Watch this video
As shown in the video above recent experiments claim that two babies have been born that were genetically engineered to resist HIV infection. Should this or any similar genetic modifications (which can be passed from generation to generation unlike standard gene therapy such as the one used to treat the woman with the vision problems ) be allowed for humans?
It is a very intriguing idea to use genetic engineering to prevent dangerous diseases from happening again. There are so many genetic disorders that are significantly negative like Huntington’s Disease. Although it’s a very attractive idea to prevent these kinds of diseases, the line of genetically engineering humans based on preference could be blurred. For example, scientists may want to engineer someone so that they are taller or other advantageous traits that make it hard to know when to stop.
The idea of gene editing through the use of CRISPR is fascinating to me and seems like a feasible idea in the near future. If the option presented itself, and was affordable, I would personally choose for my children to have resistance to some diseases/infections through genetic modification. To me, the process feels similar morally to that of vaccines and is something I’d feel comfortable with as the technology continues to develop, especially if it can help hinder some of the medical detriments that run in my family.
While I do believe there are some ethical concerns in being able to “create the perfect baby” and the “line that should not be crossed” in regards to the child’s own choice, this field is going to continue to progress whether we like it or not. Therefore, rather than fight it, I feel as if it would be more practical to establish laws now as to what may be edited (preferably limit to factors that may improve quality of life and prohibit desired personal traits) and continue to develop it as to make it more safe/affordable.
From a health care point of view I think this is amazing and fascinating. STDs are such a widespread problem especially when they’re passed down from a parent to child. This made me think of another article I read where it talked about blindness resulting from an eye infection when a baby is born to a mother infected with gonorrhea. Like this, HIV can cause many lasting affects to the baby as well. I think it is a great idea and a huge advancement to be able to give babies resistance to this.
However, from an ethical stand point, is it right to genetically modify a person, even if they are a baby and it will help them tremendously, without their consent? How do we know this genetic modification is safe and won’t cause other problems with the child? Jacob also raised a great point about people who may try to use this to their advantage to create “the perfect baby” and crossing a line. You possibly could have legal restrictions where this can only be used in situations like the mother is infected with an STD and that may help. Overall, I think this is a slippery slope but if we can find a way to navigate it, it will be an extremely vital advancement in health care.
My position on this is that CRISPR should be used for gene therapy, but not to change the genes of people for generations. Being able to change the lineage of a family before a child is born is incredible, but it also feels a bit like playing god. While I do understand that there is a difference between preventing a horrible disease in a family, and customizing the color of hair a baby is born with, the fact that we can do something like that at all seems unethical. Just because we have the ability to do something doesn’t mean that we should. This technology is amazing, but I fear that using it to engineer humans will lead to a society similar to one found in “Gattaca”.
The recent claim of genetically engineering babies to resist HIV infection prompts a complex evaluation of ethical, scientific, regulatory, and societal factors. While the potential benefits of such modifications are significant, including disease prevention and improved health outcomes, there are profound ethical concerns regarding the long-term consequences, consent, and equity in access. Safety and efficacy must be thoroughly assessed through rigorous scientific research, and any use of genetic engineering for human modification should be subject to stringent regulation and oversight. Additionally, social and cultural considerations, as well as the potential implications for future generations and human evolution, must be carefully weighed in the decision-making process. Ultimately, decisions regarding heritable genetic modifications should prioritize the well-being of individuals, respect for human rights, and the long-term sustainability of humanity and the planet.
I believe the type of genetic modification used to aid the children mentioned in the video is ethical and should be considered a valuable medical advancement. It does not alter the children in any way besides allowing them to live without the burden of their parents’ genetic liability. It also allows for the potential eradication of certain genetic diseases and infections which could improve the quality of life of humanity as a whole and allow for generations that don’t have to worry about their children developing life threatening issues.
I think it is ok to use on humans, however it needs to be only for good uses and not for experimenting. Being able to have a kid and not worry about the hundreds of scary diseases, would be a dream for a every parent. This comes with a pretty big cost though, so it is really about is it safe and can nothing go wrong? For that kind of money it better be safe or I will just take my chance with my kids.
So I, like everyone else believe that this kind of gene editing should be allowed to help fix detrimental diseases, but there should be regulation to prevent it from being used to create a “perfect baby”. By eliminating these harmful diseases and giving a child the opportunity to live, you save lives and improve the future of generations. However, if unlimited genetic engineering were allowed, people could just build a baby and create any features, meaning that people would be predisposed to certain careers, such as athletic, academic, and any other careers before they are even born and get the opportunity to be a person and choose their own life. It would remove natural talent from people’s lives and turn into a game of who can engineer a child the most effectively. You would also get generations that change in waves. We would have trend-babies, which would just be a whole generation of kids that represent the standard while they were conceived, leading to less genetic variation. It would be difficult to control and regulate the proper usage of this technology because we all know that someone somewhere would abuse it, but if it can be properly used, the benefits would vastly outweigh the possible drawbacks.
The video transcript discusses gene surgery’s application in preventing genetic diseases, focusing on the story of Lulu and Nana, two Chinese girls born healthy after their father’s HIV-positive sperm underwent gene surgery to remove the gene causing HIV infection. Utilizing CRISPR technology, the surgery successfully eliminated the problematic gene, confirmed through whole-genome sequencing. This breakthrough offers hope to families facing genetic conditions, exemplified by Lulu and Nana’s father, Mark, who previously hesitated to have children due to his HIV status. While the technology’s ethical implications are debated, the speaker emphasizes its potential to assist families with inherited diseases, cautioning against non-therapeutic uses like IQ enhancement. Despite criticism, the speaker believes gene surgery’s benefits in fostering healthy families justify its continued development and application. Regarding the ethical question, the discussion revolves around whether such genetic modifications, capable of being passed down through generations, should be permitted for humans. This raises complex considerations involving informed consent, equity, and the potential for unintended consequences, demanding careful ethical scrutiny and regulatory oversight.
