Skipwith 1

Anyah Skipwith
Pre-English 9
Dominika Szybisty
30 July 2017

Modifying the Human Genome: Are Scientist Going to the Extreme?

Ever since I was a little girl, I have known that I wanted to help people. It all started

about four years ago. My sister (Laila), her friend (Saysha) and my friend but also Sayshas older

sister (Sierra) was outside riding bikes one sunny July day. Suddenly Saysha fell off her bike,

lacerating her big toe. As the wound was bleeding profusely I quickly I ran inside my house

grabbing my first aid kit and some peroxide and treated the wound. Saysha still weeping, got up

and walked her bike back home. As I gathered my materials getting ready to head back inside,

Sierra stopped me, praising me for helping her little sister because she would never have been

able to do that. I noticed I had a gift that was a force to be reckoned with. In high school, I

decided to take the medical services pathway to further my intelligence. The pathway consisted

of taking biology and anatomy/physiology. Biology consists of a lot of components, one being

DNA and genes. My biology teacher once told me how scientists can make an ideal baby for

soon to be parents. Meaning scientists can change the genetic make up an embryo. I began to

ponder about under what circumstances should scientists be able to manipulate genomes?

Genomes are the genetic material of an organism, consisting of DNA and RNA. To

manipulate genomes in an embryo, scientists inject genetic construct inside the embryo. In the

early 20th century chinese scientists [unspecified] were accused of holding an experiment which

used genetic technology to alter viable human embryos. Now a new technique is used, a
 Skipwith 2

technology called CRISPR, which allows scientists to edit the genome of living cells by cutting

out one gene and replacing it with another. Before the CRISPR was developed, scientists could

only add or suppress certain genes, not fully replace them (Adams, paragraph 2-5). There are two

causes of why scientists manipulate human genomes: To potentially eliminate inherited diseases

and/or to produce an offspring with certain different phenotypes. In a result of eliminating

disease, the embryo will not contain the hereditary disease gene. With a result of modifying

phenotype, scientist can alter the genome giving an embryo different phenotype. For example,

giving the embryo blue eyes instead of brown eyes.

The CRISPR can be used to eliminate life threatening diseases that is inherited from

generation to generation. Many get sick from disease like the common cold or the flu, but genetic

diseases are different. A genetic disease is a disease in which is inherited through DNA. The

original purpose of using CRISPR to modify human genomes was to eliminate inherited

diseases. This means that the future generation will avoid having that carried disease gene. Jill

Adams claims that if CRISPR is used to alter human genomes, the new human beings created

would have artificially inserted genes in every cell and tissue in their bodies (Adams, paragraph

10). The edited genome would be passed on to the descendants of the engineered humans. Little

is known about the potential long-term effects, but as of now the CRISPR is being sought to

eliminate heredity disease in humans.

Some condemn the use of CRISPR for scientists branching out from using it for its

original purpose. Once scientists discovered that the CRISPR was used to manipulate genomes,

they realized that they could also modify the embryos phenotypes. Scientists can modify

genomes for physical traits, like giving an embryo certain eye color or making an embryo a

certain gender. Marcy Darvosky states Permitting human germline gene editing for any reason
 Skipwith 3

would likely lead to its escape from regulatory limits, to its adoption for enhancement purposes,

and to the emergence of a market-based eugenics that would exacerbate already existing

discrimination, inequality, and conflict.. Fearing that society is trying to be too perfect and the

child has no say on how he/she wants to look. She also concludes that You must act before you

get pregnant, dont be sorry after the baby is born (Darvosky, paragraph 11). Darvosky then

addresses that parents and scientists should be more responsible, making sure that what they are

doing to the embryo is the right thing to do. There is also an argument that modifiying genomes

is inherently dangerous because the ways it can affect the embryo is unknown. Genetically

engineering has high risks of complications for the embryo that is being modified. Most try to

avoid manipulating human genomes for phenotype because the offspring has no consent.

Scientists then began wonder if the CRISPR is safe for the human kind. Some scientists

think that the CRISPR is dangerous and should be banned. Nicholas Wade explains The

biologists fear that the new technique is so effective and easy to use that some physicians may

push ahead before its safety can be assessed. (Wade, paragraph 2). The technique occasionally

cuts the genome at unintended cites. Dr. Baltimore says, we worry about people making

changes without the knowledge of what those changes mean in terms of the overall genome.

claiming that people just arent smart enough to know what truly happens and the true

consequences when manipulating genomes (Baltimore, paragraph 11).

This matter should strictly be dealt with those involved in the process of genetic

modification. This includes the parents and the scientists. As of now, the government has no say

in the genetic modification of human genomes, the decision is strictly up to the parents. It is up

to them whether or not they want to manipulate the natural genomes of the embryo to get rid of a

hereditary disease or to make the child look like how they want. The child does not have consent
 Skipwith 4

in this act. When the embryo grows up their consent is worthless because they have already been

modified. Under what circumstances should scientist manipulate human genomes?

 Skipwith 5

Harris, John. Pro and Con: Should Gene Editing Be Performed on Human Embryos National
Geographic, http://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2016/08/human-gene-
editing-pro-con-opinions/. accessed 28 jul. 2017.
Darnvosky, Marcy. Pro and Con: Should Gene Editing Be Performed on Human Embryos
National Geographic, http://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2016/08/human-
gene-editing-pro-con-opinions/. accessed 28 jul. 2017.
Holdrege, Craig. Manipulating the Genome of Human Embryos: Some Unforeseen Effects The
Nature Institute, http://natureinstitute.org/txt/ch/human_gmo_embryo.php. accessed 28
jul. 2017.
Hix, Laura. MODERN EUGENICS: BUILDING A BETTER PERSON? Northwestern
Reasearch, 23 jul. 2009, https://helix.northwestern.edu/article/modern-eugenics-building-
better-person. Accessed 28 jul. 2017.
Adams, J. U. Manipulating the human genome CQ Researcher, 19 jun. 2015,
http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre2015061900&type=hitl
ist&num=0. Accessed 28 jul. 2017.
Wade, Nicholas Scientist Seek Ban on Method of Editing the Human Genome The New York
Times, 19 mar. 2015, https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/20/science/biologists-call-for-
halt-to-gene-editing-technique-in-humans.html. Accessed 28 jul. 2017.
Word Count: 980