You are here

Gene-editing

Submitted by jhussaini on Wed, 02/13/2019 - 17:11

I would advocate for genetic modifications to prevent disease. Some people might argue that gene-editing technology is unnatural and interferes with natural evolution. To this I would argue that humans have already altered their own evolution in significant ways. For example, antibiotics have saved people throughout history from dying of infections, and yet they are also unnatural according to the article ““Pro and Con: Should Gene Editing Be Performed on Human Embryos.” Like antibiotics, gene-editing is also unnatural, but unnatural can be a good thing if it prevents disease and increases human survival. According to the NYT article “These Patients Had Sickle-Cell Disease. Experimental Therapies Might Have Cured Them” clinical trials for sickle cell anemia are already underway and have shown initial success in a few patients. I think there should be more research in gene therapy for single gene disorders such as Sickle Cell Anemia and Cystic Fibrosis than for diseases that are polygenic or have a strong environmental component. The causes of the latter are more complex and might require more than gene modifications to be cured. 

I don’t think we should genetically modify humans for purposes beyond disease prevention. Using gene-editing to select for traits related to appearance and personality to make the perfect human being can come with dire consequences. For one thing, classifying genes as “good” or “bad” is arbitrary. Genes that control psychoticism for example can confer advantages such as creativity or open mindedness (according to the article “How Gene Editing Could Ruin Human Evolution”). The article also mentions that influential people such as Carrie Fisher, David Foster Wallace and Kurt Cobain can benefit society despite them all having psychiatric risks. On a more personal note, artificially selecting genes to make a designer baby would detract from a person’s individuality. According to the Wired article “You’re only human but Your Kids Could be So Much More”, having a baby would turn into a “model building exercise” or a “project.” People would wonder if their successes are because of their own hard work or because they were genetically programmed to succeed. Everyone would choose the same traits that are considered to be the best, and we would no longer be diverse or unique. 

Post:

Comments

You should change this to only one paragraph, you should not split it into two separate pragraphs. Gene-editing can also gives rise to new mutations and unknown diseases.

I think you can omit the comma after the Wired title in quotations.

"For one thing" does not fit the flow of your paragraph. Maybe "for example" would be a better choice for words.