People interviewed in Washington, D.C. this week all agreed they wouldn’t genetically modify human embryos or sperm cells, noting they believe in the science to cure disorders but disagree that it should be used to enhance newborns’ features.
The technology might not be that far away.
Cathy Baker, 23, majoring in literature at American University, said “that’s scary” when she was told about the possibility of designing babies. She feared that it could lead to a revival of the eugenics programs like those done by the Nazis.
“You start valuing people based off the traits they have, and not their for their inherit worth as human beings,” Baker said.
There has been a lot of progress in the gene editing field in recent years.
In the 2018 book Beyond Bioethics: Toward a New Biopolitics, Eric S. Lander explained that scientists currently have been able to remove mutations and prevent genetic disorders, and a more distant frontier will be programming babies, giving them certain traits we desire, such as making them smarter, prettier and stronger.
As programming babies is becoming more of a realistic possibility in the future, gene editing has become a controversial topic in the recent years.
Derik Siegel, 28, a former sociology student at American University, commented on the issue. He noted that, “science and technology is not inherently good or bad, but it depends on the way it is used,” continuing that “there are are lot of ethics that go into it.”
Winston Kang, an American University student, worries that the technology may be available only to the rich due to its expense.
“Rich people can do this and poor people can’t do that,” Kang said. “And there will be more political issues from there on.”
Intan Fadzullah, 39, a father of two, challenges the morality of changing the environment our self included, saying that we would be too “god-like” defying the natural order of the world.
Despite all this, Tim Nicholls, who describes himself as an entrepreneur, creative designer, traveler, professor and writer, believes science should be helpful to people all around the world in the cure for diseases and therefore should be allowed to advance with some precautions. He’s had a number of surgeries he credits with his own health.
“I wouldn’t be here without science,” Nicholls said.
This technology seems to meet problems with the law in many countries.
In fact, according to the statistics collected by Motoko Araki and Tetsuya Ishii, out of all the developed countries surveyed, in a majority of them such as Italy, France and England, human gene modification is not yet trusted and banned by law.
Other countries such as the U.S. have restrictions on this technology, while the remaining surveyed are ambiguous or have guidelines that can or can’t be followed.
There are many different opinions on this topic, but out of all the interviews, one thing seems absolutely clear: everyone believes that humans shouldn’t tamper with the DNA as it is not natural and might cause problems in the future that we can’t account for now.
