Should We Be Genetically Modifying Our Embryos?

Think about the circumstances of those who are born with dangerous genetic diseases. Some of these individuals have a tendency to lead very brief lives that are characterized by ongoing hospitalization and medication, while others struggle with a variety of issues. How does the quality of life of these people relate to that of young, healthy people? The best way to explain the quality of life is when children with genetic defects who would otherwise be able to play regularly as children become isolated due to this and develop depression and other mental illnesses. As a result, genetic modification/ germline engineering of human embryos for severe medical diseases, with some limitations, can result in many benefits.

The clear objective of genetic modification is to reduce significantly the number of people suffering from inherited genetic diseases. As Savulescu (n.p.) observes, blood-related genetic disorders such as cystic fibrosis and thalassemia can easily be managed through genetic modification of the embryos. Additionally, germline engineering reduces the need for genetic selection which leads to completely different individuals (Savulescu n.p). The treatment and management of genetic diseases are expensive and time consuming for the affected families. Consequently, the living standards of such families are significantly reduced. Genetic modification, thus, leads to cut costs in treating various diseases.

What if people could stay young for long? Imagine a world where aging effects are easily mitigated, and humans have double lifespans or can live for hundreds of years. Reduction of aging effects are the future promises of continued research and adoption of germline engineering. The annual death rates from aging-related conditions are thirty million people. According to Savulescu, aging is the “most under-researched cause of death and suffering relative to its significance.” However, Mathews et al. (160) indicates that genome editing in human embryos is critical to facilitate various research. One area of research that can significantly benefit from embryonic genome editing is aging where it is possible for the development of better individuals who will be capable of longer lifespans. The other advantage of gene modification is the ending of lottery nature of genes among human s which short-changes some individuals in the society.

Despite the apparent advantages of genetic modification, the practice is subject to ethical concerns in the general public and among medical practitioners. (Moon n.p.) Observes that the US Congress has prohibited clinical trials in human embryo genetic modification while Mathews et al. (160) indicate that only eight countries in the world permit human embryo genome editing. Furthermore, there are concerns about worse effects of genetic modification such as the condition is known as “mosaicism” where changes applied to the DNA does not occur evenly. Another matter by different factions in the society is the issue of designer babies. Most people argue that this is unnatural and that individuality among babies will be lost. Hanson (n.p.) questions the affordability of genetic modification indicating that only the rich will be able to afford it. Hanson proceeds to outline other disadvantages of designer babies such as the drawbacks on the human gene pool and the lack of choice by the babies and other children in the families.

Despite the ethical concerns, most people are in favor of continued research in genetic modification. From the survey conducted by Weisberg et al., they found that “based on 2,493 respondents, is that our sample of diverse participants is supportive of continuing research in the human genetic modification.” These attitudes towards better, healthier, and longer-living human beings are vital for the advancement of humans and the quality of life.

Evidently, genetic modification helps reduce incidences of genetically inherited diseases, thus, reducing the costs of treating and managing the diseases. Furthermore, genome editing allows research in different areas such as aging which can help prolong human life. Despite ethical concerns about worse conditions from genetic editing and cases of designer babies, most people are in favor of continued research in genetic modification.

Works Cited

Hanson, Jack. “Designer Babies Pros and Cons | Gene Therapy | Genetic Engineering.” Futureforall.Org, 2017, www.futureforall.org/bioengineering/designer-babies.html.

Mathews, Debra JH, et al. “CRISPR: a path through the thicket.” Nature News, vol. 527 no.7577, 2015, pp. 159-161.

Moon, Mariella. “US Scientists Have Genetically Modified Human Embryos.” Engadget, 27 July 2017, www.engadget.com/2017/07/27/crispr-human-embryo-gene-editing-first-time-us/.

Savulescu, Julian. ”Five Reasons We Should Embrace Gene-Editing Research on Human Embryos.“ The Conversation, 2017, http://theconversation.com/five-reasons-we-should-embrace-gene-editing-research-on-human-embryos-51474.

Weisberg, Steven M., Daniel Badgio, and Anjan Chatterjee. ”a crisPr new World: attitudes in the Public toward innovations in human genetic Modification.“ Frontiers in public health 5 (2017).