Title: Is New Zealand ready for Gene Editing?
Subtitle: And should we be modifying the human genome?
Thesis: Is it ethical to edit the human genome?
A new world of possibilities for genetic engineers has opened up in the last few years. With a new batch of tools at their disposal, geneticists can now edit genes for a fraction of the cost. These new tools are easier to use and have improved accuracy. What was once only science fiction, could now be a reality. Of these new tools CRISPR (see glossary) is the most famous, but others include ZFN and TALEN. Each of these tools can be targeted to find a specific DNA sequence and make a cut at that point. Instructions can be included on how to repair this cut, allowing geneticist to inject their own
…show more content…
Plants natural ability to fight diseases could be enhanced, reducing our current reliance on chemical protection for edible crops. Of the 3,000 known human genetic disorders, many of these genetic errors could be corrected, allowing sufferers to live a normal life. When your doctor diagnoses you with a disease, a customized cure based on your DNA could be created. But wait, that is not all. Designer babies are now a technical possibility, not only correcting inherited genetic errors but also improving on the original design. Therefor, the next generation could be smarter, stronger, and with perfect vision. With so many possibilities, the question naturally arises; just because we can do all these things, should …show more content…
This gene therapy modifies the PCSK9 gene. From studying people with this mutation, they show no other deleterious effects from the mutation. However, this is not the only possible risk. With any gene therapy, there is the risk of off-target gene edits. This is you are deliberately trying to edit a specific gene sequence, but you inadvertently end up editing other genes besides your target gene. In this particular therapy, the risks appear to be low. But as every person's DNA is unique, the risk is not zero.
Conclusion: Some uses of Gene editing will always be unethical and should be restricted. Other uses of gene editing are only unethical because of our lack of knowledge. In a few cases, we are already confident that the potential good we can do, would out weight the potential risks.
In spite of the many questions still to be answered, we need to fight our natural response to retreat from the unknown, but rather strive to understand. To think deeply about the ethical implications of these new tools. Always aware that, these are powerful tools, capable of improving the lives of many. But also of unleashing unforeseen consequences if not used with
...s of gene therapy is that the mortality rate is very high. This is because Immune system may attack cells and cells may attack vital organs. Furthermore, ethical issues should be dealt in a positive way. The technological institute has to reduce the unnecessary expenses of the treatment. I highly suggest the government investing more money on the development of gene therapy.
In the past 40 years, scientists have developed and applied genetic engineering to alter the genetic make-up of organisms by manipulating their DNA. Scientists can use restriction enzymes to slice up a piece of DNA from an organism with the characteristics they want and spliced (joint) to a DNA from another organism. DNA that contains pieces from different species is called recombinant DNA, and it now has different genetic material from its original. When this DNA inserted back into the organism, it changes the organism’s trait. This technique is known as gene-splicing (Farndon 19).
Gene therapy focuses on the replacement of defective genes with modified functioning genes. Many diseases are caused by a defective gene meaning the body is incapable of producing essential proteins or enzymes. In its simplest form, gene therapy aims to identify the defective gene and fix this gene with the replacement of a normal gene (Senn).
General dangers of the techniques of gene therapy are a large concern. One problem is that the new gene may be inserted in the wrong location in the DNA. Experiments with rats showed this could cause cancer or other damage. In addition, when DNA is directly injected into a tumor there is a chance that the DNA could be introduced by mistake into reproductive cells, producing changes in offspring. The consequences of this are discussed in more detail later on. Another disturbing thing to think about when pondering the safety of gene therapy is the fact that once gene therapy has taken effect it cannot be stopped and is irreversible. It is not like drugs, the genes cannot be stopped from multiplying.
From the perspective of some activists against gene therapy, they feel as though if it were to be used in a way to enhance one's own abilities. It could possibly have a destructive outcome especially if applied to an unborn/newborn child. These activists believe that if possessed in the wrong hands it may cause ethical issues such as altering a child's basic height, weight so forth. This type of treatment is called germline therapy, however the Government does not allow the research to be funded, so it is all only theory as it has not occured yet. But in factuality the cells that are implanted inside a patient's body may cause dozens of issues, as shown in the statement “Several studies have already shown that this approach can have very serious health risks, such as toxicity, inflammation, and cancer.” (GHR) With these issues it will cause even more problems, especially if someone is being treated for cancer. If they were to either retain the cancer or develop a new possibly worse type of cancer it will affect not only the patient but it will also halt the research of gene therapy which in turn will slow down the process for finding a safe
It lists the advantages and disadvantages of genetic engineering. The article claims that although human genetic engineering would help cure diseases, “it is of serious concern that the cons may far outweigh the pros...since the editing process is costly…(and) there is always the chance that disrupting one gene may disrupt large signalling pathways, leading to cell damage…(and lastly,) some scientists condemn gene editing on ethical grounds ” The editing process costs about $1million, which is much more than most people can afford. Gene therapy could cause gaps between the wealthy and the poor. Affluent people wouldn’t have genetic diseases, whereas people with less money would. Gene therapy isn’t the only form of human genetic engineering.
