Crspr, designer babies and Prof. Jiankui - an ethical dilemma

CRISPR, DESIGNER BABIES AND PROF. JIANKUI – AN ETHICAL DILEMMA

Imogen Grimwade (WHS), Hannah Mohamed (WHS), Clara Norenberg (OHS)

CRISPR (Clustered Reg-ularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats) was discovered in 1987, and is a method used to genetically modify genes. It consists of a guide RNA molecule and an associated protein, which work together to cut genes to either destroy them (as in the case of viral DNA) or for genetic modification.

The guide RNA molecule is a section of RNA (usually 20 base pairs long), where the nucleoti-des are complementary to a specific section of DNA. These attach to the complementary nucleotides on the DNA to make it easier to recognise for the associated protein. The enzyme Cas9 then follows the guide RNA to the specific part of the DNA sequence. It then binds to the guide RNA and cuts both strands of the DNA. A recent, yet widely controversial example of this rapidly evolving gene editing technique, occurred last November (2018). The Chinese scientist He Jiankui scandalised the global community with the proclamation that he had ‘created’ the first genetically edited people – the twin girls Lulu and Nana. Professor Jiankui had the intention of developing resistance to HIV, though the process of targeting and then consequently editing mutations into the CCR5 gene (using the Crispr-Cas9 technology). CCR5 was chosen since it encodes a protein which allows HIV to enter white blood cells. This protein can be disabled by deleting part of the gene – imitating CCR5-∆32, a naturally occurring mutation conferring resistance to HIV.

A study carried out by the University of California looked at almost 410000 people in the UK. It demonstrated that those with only the mutated version of CCR5 were 20% more likely to die before they turned 78. Therefore, suggesting that the ‘CRISPR babies’ may have a shortened life expectancy.

Although some people may view this case as a radical advancement in both science and ethics; in the majority of countries, this variety of gene editing is forbidden due to the exploratory nature of the technology and that any alterations to DNA have the potential to pass on to future generations, with possible unpredicted s ide-effects.

Therefore, it is evident that this was seen as a widely controversial issue throughout the world. This seems mainly due to the door opened by He Jiankui to other forms of genetic engineering and developments in so called ‘Designer babies’. This poses the ethical question of whether it is morally acceptable to allow specific traits to be prioritised and others to be completely eliminated. This could potentially enable an elite, select group to emerge with an abundance of ‘positive’ characteristics (for example athleticism, intellect, good memory, good looks). This would inevitably allow the rich of society to get even richer by the production of superior offspring in an undoubtedly expensive process. This would suggest that ‘Designer babies’ could lead to a retrogression to clear class division, from the already divided society that we live in. This shows how these scientific developments could be socially dangerous and regressive, rather than an indication of the scientific progress we are capable of.

However, it does seem as though this scientific progress could be used for the greater good. One way in which it could most definitely benefit our society would be in the eradication of certain genes leading to genetic defects

or diseases. This involves the examination of embryos and identifying certain disease-causing genes, so that they can be removed, or new genes added to alter the outcome. On the surface this seems like a positive scientific development as it could potentially prevent babies being born with congenital disorders or serious diseases. Therefore, the idea of ‘Designer’ or genetically modified babies could be massively beneficial, in their potential to reduce the future suffering of those with birth defects or a propensity for a certain disease in later life.

In conclusion, ‘Designer babies’ do pose an important ethical dilemma in the modern era. The idea of a growing elite society of genetically superior children is definitely a frightening one, and one with huge social impacts. However, the benefits of developing ‘Designer babies’ are also very significant, in their potential to alleviate the hardship caused by many congenital defects. Consequently, it seems as if there is a very fine line between major health benefits and social crisis.

Bibliography

Ball, P (2017). Designer babies: an ethical horror waiting to happen? The Guardian

Gallagher, J (2019). He Jiankui: Baby gene experiment ‘foolish and dangerous’. BBC Greshko, M (2019). Error undermines finding of health risks in first gene-edited babies. National Geographic Reardon, S (2019). Gene edits to ‘CRISPR babies’ might have shortened their life expectancy. Nature

Unknown (2016). What is CRISPR-Cas9? Your Genome

Unknown (2018). World’s first gene-edited babies created in China, claims scientist. The Guardian

Unknown (2019). Designer baby. Wikipedia

Image Source https://www.yourgenome.org/sites/default/files/ illustrations/process/crispr-cas9_process_yourgenome. png