Claim
“Does DNA testing/manipulation in a human embryo to obtain desirable traits for human offspring pose too many ethical threats?”
This claim was derived from the original statement “Human DNA testing should be permitted for selection of offspring traits”. The initial statement was vague in what precisely what the question was as it had a variety of forms to be interpreted, causing it to be challenging to understand and explain. Hence why a definite claim was created in response.
Rationale
The claim was created by what is issues are present in our adapting society. This is because although DNA testing is relevant today, DNA manipulation such as CRISPR has only just become a matter of concern as it becomes more available to the human embryo. Being able to choose the genotype and therefore phenotype of human offspring as posed many moral and ethical threats.
Process
The process of CRISPR (Cas9) is the modification of DNA with the use of bacteria. This process is more accurate, faster and affordable than any other genome editing methods before it. CRISPR was adapted from the occurring genome editing process in bacteria. This occurs as bacteria have a process to ward off invading viruses by capture fragments of the DNA and produce DNA segments, identified as CRISPR. This allows them to ‘recall’ the virus and produce an enzyme in which target and disable the virus by cutting the DNA apart.
Pros and Cons
Concerns stem from the fact that this can and has been used to alter human genomes. Most introduced changes in genome editing in somatic cells (cells other than gametes) and cannot be passed down from one generation to another, whereas germline cell editing can.
Many people may view this like a pro. This could lead to further advancements in our society, longer life spans and a hereditary disease-free world. Although this would not be the case, as this process of genetic testing and manipulation is costly, this would provoke a greater shift in the rich and poor gap as the affluent can afford this procedure. IF this takes place the offspring may be healthier and further advanced, making them more preferable for jobs and health insurance, etc. Genetic manipulation has already assisted medicine and agricultural industries that allowed improvements in the particular, insulin and penicillin, to refer to some, is generated and the quantity of it. The Australian Government Department of Health had stated in 2017, that 3 crops grown in Australia were GM crops, one of which canola. 21% of canola crops in Australia were genetically modified but there are 80 crops around the world which are grown genetically modified, most of which imported to Australia are utilised as stock feed.
Although genetically modified plants and animals are recognised in most countries to some extent, humans are of a different narrative. Germline editing is prohibited in over 40 countries worldwide, as it is perceived as off-limits for many ethical and moral reasons. Most of society deems genetic modification as ‘playing God’ and a menace to the way in this society runs in this day and age. This was presented as in 2014 rumours of the US and China using CRISPR (at the time a new and time and cost-efficient way to use germline editing) and a team at Sun Yat-Sen University later publishing a report explaining their discoveries when using CRISPR to edit the gene associated with beta-thalassemia, a blood disease in non-viable human embryos. Although these experiments were found unsuccessful, gene-editing tools have continued to be developed and refined, making the CRISPR process more accurate with insertion and deletion, cheaper and simpler than before.
The widespread controversy of germline editing as a whole has sparked many debates on the pros and cons in the future in humans and the health threat it can cause to future generations. This conceivably may pose many threats as ethical concerns with safety and social consequences which open new forms of social inequality, conflict in many forms and discrimination.
Genetic Testing
Since so much is still unknown it poses serious issue in how medicine, social policies and public health would be affected. This is why many do not agree with the ethical and moral standpoint genetic manipulation. When genetic testing was first being introduced to the public in 1992, a national probability survey of the public was conducted. This survey showed 38% of respondents were completely against genetic testing and believed it should. Be stopped altogether as it posed too many privacy issues. These privacy issues had people concerned as it good directly affect many people’s wellbeing’s with thing such as public access to DNA databases which could influence how the population is hired in jobs and services such as health and life insurance.
This however has already occurred in companies such as Ancestry and 23andMe. These companies provide a service of mapping your genetic ancestry and what disease you may be susceptible to or not. As this process uses DNA testing in keeps this information on a database. Although under their customer guarantee this database is prone to being hack along with the fact that laws, or GINA (Genetic Information Non-discrimination ACT) covering genetic privacy are not broad enough to guarantee ensure employers or insurance company could not access this information. On a more positive note DNA testing and sharing could help police investigation crime and enforce it, but this would also mean everyday people would have to forfeit this information the DNA database as well.
DNA testing is also used as way to identify potentially genetic diseases. This can be used on parents to see potentially genome types and alleles that may lead to genetic disease. There is also a use of a karyotype, this is used to identify chromosomal disorders or gene mutations. A karyotype could be used as a way to identify a chromosomal disorder in a foetus such as trisomy 21 (down syndrome).
Mutations can occur in two different forms; Hereditary mutations are inherited and are presented in most cells in the body. Germline mutations occur in the fertilisation process, in the process a mutation occurs in a cell which continues mitosis and will have the mutation in every cell. The last Acquired or Somatic mutations can occur in any point in a person life, this change may be cause b environmental factors and do not occur in very cell in the body. This mutation cannot be passed down through generations.
Conclusion
In conclusion, genetic manipulation, although found to help the greater good in the fields of pharmaceuticals and agriculture, is not realistic to be operated on human embryos. It presents many threats civilisation and the future of it with the uncertainty of how this affects children and class groups. Because of this unpredictability, it would be unethical to continue genetically modifying human embryos until more is known to how it will affect the children of these experiments.
Despite this, if research on GMO food and medicine continues it has great potential to provide a substantial impact on world health and hunger as it allows expeditious production for less money. Despite the research that has been performed more, such as researching more in depth on how this procedure does and/or will affect embryo/adolescents.
Research would include, but not limited to, how it. Will affect conception, DNA and cells after conception, could they be more prone to certain disease or resistant, what is the phycological impact. These are just some of the uncertain topic that are hard to find and research but essential to know in how to go in developing genetic manipulation in human offspring.
Along with the poor GINA laws in many countries, it is unsafe to forfeit DNA Information to these companies in general. This process has great potentially on the basis of advancements in the field of criminal investigations but a great downside in privacy for the public. DNA testing also provide information to families with a background of genetic disease, creating incite on whether on not is a good option to have children etc. Along with providing information to possible outcome regarding disease and chromosomal disorder during pregnancy with the use or DNA and chromosomal testing.
This would further basic knowledge and therefore how to approach it and decision based on how nations would cope and whether or not it was detrimental to the basic fabric of society. If there was more now moral, ethical, financial and basic and phycological health short and long term this would greatly disapprove or prove the claim.
2020-3-26-1585184530