Tina Mitchell | a work in progress



Cameron PearsonProfessor TinaEnglish 102 / TR 9:30April 9, 2018Genetic Engineering, Designer BabiesGenetic engineering has sparked a major ethical conflict. Genetic engineering is when you deliberately modify characteristics of an organism by picking and choosing its genetic material. There are a ton of pros and cons. The obvious one being that a pro is that genetic engineering can help cure diseases, and a con being that there can be many side effects that could lead to death. CRISPR is a major discussion that popped up throughout a lot of my articles. CRIPSR is a gene editing technique and can modify diseases (Harris). Gene editing leads to designer babies. Which is another conflict we have today. No one knows where to draw the line between using gene editing to get rid of diseases rather than to pick which eye or hair color you want your child to have. We have to know what is morally right and wrong. The problem is who will make that decision. Gene editing will get out of hand if we start choosing our babies life for them before they are even born. There are a lot of technologies being tested to see if genetic engineering can be a safe technique and if it is even usable. These technologies will help gene editing become possible which will eliminate terminal diseases. There is a lot of scientific research behind gene editing that you must also understand. One of the biggest issues is whether it is morally right or wrong and where we draw the line with gene editing. Gene editing should be used only for curing diseases, but only in proof it is safe to do so with no long-term effects afterwards. Genetic Engineering is when we remove sections of the organism’s DNA and we replace it with new segments. There have been many studies on genetic engineering. There is social pressure that will impact the way we look at this technology. A lot of people will probably see this as immoral. Genetic engineering can isolate genes, and modify genes that way they can be transferred and function within a new organism whether it is with the same species or different (Glenn). There are already similar procedures to gene editing. In preimplantation genetic diagnosis, geneticist are analyzing the gametes for illnesses. The ones that are not affected are then selected and implanted. The Human Genome Project has actually mapped out 20,000-25,000 genes in the human genome (Catalano). Gene editing in reproduction can be expensive and also difficult. Henry Greely at University in California makes the statement, “almost everything you can accomplish by gene editing you can accomplish by embryo selection.The benefits of gene editing is that this technology could prevent diseases. It can prevent genetic diseases such as cystic fibrosis and Huntington’s disease. Gene editing can also lower the risk of HIV/AIDS. It can be used to understand basic biology as well (Lewis). Gene editing wouldn’t only improve the individuals but there would also be social advances. This will make future generations even better. There is a “moral imperative” for genetic engineering. Savulescu argues that there are so many diseases and possibilities that could go wrong after from the stage of birth all the way to old age. Some statistics is that 6% of all births have a birth defect and 35% of deaths are due to chronic diseases. “Gene-editing is not an option it is a moral necessity” (Savulescu).There are arguments made against genetic engineering. Human reproduction should not be interfered with simply because we are simply “playing God”, we would also be violating the child’s rights before they are even born, and this is only beneficial to those who are wealthy enough to afford this. Modifying embryos in unnatural, to some it is going against God (Harris). If we protect natural creatures just because they are natural we wouldn’t even be able to use antibiotics to kill bacteria, or practice medicine and so on (Harris). Modifying genomes can be very dangerous and we don’t know all of the ways it can and will affect the individual. People who fear the dangers of gene editing don’t realize that the natural way we produce can be just as dangerous. Statistics say two-thirds of human embryos fail to develop successfully. There are also ethical concerns about what kind of traits should be kept or not kept. There is line between editing diseases rather than editing eye or hair color. How are we supposed to know when to draw the line? It can prevent genetic diseases such as cystic fibrosis and Huntington’s disease. Gene editing can lower the risk of HIV/AIDS. Lastly, it can also be used to understand basic biology (Lewis).Genome editing technologies can offer an approach to treat human diseases. Such as HIV, AIDS, haemophilia, sickle cell anemia, and cancer. All of the techniques focus on modifying the genetic material or cells. Genome editing in embryos use technologies that can have substantial effects. It can be very dangerous. Editing tools in human somatic cells, aim to change numbers of cells that carry the mutation. The Sangamo Biosciences is currently conduction trials to see if genome editing is a potential cure for HIV and AIDS. The CRISPR technique has definitely expanded (Nature News, Nature Publishing Group). In an embryo, the nuclease might not cut both of the copies of the gene targeted. This indicated that it is possible to delete genes in the embryo. The legal side to it is that if a mosaic embryo is created then the germ line may not carry the genetic alteration (Nature News, Nature Publishing Group). But with CRISPR, it can make onward human germline a big possibility. When they tried using the CRISPR technique on an embryo it caused effect on some parts of the genome (Lewis). This could lead to even bigger problems like other genetic complications, leading to fatality. There’s always the argument on if things are necessary. The use of CRISPR to fix congenital genetic defects is arguably unnecessary considering the fact that doctors can see this and help prevent this before a pregnancy. If gene editing and all of the technology becomes 100% workable then some worry that “designer babies” will become a huge deal and people