Gene editing

I have recently gotten into listening to WSJ’s Future of Everything podcast. WSJ has many different podcasts including Tech News Briefing, Secrets of Wealthy Women, and What’s News. The Future of Everything focuses on technological innovations, and really, imagining what our future may look like. 

I have this habit, not necessarily a bad one, of listening to podcast after podcast on the elliptical. This week, I found one particular one I’d like to highlight called Customized Kids: Are designer babies on the way? Its title pretty much encapsulates the essence of this episode about genetic engineering. 

Genetic engineering was originally designed as a bulwark against congenital diseases such as diabetes and cystic fibrosis. What’s happened is that scientists discovered ways to manipulate genes that can also control physical appearances such as eye color and gender. Many questions of ethics arise from genetic engineering. 

Dr. Jeffrey Steinberg, the founder of Fertility Institutes explains that when would-be parents come into his office and request for a baby that has a particular eye color or a particular hair color, he will scan both parents to find possible combinations of genes that would lead them to not have a baby with those traits. If the desired trait the would-be parents would like to have is possible to have, then hormones are given to a woman that causes her to release around 10-14 eggs. These are fertilized and then scientists will go through and pick the embryo that possesses the desired trait. 

After listening to this podcast, and more importantly, to both sides of the issue, I’m still on the fence. There was a man with type 1 diabetes who was interviewed for the episode. He was against the idea of genetic engineering, saying that if his parents had the technology 20 years ago to pick the fittest and healthiest embryo, he would not exist today. It troubles me to think of the truth in his statement. The implications of genetic engineering would give way and allow for a “perfect” society and in a way, us humans would be defying the laws of mother nature. And then there are questions of privilege. Genetic engineering, whether to prevent diseases or for cosmetic purposes, is expensive and would lend itself to privilege. Is it ethical that some people have access to these benefits while others don’t?

Conversely, what’s interesting is that China has been trying to find genes that cause intelligence. For several years now, they have been analyzing hundreds of people with high IQ’s, in attempts to find common traits. Hypothetically, China would be able to change the base or average intelligence of its entire population, and in theory, regardless of whether someone was an executive or homeless, these people would be more intelligent than people from other countries. There are clear benefits to gene editing, but I believe what China is trying to do is raise the base level of intelligence. 

I believe gene editing is effective when it is applied to an entire population. For example, when an entire population’s intelligence is raised, or when an entire population is exempt from sickle-cell anemia or another congenital disease. In a way, we would still be defying mother nature. But then there’s the other side of the case with gene editing for cosmetic traits. Is it ethical to edit a baby’s features, or as the podcast calls it, “customize” them? I have a feeling this would perpetuate racial stereotypes and bias. While there are clear benefits when genetic engineering is applied to rid of life-threatening diseases, once the technology is released, it will be difficult to restrict customers from using gene editing to acquire particular cosmetic traits in their children. While gene editing certainly has its benefits, there are questions of ethics we must consider as a society. How far will we allow gene editing to go? What is a valid reason to select one embryo over another? Can any would-be parents do gene testing or only couples with predisposed diseases? It’s a topic that’s been on my mind recently, and as of now, I’m still unsure of where I stand on the matter.