February 23, 2014, the New York Times released an article discussing the FDA's recent meetings about genetically modified babies. They are investigating a procedure called mitochondrial manipulation technologies, which, if successful, would completely change the cells and genes of the offspring and would be passed down to future generations. The procedure would call for extracting nuclear material from an embryo from a woman that has an inherited mitochondrial disease, and replacing it with nuclear material from a donor. This would result in the offspring to have DNA from three different people; the mother, the father, and the donor. Because mitochondrial diseases are usually inherited from the mother’s side and have the potential to develop in the child around age ten, causing them to have severe genetic abnormalities, this procedure would be a great preventative measure. However, this procedure has caused a lot of controversy within the scientific community. Many argue that just because we have the ability to change one’s genes, does not mean we should. The procedure is not proven to be effective and researchers do not know whether or not another disease can develop down the line as a result.
The concerns mentioned within in the article sum up exactly what I was thinking while reading through it. Using mitochondrial manipulation technology can be beneficial to prevent future harmful diseases from developing, but where do we draw the line? First off, there is no guarantee that this procedure is an effective preventative measure, nor is there a guarantee that that it will not cause damage in another form. Testing the procedure on monkeys cannot determine what will happen if it is conducted on humans. Even if the procedure is safe and effective, how can we be certain this exact procedure will not lead people abusing it by genetically modifying their offspring to their liking, such as changing eye color or intelligence? The social and ethical concerns for a situation like this are rightly judged. The very idea of genetically modifying babies is like playing God, which can be unsettling for many. Even though this procedure has the potential be a great breakthrough in the medical community, the uncertainty of it needs to be discussed on a deeper level of moral and ethical standing.
Primary Article:http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/24/opinion/genetically-modified-babies.html?module=Search&mabReward=relbias%3Ar%2C%7B%222%22%3A%22RI%3A14%22%7D&_r=0
Secondary Article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stuart-a-newman/fda-asked-to-approve-crea_b_4809876.html
I understand the medical advantage to modifying a child's DNA, but I feel as if people would try and change their child's DNA for other reasons. People would try and change physical appearances to fit this idea of what they want their child to look it. If they want them to be a professional basketball player they'll try to alter their height. Crazy! Awesome job on this article I never knew about this!
ReplyDelete