CRISPR Designer Babies: Ethical or Not?
Everyone has heard about the CRISPR twins, right?
By Ava Fuhr
Introduction
The year is 2040. Imagine going to school as a 5 or 6 year old, on your first day of kindergarten. As you’re parents are walking you in, the older kids point and stare at you. You’re parents have told you this many times before, but they think you are still too young to understand. You are one of the first one hundred children to be legally genetically modified as an embryo. The other kids come up to you and ask what color your eyes were supposed to be, how smart you are, and other nonsense questions. You realize that they think that CRISPR edited means ‘designer baby’. They think that you believe you are better than everyone else, because of your editing. In reality, the only edits the scientists made on you were ones to prevent some of the many diseases and disorders in your genetics. This is the first of your embarrassment at school, because you are the only one at your school like this. Lots of people think your photographic memory is because of CRISPR, and you can’t tell them it’s just genetics. You have to eat certain foods and get tested for the diseases the scientists prevented, to see if it worked without side effects. Every day you wish you were normal; wish that you had a choice to be…
In the realm of genetic engineering and reproductive technology, a new and highly controversial innovation has emerged — CRISPR babies. This groundbreaking technology, known as CRISPR-Cas9, allows scientists to edit the DNA of embryos, raising both some excitement and a few concerns about its potential side effects and consequences. The ability to genetically modify human embryos has sparked a global debate on the ethical considerations of such a powerful, and dangerous, tool. What are the potential pros and cons of CRISPR babies? We should consider the infamous case of the CRISPR twins, Lulu and Nana.
Potential Pros
To fully appreciate the implications of CRISPR babies, it is important to understand the potential benefits it offers. One of the key advantages is the prevention of genetic diseases. By utilizing CRISPR, scientists can potentially eliminate or reduce the risk of genetic disorders in offspring, offering a chance for a healthier life. For instance, a study published in the journal Nature Medicine in 2017 demonstrated the successful correction of a genetic mutation in a human embryo that causes a potentially fatal heart condition called hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, which means that the muscles of the heart become abnormally thick, therefore making it harder to pump blood.
Another potential pro of CRISPR babies is the ability to enhance the resistance to diseases. Genetic modifications using CRISPR technology could provide individuals with increased immunity or resistance to specific diseases. For example, a study published in The New England Journal of Medicine in 2020 showed promising results in using CRISPR to edit the gene responsible for sickle cell disease, a hereditary blood disorder. ( if you would like to learn more about this topic, read this article) CRISPR technology has the potential to revolutionize disease prevention and treatment, offering new avenues for eradicating or managing debilitating illnesses, and savings millions of lives.
Changed Quality of Life
Furthermore, CRISPR babies could potentially lead to an improved quality of life. Genetic editing might offer the opportunity to enhance certain traits or attributes, such as intelligence or physical abilities, with a goal of optimizing human potential. While these enhancements raise ethical concerns, proponents argue that if used responsibly, CRISPR could empower individuals to reach their full potential and lead fulfilled lives. Though scientists could make mistakes or create new genetic mutations, this has the potential to overall improve quality of life.
Major Concerns
However, alongside the potential benefits, there are significant concerns and ethical considerations surrounding CRISPR babies. One of the most prominent cons is the uncertainty and unintended consequences of genetic modifications. The long-term effects of altering the human germline are still largely unknown. There could be unforeseen negative health outcomes or other unintended ethical issues that arise later in life.
Ethically, there are concerns that editing the genetic makeup of babies may lead to a slippery slope, where the technology could be misused for non-medical purposes, such as creating so-called “designer babies” with enhanced physical or intellectual traits. Safety is another major concern, as the long-term effects of CRISPR editing on human embryos are not yet fully understood. Additionally, there is a risk of off-target effects, where unintended changes occur in other parts of the genome. Furthermore, the irreversible nature of germline editing, which is passed on to future generations, raises concerns about potential harm caused by unintended genetic modifications. For example, altering genes that regulate physical appearance may inadvertently lead to unforeseen health problems, affecting not only the edited individual but also their offspring.
Minor Concerns
On the other hand, some minor concerns associated with CRISPR edited babies include the potential for exacerbating social inequalities and the impact on natural biodiversity. With the ability to edit genes, there is a risk that access to this technology may become restricted, further widening the gap between privileged individuals who can afford genetic enhancements and those who cannot. This could lead to a society where those who can afford genetic enhancements have significant advantages over others, creating a greater disparity in opportunities and resources. This could perpetuate social inequalities and further marginalize disadvantaged communities.
Additionally, the impact of CRISPR editing on natural biodiversity is a concern. Genetic modifications to human embryos and subsequent generations could potentially alter the gene pool drastically, leading to a decrease in natural genetic diversity. Biodiversity plays a crucial role in the stability and resilience of ecosystems, and any disruption caused by extensive genetic editing could have unforeseen ecological consequences.
Furthermore, the commercialization and patenting of CRISPR technology raise concerns about corporate control over human genetic engineering. If the technology is monopolized by a few companies, it could limit access for research purposes and hinder scientific progress in understanding and addressing genetic diseases.
Conclusion
In the end, the psychological and societal implications of CRISPR gene editing on individuals and communities should not be overlooked. The idea of genetically modifying babies can raise ethical questions regarding identity, individuality, and self-acceptance. It may also challenge societal values, norms, and perceptions of what it means to be human and the definition of a “normal” or “desirable” individual.