will start to change traits that are not necessary. CRISPR is rejected by a lot of people.” The simplest way to design a baby is to produce a huge number of embryos and then read their genomes in order to find the one that matches your wants. In order for this two happen there are two technological advances needed. IVD needs to become easier and gene sequencing must be faster and cheaper to reveal the traits that it will have. He says if you put these together you get easy PGD (Ball).PDG plays a major role as well with the tools for genetic engineering. PDG is a pre-implantation genetic diagnosis, is something that can avoid disease. It is limited by the number of embryos that are and can be created. So, it isn’t possible to stay away from diseases by using PDG. The argument is that gene editing potentially allows these diseases to be dealt with and lessened. Another thing about PDG is that It is limited by characteristics of the parents. Even if PDG helps to select and unaffected child you always have the fact that the diseases can be transmitted and rise again when the next generation comes along. The argument here is that gene editing allows the couple to have a child who won’t carry that condition and it won’t get passed on from generation to generation. They make a valid argument that PDG involves removing 2 cells form the embryo which has 8 cell (Savulescu). This can lead to a devastating end way more than gene editing could lead to.Genetic engineering uses a variety of tools from biotechnology and bioengineering in order to create and organism’s gene makeup. She also talks about the ethical issues such as social, extrinsic, and intrinsic concerns. Some biotechnology includes Xenotransplantation, genetic manipulation, and commercial companies. Xenotransplantation can be seen as a potential to deal with the shortage of human heats and kidneys. Genetic manipulation of stem cells to be specific now includes the growth on a scaffolding and also a 3-D printer. Tissue engineering can replace cartilage, heart, and more. Another major tool is NR2B, which is a gene. Techniques from this modification can introduce a gene at any time at any random place in a human. If a NR2B gene is placed, it can mess up the function of a gene that is crucial to one staying alive (Agar). Genes can have multiple effects, so the effect we may be intending to have, may also bring along other ones that we won’t notice until later on. By adding an extra copy of the NR2B gene to a human embryo, it will function beyond a normal level and this is called an “enhancement”. Again, there is a moral complication from treating the actual disease rather than treating the person with the disease. The question that pops up from all of this discussion is should parents be permitted to enhance their children? We need to know the difference between enhancing and treatment. Parents already make most of children’s decisions. Cognitive enhancement can lead to danger of creating two classes of human beings. The ones with access to enhancement technologies and then the ones who have to do it with their natural capacities. If it gets passed down from generation to generation then eventually it could become subspecies (Sandel). An investigation was done on whether or not gene editing would be rendered permanently by ZFN. ZFN is a “DNA binding protein that facilitates targeted editing of the genome by creating double strand breaks in DNA at user specified locations” (google definition). They enrolled 12 patients. The patients had chronic HIV infection and they were receiving antiretroviral therapy. The results were that the blood level of HIV DNA decreased in most of the patients. ZFNs have proved versatile for genome editing and now it is well used in a number of organisms and cells. ZFN’S are well suited for genome engineering (New England Journal of Medicine).Genetic Engineering is a personal, moral, ethic opinion. Genetic engineering is not advanced enough to proceed forward yet. There is a lot of scientific tools out there that are advancing and being practiced upon. There are people who want genetic engineering to become an actual resource for pure and moral reasons. But there are some people who would abuse genetic engineering and turn it in to gene editing-designer babies and use it for personal liking. Such as to pick and choose their child’s genes. Genetic engineering should be used only for causes such as curing diseases and being a positive way for a human’s safety, and to live longer without a disease. WORKS CITEDAgar, Nicholas. “Designer Babies: Ethical Considerations.”?ACTION BIOSCIENCE, biotechnology/agar.html.Ball, Philip. “Designer Babies: an Ethical Horror Waiting to Happen?”?The Observer, Guardian News and Media, 8 Jan. 2017, science/2017/jan/08/designer-babies-ethical-horror-waiting-to-happen.Catalano, Michael. “The Prospect of Designer Babies: Is It Inevitable?”?The Prospect of Designer Babies: Is It Inevitable? | The People, Ideas, and Things (PIT) Journal, pitjournal.unc.edu/article/prospect-designer-babies-it-inevitable.“Don't Edit the Human Germ Line.”?Nature News, Nature Publishing Group, news/don-t-edit-the-human-germ-line-1.17111.“Gene Editing of CCR5 in Autologous CD4 T Cells of Persons Infected with HIV | NEJM.”?New England Journal of Medicine, doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1300662.Glenn, Linda. “Ethical Issues in Genetic Engineering and Transgenics.”?ACTION BIOSCIENCE, biotechnology/glenn.html.Lewis, Tanya. “There Are Really Good Reasons Why We Should - and Shouldn't - Genetically Engineer Human Embryos.”?Business Insider, Business Insider, 4 Dec. 2015, arguments-for-and-against-editing-human-embryos-2015-12.Porostocky, Thomas. “Pro and Con: Should Gene Editing Be Performed on Human Embryos?”?National Geographic, 19 Oct. 2017, magazine/2016/08/human-gene-editing-pro-con-opinions/.Sandel, Michael. “The Case Against Perfection.”?The Atlantic Online, 20 Apr. 2004. Savulescu, Julian, et al. “The Moral Imperative to Continue Gene Editing Research on Human Embryos.”?SpringerLink, Higher Education Press, 26 June 2015, link.article/10.1007/s13238-015-0184-y. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download