ROUGH DRAFT: Gene Editing: Good or Bad?

Gene editing is a type of genetic engineering in which DNA is modified in the genome of a living organism. Crispr relates very closely to gene editing because it is a genetic engineering tool that uses a DNA sequence to edit the base pairs of a gene. Tenzin Gyatso is the fourteenth Dalai Lama and he is focusing on genetic engineering. The Dalai Lama states that “the issue of gene therapy and the associated question of genetic manipulation, especially at the level of the human embryo, are posing grave challenges to our capacity for ethical thinking.” (64). If you knew that there may be negative effects on the embryo, would you edit your child’s embryo? 

I understand for people how this could change their lives so their child doesn’t have a certain disease or cancer that runs in the family. I know that colon cancer runs on my dad’s side of the family. I’ve lost many family members to it, and my dad even had it when I was in the fifth grade. Lots of people wish there was a cure, but there isn’t. People may think that gene editing is a cure but down the road what if something happens to the embryos, animals, or sperm that we are editing? What if they die after being edited? What if they die later on in life due to the editing? Therefore crispr and gene editing is not a cure.

There are so many questions that lots of people have, and I bet that half of them can’t even be answered. A woman stated in the Editing human embryo’s ‘morally permissible’ video that crispr is “too risky, we don’t need it. There are healthier ways to have children.” (2:00). And I would have to agree with this statement. Just because this one thing right now “works”, how do we know if it is actually working?

Ethics is the practice of knowing the differences between right and wrong, would you say crispr is ethical? We have heard the positive aspects about it but what about the negative ones? The Dalai Lama mentions that “…there [are] a series of further issues which again raise deep and troubling ethical questions.” (65). People who work with crispr or with gene editing should be able to identify if what they are doing is ethical or not.

In the article from before, it said that while gene editing is “effective, the process is less than perfect and can cut out too much DNA, experts have found.” (BBC NEWS). That line is what people need to hear, they need to hear that it is working but things can go wrong. Due to the mishaps, the editors can ruin other important DNA strands, causing cancer. As for The Dalai Lama, he states that “By actively manipulating the gene, we are on the cusp of forcing an unnaturally quick rate of change in animals and plants as well as our own species.” (63). These two quotes are helpful for both sides of the spectrum, positive and negative. Yes, one day by manipulating genes we may have a great outcome. But as of right now there is a possibility of a not so great outcome due to editing genes or anything of that sort. 

In The Dalai Lama’s writing his main claim was about the moral compass. A moral compass is used to relate to someone’s ability to judge what is right or wrong and act accordingly. The Dalai Lama talks about putting faith in human nature and residing with compassion, do you think that demanding compassion for all this would work? After you edit someone’s embryo let’s say it goes wrong, you accidently take too much of the DNA out then you planned on. The baby isn’t going to come out the way you thought. If you begged for compassion to the parents do you think that they would hate you? I know that if I was one of those parents I definitely would not give you – the editor – compassion. Knowing that there are risks to this may affect some parents’ decisions of editing their child’s embryos, which in the end may not be such a bad thing. 

After looking at multiple sides of the gene editing debate, I would have to disagree with gene editing as a whole. No matter what it is that you are editing, I do not see the greater good in it at the end of the day. We can hurt our children, the future generations. If we keep editing our childs embryos we are going to lose all of the diversity in this world, which in the end isn’t so good. We talk about how being different is okay, so why is it that you want to change your children? Yes I know they might have a disease or cancer, but still. We don’t want to lose all the diversity we have left, right?

Work Cited

“Editing Human Embryos ‘Morally Permissible’.” BBC NEws, BBC, 17 July 2018, 

www.bbc.com/news/health-44849034

FINAL DRAFT: Gene Editing: Good or Bad?

If you knew that there may be negative effects on the embryo, would you edit your child’s embryo? Gene editing is a type of genetic engineering in which DNA is modified in the genome of a living organism. Crispr relates very closely to gene editing because it is a genetic engineering tool that uses a DNA sequence to edit the base pairs of a gene. Tenzin Gyatso is the fourteenth Dalai Lama and he is focusing on genetic engineering. The Dalai Lama states that “the issue of gene therapy and the associated question of genetic manipulation, especially at the level of the human embryo, are posing grave challenges to our capacity for ethical thinking.” (64).  Gene editing isn’t a risk mankind should take without knowing that it is successful or not. 

