Rice University has opened up an investigation on one of its professors on the bases of his involvements on embryo genetic alteration of a set of twins. The alteration was intended to alter the children in such a way that they would be immune to HIV. While the alteration was done in China and it is only illegal in the US, the investigation is due to the moral implications and infractions of the code within the scientific community. The research has not yet been published n the general fashion and the scientist being investigated did not reply to the news source for any questioning.
The audience of this article is most prominently people interested in science and the purpose is to warn about what advancements might be present in that field whether you agree with them or not. Personally, it is an interesting idea to think about because there are so many things that could be fixed before they were even a problem. At the same time, altering something that happened naturally usually has its consequences. The argument can be made that if it didn't occur naturally then it wasn't supposed to happen. Then again if you use that argument it can be said that people shouldn't be able to physically alter their gender to who they identify as mentally if it didn't happen naturally/originally. And that's just the beginning of the discussion. It also gives us as humans so many choices that we didn't already have. It would hinder our ability to cope with less than satisfactory things, our excitement from surprise, and our ability to be flexible or to be thankful for what we are given instead of yearning for what we wish we had. One last negative side effect that I see is the possibility that it could create an even bigger divide between the social classes. For example the wealthier class has the ability to possibly create a "stronger" (disease resistant) population making it even harder for the lower income people, who tend to have more medical issues due to the fact that they may not be able to seek the medical attention that they deserve and therefore may need the alterations more, to climb to a place where it is economically feasible to acquire this kind of service.
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/american-scientist-investigation-ties-alleged-genetic-editing-chinese/story?id=59425807
Very interesting article! I think that you present convincing arguments for both sides of the question posed.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with what you say about how genetic alteration has both pros and cons. I'm not too sure about the extent the genetic alteration was taken to and whether it was successful or not, and therefore cannot give an opinion on how serious his punishment should be. I can say, however, that genetic alteration will probably become more frequent, and the way this case is handled will set a precedent for the future.
ReplyDeleteThis is super interesting. I wonder if the world will even abandon its ethical standards for the possible manual evolution of humans
ReplyDeleteThe premise that, "if it didn't occur naturally then it wasn't supposed to happen," is a pretty terrible one, and I don't think it could be argued successfully at all.
ReplyDeleteI think your ideas are interesting. It is crazy was science could do.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I understand why there are restrictions to research like this, it would be quite amazing if this was successfull. In biology last year, the teacher was saying that it is possible (in a few instances) where the parents could change the eye color of their baby. Personally, I disagree with that, I think it’s only ok to mess with nature if the baby has a medical condition where genetic alteration would help it in that regard.
ReplyDelete