Why Is Gene Editing Bad

Have you ever wondered what it would be like to be able to choose your own characteristics, or even get rid of unwanted ones? Although at first, this may seem like the main idea of a cliche science fiction novel, it is, in fact, a current controversy known as gene editing. Gene editing is a widespread possibility for the future. The hope is that one day scientists will be capable of changing the genes in human embryos to remove dangerous inherited diseases. Despite the clearly positive results of healthier children, people are split on whether or not it’s actually beneficial. Some argue that it’s unsafe and that we don’t know if it has negative effects that could end up doing more harm than good. On the other side, some believe that if we

are able to make this breakthrough and cure diseases before they even become a problem, we should. The rewards of gene editing are productive, as long as strict regulations are set in place soon to ensure that it won’t be taken advantage of for future use.
One reason why gene editing is beneficial is that it overall will help many families who are at high risk of having a child with a certain disease but don’t want to adopt.

In the article “Despite moral objections, panel gives cautious approval to gene editing research” by Eva Botkin- Kowack, it says, “There are thousands of genetic diseases- gene editing could be a huge help for these people and deserves some consideration.” This is true because we will greatly improve the lives of many by allowing them to rid themselves and their children the burden of having, or even carrying, a genetic disease. In the text, it also states it can “treat a range of diseases such a sickle cell, hemophilia, to even lowering risks of certain cancers.” This shows us more specifically some of the viruses that could be gone just by genetic editing. We have access to curing diseases, which is too great of an opportunity to pass up. If society can save lives, why shouldn’t

we?
In addition, scientists say that the procedure is cost effective and simple. This is shown in the article “We can engineer a better baby, but we should be careful” by Project Syndicate when it says “It allows scientists to remove and add genes cheaply and easily.” From this, we know that the task itself is not challenging, and with the scientists being very well trained for this, nothing could go wrong. Furthermore, in the article “Faster, Cheaper Way to Alter DNA Points Up Ethics Issue” by Washington Post writer Joel Achenbach, it also adds onto this idea by describing gene editing as a “stunningly fast, flexible, cheap way to manipulate the code of life”.
Opponents believe, however, that there are many fears revolving around how far this would go, and soon designer babies could be the new normal.

In the article written by Eva Botkin-Kowacki, she states “fears have persisted that such technology could lead to a dystopian society in which people with the means could pay to alter the traits of their offspring to give them an advantage in life, or governments might use the technique to build super-soldiers.” What this means to them is that it could get out of hand. Those who say this are short-sighted. If we set strict regulations and guidelines now to ensure that gene editing remains only for getting rid of diseases, there is no concern for superhumans whatsoever. This idea is shown by Project Syndicate when it says “The sick should not be left untreated just because of fears that some parents will want to build superkids.” Besides, this situation presented by those anti-gene editing is merely hypothetical, not fact-based by any

means.
In conclusion, genetic editing is rewarding due to the illnesses it can cure, such as some cancers. Not only this, but the procedure is also inexpensive and efficient, and the scientists will be heavily trained for this lab in particular, making sure it’s well done. Since this is so, gene editing will be an immense project in later studies, changing how we treat genetic diseases perpetually.