There is recent study on gene
editing, it is going to be an intense debate in upcoming days. The crucial
point of Gene editing is to prevent or treat the devastating genetic disease,
which gives hopes to millions of people around the world. On the other side,
technology might unlock the path to design our future children. Enhancing their
genome by choosing desirable traits such as height, eye color, and
intelligence. The variation of DNA sequences in living cells are called Gene
editing. So, mutations can be added or genes can be substituted in cells or
organisms. CRISPR/Cas9 allows to target specific positions in the genome with
much more precision than previous techniques. This process allows a faulty gene
to be replaced with a non-faulty copy, making this technology attractive to
those looking to cure genetic diseases. The debate on the gene editing is
ethical and gets off the ground. The germline gene editing affects both the
individual receiving the treatment and their future children. Germline gene
editing is when gene editing is used in embryos or earlier, on the sperm or egg
of carriers of genetic mutations. This is the main point of game changer as it
implies that the genetic makeup of entire generation may be changed on a
permanent basis.
Dietram Scheufele, a professor of science
communication at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and his colleagues
surveyed 1,600 people about their attitudes toward gene editing. "Among
those reporting low religious guidance," explains Prof. Scheufele, "a
large majority (75 percent) express at least some support for treatment
applications, and a considerable proportion (45 percent) do so for enhancement
applications” (Martin). The results of the survey also conclude that 77.8% of
defendants supported the hypothetical use of germline gene editing for
therapeutic purposes 73.5% were in favor of using the technology, whereas 78.2%
supported germline editing in cases where a disease would be fatal in
childhood. While fetal testing now allows parents to choose to abort fetuses
carrying certain disease traits in many places across the world, gene editing could create an expectation that
parents should actively select the best traits for their children.
Unequal access and cultural differences affecting
agreement, could create large differences in relative incidence of a given
condition by region, ethnic group, or socioeconomic status. They care Genetic
diseases, an universal common denominator, could instead become an relic for
class, geographic location and their culture. Hence, the ASHG conclude that at
present, it is unethical to perform germline gene editing that would lead to
the birth of an individual. But research into the safety and efficacy of gene
editing techniques, as well as into the effects of gene editing, should
continue, providing such research adheres to local laws and policies. Prof
Ormond thinks there are some gaps, but clearly knowledge and levels of
religiosity impact the people. We need to educate the community so that they
have a realistic sense of what gene editing can and cannot do. Measuring
attitudes is difficult to do when people don't understand a technology.
Article:
C.
(2015, July 05). About Human Germline Gene Editing . Retrieved October 21,
2017, from https://www.geneticsandsociety.org/internal-content/about-human-germline-gene-editing
PhD,
Y. H. (2017, October 20). The ethics of gene editing. Retrieved October 22,
2017, from https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/319817.php
No comments:
Post a Comment