For some people gene editing could change their lives in a positive way. Gene editing could make it so their child doesn’t have a certain disease or cancer that runs in the family anymore. I know that colon cancer runs on my dad’s side of the family and I have lost many family members due to it. My dad even had it when I was in the fifth grade which impacted our family and community greatly. Lots of people wish there was a cure, as do I. One day there will be a cure for cancer and diseases that aren’t curable now. Another author wrote that there is “A wide range of perspectives and values [that] are likely to affect different people’s judgment of the issues.” (“Moral Perspectives”). There are many different opinions in this world about gene editing, good and bad. And that is okay, people should be able to express how they feel no matter what.

People who work with crispr or with gene editing should be able to identify if what they are doing is ethical or not. Ethics is the practice of knowing the differences between right and wrong, would you say crispr is ethical? We have heard the positive aspects about it but what about the negative ones? The Dalai Lama mentions that “…there [are] a series of further issues which again raise deep and troubling ethical questions.” (Lama). It may be too soon to tell if this editing software is working or not. A woman stated in the Editing human embryo’s ‘morally permissible’ video that crispr is “too risky, we don’t need it. There are healthier ways to have children.” (Editing human embryo’s ‘morally permissible’). Just because gene editing is happening how do we know if it’s helping?

The public needs to be informed on the good and bad sides of gene editing. Lama mentions that “We need a much higher level of public involvement…” (69). We can’t act on something we haven’t been made aware of. People need to hear, they need to hear that gene editing is working. But they also need to know that things can go wrong. Due to the mishaps, the editors can ruin other important DNA strands, causing cancer. As for The Dalai Lama, he states that “By actively manipulating the gene, we are on the cusp of forcing an unnaturally quick rate of change in animals and plants as well as our own species.” (Lama). That sounds scary. To think that gene editing could affect us in such a big way, good and bad. Gene editing could affect us humans and animals in so many different ways. These two quotes are helpful for both sides of the spectrum, positive and negative. Yes, one day by manipulating genes we may have a great outcome. But as of right now there is a possibility of a not so great outcome due to editing genes or anything of that sort. 

A moral compass is used to relate to someone’s ability to judge what is right or wrong and act accordingly. In The Dalai Lama’s writing his main claim was about the moral compass. Lama mentions in his writing that putting faith in human nature and residing with compassion. Demanding compassion may or may not work in this case. In an article they stated “Few people [will] argue that intervening in the genome is intrinsically more important than other ways of manipulating nature…” (“Moral Perspectives”). After you edit someone’s embryo let’s say it goes wrong, you accidently take too much of the DNA out then you planned on. The baby isn’t going to come out the way everyone thought. If you begged for compassion to the parents do you think that they would hate you? I know that if I was one of those parents I definitely would not give you – the gene editor – compassion. Knowing that there are risks to this may affect some parents’ decisions of editing their child’s embryos, which in the end may not be such a bad thing. 

After looking at multiple sides of the gene editing debate, I would have to disagree with gene editing as a whole. No matter what it is that you are editing, I do not see the greater good in it at the end of the day. Gene editors shouldn’t hurt our children, or the future generations. If we keep editing our childs embryos we are going to lose all of the diversity in this world, which in the end isn’t so good. We talk about how being different is okay, so why is it that you want to change your children? Yes I know they might have a disease or cancer, but still. We don’t want to lose all the diversity we have left, right?

Work Cited

“Editing Human Embryos ‘Morally Permissible’.” BBC NEws, BBC, 17 July 2018, 

     www.bbc.com/news/health-44849034 Accessed 28 February 2020.

Lama, Dalai. “Ethics and the New Genetics.” Emerging: Contemporary Readings for 

     Writers, edited by Barrios Barclay, Beddford/St. Martin’s, 2016 pgs 62-70.

“Moral Perspectives.” NuffieldBioethics.org. Nuffield Council on Bioethics,      https://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/publications/genome-editing-an-ethical-review/guide-to-the-report/moral-perspectives