We are already organizing music lessons for our children, putting braces on them and arranging additional classes with teachers. Why not give them the best genes? - the author is interested. Most countries have banned the creation of "children by design". But it will happen anyway. The US shouldn't stop using this technology for those of us who want to try.
Soon, some of you will be trying to get better children.
People are already paying special labs to analyze the embryo and choose the one with the right DNA. Some people do research to determine gender or eye color. Others take action against certain diseases.
So far, their possibilities are limited to the choice of genomes existing in their parents. These genomes are not engineered. However, the situation in this respect will soon change.
Chinese experts recently reported a change in DNA in human embryos.
These engineered children - two twin sisters - were born with immunity against common types of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), they argue (the added genes can also shorten life expectancy. Most scientists think it's too early to talk about safety in the event of human genome changes).
“He was placed under house arrest … and the Chinese did the right thing to punish this scientist,” says Sheldon Krimsky of Tufts' medical school in my new video.
Most Americans agree with this.
Promotional video:
A survey conducted by the Harvard Department of Statistics (STAT-Harvard poll) found that 83% of respondents believe that making children smarter or stronger through gene editing should be illegal.
"Of course they think so," says Jason Brennan, professor of philosophy at Georgetown University. - If we are talking about some kind of new intervention in the human body, then people consider it wrong. And on the basis of this feeling of "wrong" they begin to moralize and believe that there are objections of a moral order."
This kind of intuitive approach threatens medical innovation, Brennan said.
Jenna Bush Hager, daughter of the 43rd US president, voiced moral concerns on the television program Megyn Kelly. She asked the question: “Where should this process stop? Should there be such things that we leave to the Lord."
“I'm not sure if I'm willing to agree with her,” Brennan says. "If the Lord appears in front of me and says, 'Don't do this,' then I will stop."
But why should the Lord say "Stop"?
We already organize music lessons for our children, insert braces for them, arrange additional classes for them with teachers, send them to the karate section - we give them all the advantages we are capable of. Why not give them better genes then?
Imagine a world, Brennan says, where humans are much smarter - perhaps smart enough to avoid war, easily transport us to other planets, and do other things we can't even imagine.
“Maybe we'll turn them into X-Men,” he says, referring to mutant superheroes from films such as the recently released Dark Phoenix.
It would be nice to have real life-saving X-Men.
Another objection to "tailor-made" babies is that at first only rich people will be able to pay for it. “This will be a new way to create wealth disparities,” says Krimski.
Brennan disagrees with him and believes that the same can be said about many other things.
“Every piece of technology we use today follows the same path. Look at your car and you will see a CD player, an MP3 player and a GPS … All these things, when they first appeared, were incredibly expensive … The rich pay for the infrastructure to develop technology, and then they, these technologies, spread … and become common and accessible to everyone."
While the rich get it first, they also pay for costly setbacks and help fund the development of technology that everyone else uses.
Wealthy people were the first to travel on airplanes, they were the first to have laser vision correction, but I would not want these things to be prohibited for this reason. A free, competitive market is the best way to guarantee price reductions.
“Even if the prices are lowered, the injustice will only increase,” says Krimski.
I called Krimski a grumpy conservative who likes to sit on government committees and fears change. In the 1970s, he opposed artificial insemination.
“I love the changes! - he said. "But … there are things we shouldn't handle lightly."
Most governments agree with this. They banned the creation of "children by design."
But it will happen anyway.
The US bans the sale of kidneys, Brennan notes, but “that doesn't mean people don't buy kidneys. They just buy them elsewhere."
Banning child design technology, he predicts, "simply ensures that it will only be available to the super-rich and only those with powerful connections."
I think Brennan is right. The advent of projected children is approaching. If not here, then genetic engineering will be applied elsewhere.
The US shouldn't stop using this technology for those of us who want to try.
Our descendants should have the right to use science to make themselves what they can be.
John Stossel
