufactured for each individual patient. Kymriah’s only drawback would be the price tag of $475,000 for a course of treatment, however Novartis plans to wave the fee for patients where Kymriah is not successful.
Genome editing is a huge leap forward in science and medicine. Because of recent advances in technology, the study of genes and induced ‘point’ mutations have led to the discovery and advancement of methods previously used in order to mutate genes. The development of Clusters of Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPRs) and CRISPR associated system 9 protein (Cas9) technology is a hugely significant leap forward as this is a tool that could potentially be used for the research into and hopefully the treatment of a range of medical conditions that are genetically related. Cystic fibrosis (Schwank, G. et al, 2013), haemophilia and sickle cell disease are an example of some of the conditions that have the
Why live a life with average abilities when we can enhance our abilities through genetic engineering on our DNA for the greater good? Genetic engineering is “the artificial manipulation, modification, and recombination of DNA or other nucleic acid molecules in order to modify an organism or population of organisms.” It is not exactly a science in a broad sense, but a branch of biotechnology, which uses methods of molecular and biology, virology, and genetics. Genetic engineering on the human genome should be approved because it has the potential to make lives and the world better. Genetic disorders could be permanently eliminated, certain genes could be reactivated for regrowth of necessary cells, eliminating many neurological disorders, and delaying ageing, which would expand scientific research in order to many world complications.
Genetic engineering has become increasingly normalized in today’s society, and people are exposed to this technology now more than ever before. Most people are aware that food companies practice genetic engineering on their plants in order to design the most profitable crops, but it isn’t generally known that this same technology can be applied to humans. The concept of picking certain traits and characteristics of a human may appear desirable, but many risks and potential side effects may follow considering that it is unknown what genetic engineering could affect in future generations. Francis Fukuyama, an accomplished and distinguished professor of political economy and philosopher, conveys his concern that genetic engineering is developing at a surprisingly rapid rate. Within his book, Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution, he claims that genetic engineering not only will potentially be detrimental for the human race, but due to the change in nature of human beings, such engineering will also result in significantly impacting government and politics. Although genetic engineering can be seen as a huge technological advancement that could potentially help millions, there are drastic negative effects and reasons for disapproving genetic engineering that are too important to be overlooked.