The future of embryonic gene modification continues to present a heavily complicated ethical dilemma for various intellectual individuals. Some believe that it is highly likely one day humans will intentionally modify their babies to fit a certain standard, while others argue that it seems unlikely for this to occur. When discussing whether the United States government should change current legislation on prenatal gene modification, it would be extremely beneficial to evaluate what potentially could emerge as possible side-effects of human germline modification. Currently, the FDA has implemented a law stating that, “research in which a human embryo is intentionally created or modified to include a heritable genetic modification (Letzter).” A Chancellor’s Professor of History at Vanderbilt University, Michael Bess explained in an email questionnaire that genetically modifying embryos would most likely occur between 50-75 years from now due to ethical and social expectations. Therefore, it can be assumed that one day laws surrounding embryonic gene modification currently implemented by the FDA will be altered. With the utilization of the CRISPR-Cas9, a scientifically endorsed machine that modifies organism’s DNA, humans are closer than ever to implementing the ability to create a perfect baby. In fact, Chinese scientist, He Jiankui, has already claimed to have made genetically modified embryos with the CRISPR-Cas9 (Stein). The perfect baby could be talented, beautiful and intellectually advanced. Humans could finally be able to play the role of God in deciding the looks and personalities of their babies.
Even if many of the positive outcomes of human genetic modification in embryos have been scientifically accepted, there are also a significant number of negative outcomes. If there became a template for the perfect baby than by creating the same perfect baby repeatedly, society could forget the beauty of everyone being an individual. If only some parents created the perfect baby, as that baby grows older it could decrease the self-esteem of a child whose parents did not want or could not pay for genetic modification performed upon them. Not to mention, that the child who received embryonic gene modification could struggle with their self-worth due to the fact that their parents alerted them to look, act, or think a certain way. To continue, if embryos were made by man, it could potentially lead to babies being developed based on the designer’s opportunity for an individual’s fulfillment (Catalona). If parents wanted their baby to possess certain vanity traits, they could pay for their baby to be edited a certain way to fit expectations. For example, since there is a cultural desire of males in India, embryonic gene editing could potentially lead to the development of an extremely uneven ratio of males to females in India (Sharma). Not to mention that there really is no ‘perfect baby’, because different cultures value different genetics. Dr. Bess point out that, traits that are extremely popular today will not always be the most popular in the future due to our ever-changing environments.
The positive and acceptable outcomes of embryonic genetic modification include farthing research developments and eliminating harmful diseases. Parents could eliminate chances of certain diseases by reducing the amount of genetically linked medical diseases presented in their genes, such as cancers or HIV (Catalano). By eliminating genetically passed diseases, doctors could eventually eradicate any gene related issue. To support this claim, around 90 percent of embryos diagnosed with down-syndrome are aborted, genetic modification could potentially lead to an elimination of Down-syndrome along with a significant decrease in Down-Syndrome related abortions (Coolidge). Also, the utilization of germline modification in order to modifying babies could lead to increased research on genetic disorders and how they are inherited. In his book, Our Grandchildren Redesigned, Michael Bess explains, that since ever increasing mental and physical knowledge has always been the constant trajectory of the past, that trend will continue.
This advancement reaches even further beyond the current use of the CRISPR-Cas9 machine because the future of modern genetic modification could come to a halt when people choose epigenetics instead. Epigenetic modifications operate by turning certain traits on while other traits remain dormmate, without affecting the original DNA sequence. On the other hand, human germline modification works to modify sex cells. While, although many parts of epigenetics have been unstudied, there is still valuable room for consideration of epigenetics as the way to when genetically modifying embryos. Studies have been done to prove that epigenetic modification can actually take place throughout a lifespan (Weinhold). During email exchanges, Dr. Bess elaborated that it seems exceptionally likely that humans will be using epigenetics before the use of the CRISPR-Cas9 for genetic modifications. The CRISP-Cas9 machine will not disappear though, as if it can safely modify human genes in relations to diseases then it will be utilized in several decades. When it comes to utilizing the CRISP-Cas9 machine for bio-enhancements, that will come much later years (Bess).
In consideration with the current religious, political, and ethical standpoints, embryotic gene modification could eventually be used to solve inherited medical issues but not any random trait. Catalano claims that a study done in a medical school proved that many people well-knowledge on the subject support this issue when it is implemented to prevent genetically passed diseases or other health reasons. Although since the public is the real determiner of the future, it is exceptionally important to decipher their feeling on the topic of embryotic gene modification. A poll done in 2016, by PEW Research Center, claims that most Americans actually expect to see more negative outcomes from genetic modification when specifically dealing with reducing diseases. Mainly, it is feared that people will opt to use embryotic gene modification before there is enough research done on the safety of such a procedure. From another standpoint, wither or not embryotic gene moficiation could become legal would be based on what religious group develops the most into American society. Most Agnostics and Atheist (36%) believe that the benefits of health-related embryonic gene modification out way the downfalls, while many Christians (54%) believe embryonic gene modification to be unacceptable if embryotic testing is required (PEW). Although it is highly likely one day that religion will not keep this from happening. In 2015, PEW published an article that mentioned how the overall Christian population is rapidly declining in the United States, while the non-afflation rates are dramatically increasing.
Advancement of embryonic gene editing will most directly be affected by the increased development of a wide range of social, moral, and economic factors. Not to mention, that if the developmental stages of safety and efficacy excel, then the demand for human germline modification could potentially skyrocket creating an exceptionally profitable market (Bess). Science can be predicted, but not garneted because science itself always changes. Through increased development and knowledge, sooner rather than later one might come upon the perfect baby developed through embryonic genetic modification.
2019-2-1-1549049208