One of the most controversial science\nstories of the 2018, was about a Chinese scientist, who has been claiming that\nhe successfully has altered the DNA of a twins using CRISPR-Cas9, a relativity\nnew, powerful and cheap gene-editing tools.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There are many questions and doubts about the scientific\nand technical aspects of this claim. Many scientists and observers of\nscientific community debunked the claim, and many others have been raising\ntheir concerns over the long-term effects of using the CRISPR-Cas9 technology on\nhumans.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Let\u2019s forget all about the validity of this claim for a\nmoment. Even if this scientist lied to us, you can be sure that somewhere, some\nresearch groups are working on this issue right now and we will have a\nCRISPR-Cas 9 modified and verified baby very soon. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
So let\u2019s talk about moral aspect of this\nnews.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Before jumping to the discussion, there is one other\nimportant issue that we should consider. The CRISPR-Cas 9 technology has the\npower to manipulate the germline DNA. In another word, when you make a change\nin these genes, this altered genes can be inherited by the next generations.\nSo, it is not just about making a prefer changes for your baby, but you have\nthe potential tool to create changes which will pass to all coming generations\nafter your child too.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For example, you can make your child immune to a specific\ndisease and also make their children immune to that too. But why stop there?\nYou can potentially, miniplate the DNA of your unborn child to help her\/him to\nhave a higher IQ, higher bones and muscle density and even choose their eye\ncolour, height, colour skin, etc.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
So, is it ethical to decide the fate of your children and\neven next generations after her\/him?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We can approach this question at least in two different\nways.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Shame on those who are meddling with the natural way of things<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Who are we to decide the fate and future of our children\nand even their children? Who says that we can play God for them? What will\nhappen to the people of this planet, if everyone has the power to design their\nnext generations? Everybody will go to create a more intelligence, healthier,\nbeautiful \u2013 whatever that socially accepted as beauty in their time \u2013 and\nstronger child and grandchild. Soon enough \u2013 even if nothing goes wrong \u2013 we\nwill kill all the diversities. People will converge toward the same shape and\nabilities. What is the point to living in a world that everybody will\ngenetically have modified to their limits? We will be killing every aspect of\nour humanity by producing a generation that will converge toward one model.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This is just the best-case scenario. What if such a\ntechnology will be limited to a rich and powerful class? There will be a\nminority with all the power and wealth and now with the superiority of body and\nmind. We will enter the new age of slavery.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And what if we screw something in the process? What if we\ncreate some unintentional and dangerous bio trends? Some illness perhaps? What\nif we will destroy some unknown system in our body and make us vulnerable in\nfuture? We will be doomed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So How can we remotely justify such an intervention in\nthe natural course of the events? How it could be considered as an ethical endeavor?<\/p>\n\n\n\n Shame on those who are not meddling with the natural way of things<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The second approach is putting the visors in a different\nangle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Let\u2019s start with the immediate results of such a\nmodification: your children. If you are a parent, probably the future of your\nchildren is one of your priorities. You are overworking to save money for their\nbetter education with the hope that they will be more successful in future. You\npay lots of money for their medical insurance to be sure that they will be\nhealthy. If you can, you will expose your children to different arts, sports,\nskills and resources to guarantee their success and well being in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Now, what will you do, If I told you there is a way to\nmake sure that your kid never ever is going to have dementia? There is a way\nthat she is never going to get AIDS? If there is a way that your child will\nnever get any kind of known cancers? And you can guarantee it with a cheap and reasonably\nsafe technique, and you can do it even before your kid born? More than that,\nyou can be sure that all of her\/his children also will be immune to all of\nthese problems?<\/p>\n\n\n\n If you know you can immune your child, then is it ethical\nto not do that? This time the question changes a little. We are not asking more\nthan if doing such intervention is moral or not; we are proposing not doing it\ncould be considered unethical.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the next step, let’s widen the range of our questions.\nYou will do whatever you can to equip your children with useful skills and help\nthem to increase their mind power. What if you have an option to be sure that\nyour children will have a higher IQ and could be smarter? If you don\u2019t act,\ndoesn\u2019t mean that you choose to ignore that possible better future for your\nkid? One day your child will ask you: \u201cYou could make me smarter so I would be\nmore successful and happier. Why didn\u2019t you do that?\u201d What would be your\nanswer?<\/p>\n\n\n\n In this view, if we can do such a thing the question is\n\u201chow not doing it will be justified ethically?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n There are also arguments about longer effects too. Some\ncan argue that the role of the education, society and culture have such a\nsubstantial impact that even two exactly same people would diverse and will use\ntheir talents in different ways. And even more, importantly having, for\nexample, higher IQ will not guarantee your success if you don\u2019t work hard. And\neven if all people reach the limit of their natural IQ, then the role of hard\nworking and willingness to use of this capability become more critical.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So not only using such technology is ethical but also not\nusing it could be considered un-ethical.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What is ethic?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Ok, I am not really asking this question, and defiantly I\nam not going even to try to answer it. For centuries philosophers have been\nworking on this subject.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Instead of coming up with a definition of ethics, maybe\nit would be a good way if we just remember that ethics \u2013 regardless of your\ninterpretation of it \u2013 is a construct.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We construct our ethical values and ethical system based\non our experiences and our cultural, geographical, spiritual, traditional and\nmany other timely values. These values are changing through the time and based\non our experiences. There are many examples of how the negative ethical values\nduring the time change into positive and vice versa.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The gene editing and especially technologies like\nCRISPR-Cas 9 which makes these editing both cheap and also inheritable, will\nadd on our experience. It is a technology, with an amazing and colossal power\n(and yes, with high power should come great responsibility). There is no doubt\nthat you can think about dozens and hundreds of applications of such a\ntechnology that right now categorised under the positive or negative columns.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We should discuss the pro and con in every and each\napplication. But it is a good idea that during this discussion, we don\u2019t use\nthe \u2018Ethic\u2019 gun. This is very subjective and timely and also \u2013 like gene\nediting \u2013 is a very powerful tool. When we accuse the other side of the debate\nof being unethical, we probably will lose the possibility of rational debate.\nWe will enter the realm of ideologies, and each side will try to prove that\ntheir set of values are more \u2018valuable\u2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Maybe it would\nbe possible to have a discussion about pro and con of a technology \u2013 case by\ncase \u2013 without villainizing the other side and using the power of \u2018ethics\u2019. The\ndebate about a new technology could exist between the \u2018technophobia\u2019 and\n\u2018technophilia\u2019.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" One of the most controversial science stories of the 2018, was about a Chinese scientist, who has been claiming that he successfully has altered the DNA of a twins using CRISPR-Cas9, a relativity new, powerful and cheap gene-editing tools. There are many questions and doubts about the scientific and technical aspects of this claim. Many scientists and observers of scientific … <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":1639,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[10,16],"tags":[104,105,96],"class_list":["post-1638","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-jour","category-science","tag-crispr","tag-ethics","tag-future"],"yoast_head":"\n
what will you do, If I told you there is a way to make sure that your kid never ever is going to have dementia? There is a way that she is never going to get AIDS? If there is a way that your child will never get any kind of known cancers? <\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
When we accuse the other side of the debate of being unethical, we probably will lose the possibility of rational debate. <\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n