When does genetic engineering in humans become inhumane?

Researchers for genetic engineering have branched out beyond plants and animals and have began DNA modification on humans, or potential humans. There are many people excited for this achievement in science, but others have become fearful of the implications involved in editing genes. So I ask, what’s at stake? How can those who regulate genetic engineering on humans avoid overstepping ethics while still allowing the continuation of research in this field?

You may be familiar with genetic engineering already. A common example of this can be seen on many food labels, printed GMO (genetically modified organism). The process of editing genes is used most commonly on plants to improve crop yields or increase nutritional value of food. Genetic engineering has also been tested extensively on viruses and animals, and researchers have discovered that this same technology can also be applied to humans. This is thanks to CRISPR working universally on all species. CRISPR, short for “clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats”, works in tangent with the enzyme Cas9 to act as a molecular pair of scissors that cut DNA from their sequences. The author of Genetically Modified Humans? How Genome Editing Works, Tanya Lewis states that “First, the CRISPR/Cas9 complex searches through the cell’s DNA until it finds and binds to a sequence that matches the CRISPR […] Then, the Cas9 cuts the DNA. Lastly, the cell repairs the cut, in this case by inserting a piece of DNA supplied by the experimenter” (Tanya Lewis par. 6). The goal is to remove/replace genes in order to refine the way an organism functions, and this is the reason why genetically modifying humans is crucial to the advancement of the medical field.

The outcomes of this procedure are numerous. A significant motivation for scientists to continue research on genetic engineering are the benefits imposed by it. This includes curing diseases, getting rid of illness in young or unborn children, and bringing on the potential for longer lives, according to Paul Arnold of Brighthub and Rinkesh’s article on the “Pros and Cons of Genetic Engineering”. With that being said, there is still some risk involved. The potential for genetic defects may increase, and if this process was abused, then genetic diversity could become limited. The safety concerns of genetic engineering in humans are not very extensive, however, the main concern that holds people back from supporting it are the questionable ethics that arise.

Genetically modifying humans is a topic of controversy because of the ethics that are seemingly disregarded in the process. To clarify, in this article, ethics is being used as an umbrella term to refer to all the social, legal and clinical implications of genetic engineering as well. There are some boundaries involving these implications that may be crossed if there were no regulations set in place to circumvent this. The most talked about topic being discussed in the community currently is the use of eugenics. There is a possibility that when genetic engineering becomes more widespread, it may be used for cosmetics rather than medical purposes. According to Renuka Sivapatham, author of Ethical Implications of Human Genetic Engineering, “The slippery slope is when/if we start to use it for cosmetic changes such as eye color or for improving a desired athletic trait. A perfect example is surgery, which we have performed for hundred years for disease purposes and is now widely used as a cosmetic tool” (Renuka Sivapatham par. 6). Many people fear that the system of eugenics, that was widely abandoned after its issues were brought to light during the Nazi regime, could make a comeback through genetic modification. This concern would be dissolved if there were policies that banned the misuse of CRISPR.

Genetic modification has shown that it is incredibly valuable to modern medical treatment. In other circumstances, it is difficult to justify its use on humans. This is why there should be a ban placed on genetically engineering for the purpose of eugenics or “designer babies”. If it meant to be used in the medical field, then how do we ensure it is safe to use? One regulation that we could benefit from is to limit testing to human embryos or animals, and prevent experiments on living humans. We are in the early stages of human genome editing, and according to the author of Ethical ‘decision day’: How should we regulate ‘gene editing’ of humans? “‘CRISPR is not ready for any human use — it is poorly understood — powerful — but poorly understood,’ Arthur Caplan told me in an email. Caplan is a veteran bioethicist who heads the Division of Medical Ethics at New York University. Careful animal trials would have to be done before pursuing gene editing as the solution to any inherited disease, he said.” (Tabitha M. Powledge par. 13) Something like this requires time, and scientists could continue research in a more controlled setting to ensure that their techniques are safe. Keeping in mind the idea that ethics are important to protect, especially when it comes to experimentation on humans, continuous debate and integration of standards is effective for upholding this code and supporting the values of everyone involved.

The need to negotiate solutions to the limiting concerns has been recognized. Genetically modifying humans is still a relatively new process, but there are already efforts being made to establish standards and guidelines from several research teams and organizations, such as Stanford’s CIRGE (Center for Integrations of Research on Genetics and Ethics) and the NHGRI (National Human Genome Research Institute). According to the article Genetic Engineering Debate: Are There Lines We Shouldn’t Cross? these research centers are used “to proactively identify and deliberate ethical, legal and social issues in current and emerging genetic research” (Jessica Erickson par. 7). It has been agreed upon by several organizations who support the use of genetic engineering that safety is their top concern.

Biotech has come a long way in recent years, and now the scientific community is tasked with yet another important obligation. Genetic researchers should discuss what limitations need be implemented, and also evaluate when to integrate policy in order to ensure safety and the upholding of ethical code, while at the same time grant space for science to advance in the medical field. Overall, genetic engineering can be valuable in our society if it used correctly and in a safe manner.