Saturday, April 18, 2026
Contact    |    RSS icon Twitter icon Facebook icon  
Unexplained Mysteries Support Us
You are viewing: Home > News > Science & Technology > News story
Welcome Guest ( Login or Register )  
All ▾
Search Submit

Science & Technology

Scientists debate the ethics of gene editing

By T.K. Randall
December 4, 2015 · Comment icon 24 comments
Scientist
Image: AI-generated (Midjourney)
It may soon be possible to tinker with our children's genes - but should we really be playing God?
The movie 'Gattaca' explores the concept of a future in which babies are born genetically perfect with all possibility of inherited disease removed through the use of gene editing - a scenario that ultimately leads to naturally born individuals being considered second-class citizens.

While editing someone's genes like this still falls mainly within the realms of science fiction, it may not be long before achieving such a thing becomes a distinct real-world possibility.

The idea of tinkering with someone's genes however does represent a substantial ethical dilemma.

While using such techniques to stop a baby inheriting a horrible disease would seem to be a moral no-brainer, it might also be possible to use gene editing to create so-called 'designer babies' where a couple could potentially pick multiple physical aspects of their child before they are even born.
It might even be possible to enhance a child's physical and cognitive capabilities.

This week a group of high-profile researchers and ethicists convened in Washington D.C. to debate the merits and ethical concerns of human gene editing and its effects on the future of mankind.

The committee ultimately concluded that "it would be irresponsible to proceed with any clinical use of germline editing" without a significant amount of additional study in to the safety of such procedures.

They did however state that "as scientific knowledge advances and societal views evolve, the clinical use of germline editing should be revisited on a regular basis."

So while human gene editing is off the table for the time being, there is nothing to say that such a thing won't become a part of everyone's lives within the not-too-distant future.

Source: National Geographic | Comments (24)




Other news and articles
Our latest videos Visit us on YouTube
Recent comments on this story
Comment icon #15 Posted by Rlyeh 11 years ago
Genetic modification will be limited to the wealthy creating two different human species. The new people will be modified to be smarter, stronger and live longer and we normal humans will be their slaves until such a time that we come to our senses and wipe them out and create laws against such abominable science. Limited to those who can afford it, pretty much like everything else.
Comment icon #16 Posted by Frank Merton 11 years ago
I can see serious ethical problems, but curing diseases, so long as we be sure what we are curing is really a disease, is not one of them. We could, for example, fix the genes so no one is ever depressed. Everyone would always be happy. Well?
Comment icon #17 Posted by TheGreatBeliever 11 years ago
I wanna edit my genes to live longer!
Comment icon #18 Posted by davros of skaro 11 years ago
I do not want it turned into the grotesque vanity that is plastic surgery of today, though there are exceptions. Parents selecting things for a fad for example. Nothing wrong with balancing things out.
Comment icon #19 Posted by Ryu 11 years ago
But why? How is it in your eyes right to fix diseases but somehow morally wrong to make someone smarter? Actually I can understand your view. Why shouldn't we be able to create the kid we want and if the offspring doesn't turn out as we want then we ship it off to a boarding school or foster care and try again. Sure...why not? Want a kid with black hair and green eyes that will have the I.Q of 180 by the age of 12 then why not? And if the kid turns out to be a dud then out he/she goes out the door and then you can fork over big bucks to try again. Human life is as cheap as a pan of cake...if i... [More]
Comment icon #20 Posted by Ryu 11 years ago
No one said anything about throwing kids away... So what do you think will happne to kids who don't turn out as they were "designed? Why not give them the best start to life you can? Whose quality of life are we really "worried" about. The child or the parents?
Comment icon #21 Posted by Frank Merton 11 years ago
I worry -- parents having some "say in the process" assumes they will be responsible about it, not unlike gun advocates insisting gun owners are responsible. As individuals maybe that's true, but as a group there are bound to be lots of exceptions. I raised the issue of genetic manipulation to eliminate mental problems -- depression in particular -- which is known to have an important genetic component. This is changing the child's personality, and changing society to eliminate an entire group and to make everyone "happy."
Comment icon #22 Posted by Ryu 11 years ago
And how is this not for the kids quality of life. If you get rid of the diseases, make them stronger healthier more intelligence and attractive then it will give them much potential for a long happy life. Sorry but that bolded part really made me laugh bitterly. So basically you are telling a kid his/her life only has "value" if they are "attractive"? In whose mind? Also what is so wrong with being average? Having a higher I.Q doesn't automatically make one a better person, oft times they end up being arrogant and abusive because they feel their "intelligence" puts them above the rest of socie... [More]
Comment icon #23 Posted by Frank Merton 11 years ago
And that's diffrent then letting a lottery decide someone's personality? Very different. There are lots of prejudices people have and these personality traits could be removed from the species. You need to think more about the Law of Unexpected Consequences.
Comment icon #24 Posted by The Black Ghost 11 years ago
The largest unintended consequences of this I think are as follows: 1. Initial cost. (Expensive!) It is currently only available to the richest of the population. It will inevitably become a class issue. 2. Scope of Application. At some point, would it be expected that everyone needs gene editing in order to have the best possible chance? Will insurance cover it? Will we try to pass laws forcing it to be covered? I suspect it will eventually be a major, divisive political issue. 3. How far is too far? If we can correct large genetic problems now, how far do we go once that technology improves?... [More]


Please Login or Register to post a comment.


Our new book is out now!
Book cover

The Unexplained Mysteries
Book of Weird News

 AVAILABLE NOW 

Take a walk on the weird side with this compilation of some of the weirdest stories ever to grace the pages of a newspaper.

Click here to learn more

We need your help!
Patreon logo

Support us on Patreon

 BONUS CONTENT 

For less than the cost of a cup of coffee, you can gain access to a wide range of exclusive perks including our popular 'Lost Ghost Stories' series.

Click here to learn more

Recent news and articles