Science and technology are rapidly advancing everyday; in some ways for the better, and in some, for worse. One extremely controversial advance is genetic engineering. As this technology has high potential to do great things, I believe the power genetic engineering is growing out of control. Although society wants to see this concept used to fight disease and illness, enhance people 's lives, and make agriculture more sustainable, there needs to be a point where a line is drawn.
Genetic Engineering is the deliberate alteration of an organism's genetic information (Lee 1). The outcome scientists refer to as successful entitles the living thing’s ability to produce new substances or perform new functions (Lee 1). In the early 1970’s, direct manipulation of the genetic material deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) became possible and led to the rapid advancement of modern biotechnology (Lee 1).
Hey! It’s me, Christopher, streaming live from The Guardian! I know, I know; it’s already January 15, so I’m sure you’re wondering what today’s tantalizing topic is. Well, today I’m going to be informing you about Gene Editing-Rewriting the Code of Life. So let’s start with some basic background information. Each and every one of our bodies is made up of a chemical called DNA; simply it is the coding telling us to how to grow, live, and function. A gene is a small section of a DNA strand and these are what are inherited from your parents to determine your appearance. They are our body’s ‘biological templates’ to create proteins and enzymes to construct tissues and organs. Get this: humans have around 24,000 genes in them! Unfortunately, some
New advancements make it possible to not only program computers to do what people tell them to, but to think for themselves.
Editing human DNA ( Deoxyribonucleic acid is a molecule that carries the genetic instructions used in the growth, development, functioning and reproduction of all known living organisms and many viruses. (Wikipedia 1) has always been a widely controversial topic. Some believe it's wrong, while others believe it could be very beneficial to the future of curing diseases and having healthy children. I believe personally that this is not something to tamper with. Here are some reasons why.
... and ignore our limitations rather than focus on them since we are already limited by our ways of knowledge. On the contrary, my proposed ideas highlight the importance of identifying one’s limitations and attempting to make up for them by using a variety of tools to solve a specific problem rather relying on one tool only.
Thesis Statement: Scientist today could potentially prevent a multitude of diseases through genetic engineering; however, any alterations beyond the medicinal scope would be unethical. Outline: Introduction: Determining whether human modification through genetic engineering is ethical. History/Background: For some time, scientists have explored the possibilities of correcting and/or eliminating genetic diseases by modifying the human genetic makeup via genetic engineering.
The lack of a line to determine which genes can be edited is the first issue; the use of CRISPR to edit genes can either lead to a cure for all genetic diseases, predispositions, and defects, or to the creation of programmed or enhanced individuals. The fiscal, mechanical, and precautionary potential of embryonic CRISPR editing is the second issue. CRISPR is viable fiscally and mechanically, yet precautionarily unviable. Although it is inexpensive, accessible, and precise, it is inefficient, resulting in extreme untoward effects, like genetic mosaicism and off-target events. The possible effect of excessive CRISPR use on future generations is the third issue, which could result in either the eradication of genetic disease from the gene pool, or the loss of evolutionary fitness and genetic diversity. It is unknown whether CRISPR will be incorporated into future editing of embryos. Only time can tell whether CRISPR will become a common household name or a name lost in scientific
Advancements in science and medicine are usually accompanied with a myriad of ethical and moral implications. The fairly recent advancement in genetics called gene therapy is no exception to the baggage of polarizing views that come with new technology. Gene therapy is an extremely hot topic in both the science world and everyday life. New technology, discoveries, and breakthroughs are rapidly occurring in the field every day. The topic of gene therapy in humans is one that is highly debated due to the ethical implications connected to the science. Both sides of the debate have various reasons for their position, but the main factors come down to the ethics of changing someone’s genome and the consequences that accompany the altercations. The two types of gene therapy, somatic and germ-line are seen in different lights. There is more debate over germ-line therapy because the alterations have more consequences than somatic gene therapy. There are many moral and ethical decisions that need to be considered before gene therapy can be widely accepted. Do we have the right to change a person’s genetics, especially before they are born? Do we know enough to confidently insert or delete genes without detrimental consequences down the road? If we have the ability to help people who have disabilities or diseases, is it ethical to withhold and not treat the patient? I believe human gene therapy is a good and useful tool for medicine and needs to be developed because it posses the ability to help and cure people from ailments that degrade their quality of life.