I strongly believe that genetic modifications using CRISPR technology could play a significant role in preventing numerous harmful and life-changing diseases that people face every day. What makes it even more important is that these genetic modifications could be passed on from generation to generation, which means that infectious diseases like HIV, HPV, and Hepatitis C could be prevented from affecting future generations. By altering the genes, children of individuals who had genetically modified DNA for a particular virus, such as HPV, would not be affected by the virus, thus preventing them from contracting cervical cancer caused by HPV. Overall, I consider this breakthrough to be a game-changer for people already living with chronic diseases and for preventing such diseases in future generations. I believe this type of genetic modification should only be used when medically necessary.
I believe genetic engineering technology is very interesting and could be used for positive genetic modifications such as creating resistance to diseases, but it also has the potential to create blurred lines between what is viewed as positive genetic modification. Meaning, I think gene modification is great when creating resistance to diseases such as the babies born to resist HIV. This way we can allow these children to live healthy long lives, and even pass on this modified resistant gene which creates longer and healthier lives for society as a whole. Though, I could see this being used in an immoral way for people who want “designer” babies, or babies where they pick every single feature about the child. When used in a healing way, then I think gene surgery is an amazing advancement in biotechnology. I do not think it should be used to change genes which allow parents to select phenotypes for the child.
The idea of genetic modifications in humans is a very slippery slope. On one hand, it could help prevent and eradicate horrible diseases that otherwise have no cure. Like in the video, the twin girls were able to be given life without HIV, unlike their father who has struggled his whole life. On the other hand, this could make way for what people like to call “designer” babies. Instead of only changing genes that cause illness and disease, it could be taken further and parents could select how their baby looks. Not to mention, a singular gene doesn’t determine a singular trait. Modifying a gene that would otherwise give the baby a disease, could modify many other traits. Overall, while genetic modification could have many benefits, more research and guidelines must be put in place before this can become a plausible option for the sake of what we define as humanity.
I don’t think genetically engineering humans is a good idea. For one experimenting these girls would not be ethical but also where do you draw the line. I think it would cause the problem that everyone would want to start genetically engineering there kids. They would want their kid to be taller and smarter. Everyone would start being genetically similar or the same. Then a strain of a disease mutates around the engineering. Since everyone is genetically identical and there is no more diversity everyone would die. Having uniqueness in our genes is important for survival. However, I do think that if you use genetic engineering to help those with either genetic disorders and diseases that would be fine. You are trying to help the person live and become “normal” and they are already alive.
While reducing the possibility of HIV and other diseases entirely is an admirable goal I have trouble believing that to be the best path forwards. One gene can be responsible for several characteristics and I find myself wondering how we can confidently edit the genes of what will grow up to be a child one hundred percent certain that this will not negatively impact them any other way throughout their lives. I would argue that efforts should be focused on increasing quality of life and making cures for the people that are dealing with diseases right now. Not to mention the dubious consent. Parents would effectively be tampering with their children’s DNA in ways that have no guarantee of increasing quality of life or health. Who is to say that these children won’t grow up and face harder challenges from the effects of the procedure than of HIV itself.
The idea of genetically modifying babies to avoid their harm is very interesting to think about, but this seems to be a very controversial topic. At first glance this seems amazing to be able to have babies have no chance at getting certain sicknesses, but something as revolutionary as this could cause problems similar to the AI debate. If we are able to genetically modify babies to avoid sicknesses, one might also want to modify for a physical deformity, and then another might want to push further. This starts to blur the line and may start fights across the world. This is similar to AI in terms of people having discussed when enough is enough. Humans have a habit of pushing too far.
I actually read Song of the Cell by Siddhartha Mukherjee, and in his book he discussed the case of the babies genetically modified to be resistant to HIV. In that particular case the babies would NOT have been susceptible to contracting their fathers HIV as he was undetectable and his wife was HIV free. It is assumed the doctor responsible for the gene modification did not properly explain this to them, he wanted to be able to take credit for being the first scientist to genetically modify a human fetus. So in that case specifically I believe it was morally and ethically wrong to go through with the gene modification. As in other cases in which gene modifications are used to prevent harmful inheritable conditions from being passed down from parent to offspring, gene modification could be a promising solution. In all cases where gene modification of human fetuses is used to select for desired traits according to the aesthetic inclinations of the parents, it is unethical. It is too close to eugenics and is, in my opinion, a violation of the rights of bodily autonomy of the individual who underwent the genetic modifications without their consent.
I think that it is very interesting to learn about how CRISPR can be used to modify genes and prevent genetic disease that would otherwise be harmful to humans. I believe that these kinds of genetic modifications should be allowed for humans. Because these genetic diseases can cause such huge problems for people I think it would be beneficial to modify the genes so that there is no possibility of these infections affecting human quality of life. However, I do think that genetic modification can get out of control very quickly if there are no strict regulations put on the procedure. But for big things like detrimental diseases I think it should be allowed because it is an improvement of quality of life.
I think genetically engineering humans is a very controversial topic. I think the diversity of humans is important for survival. If people were able to genetically alter their children, people would all have very similar genes which could end up being problematic. However, I do think that genetic engineering could be useful in terms of curing/preventing diseases. In my opinion, this is a controversial topic because there is concern that if people were able to genetically cure diseases, they could start taking it farther like altering a child’s genes which could lead to greed and even more problems that were not expected in the beginning.