Raqilah Clyburn

Bio 110-08

Lab paper (optional)

November 29, 2016

Genetic Engineering

I have always followed the saying, everything happens for a reason. I believe we go

through struggles in life for a reason, our hair is brown for a reason, or that we even drive a

Honda for a particular reason. Everyone who is created has been put on earth for a reason. The

great diversities we all experience such as hair color, eye color, and weight, or height, makes up

the world today. What would the world be like if everyone was smart, with perfect vision, and 6

feet tall? Some may think there is nothing wrong with that statement, but I beg to differ. If

everyone was the same wouldn't the world be a little boring?

According to the Genetics Home Reference, a gene is the basic physical and functional unit of

heredity. Genes, which are made up of DNA, act as instructions to make molecules called

proteins. In humans, genes vary in size from a few hundred DNA bases to more than 2 million

bases. DNA is what makes us who we are. Scientist have been modifying plants and some

animals for some time now, but with technology advancing doing this has become more

expensive. CRISPR(Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeat) is a new

technological advance that will change what we consider to be normal and also being less

expensive. It seems overnight the cost of Engineering has shrunk by 99% with the development

of CRISPR. The start of this advance begin with bacteriophages entering their own genetic code

into bacteria and taking them over. As the bacteria tries to resist the changes, they fail most of the
time. If the bacteria is likely to survive an attack it is less likely they will have a strong protective

system. They then store a part of the virus DNA in their genetic code called CRISPR. If the virus

decides to attack again the bacterium makes a copy of the RNA and makes a protein called

CAS9. The protein can now scan for signs of the invader and cuts out the virus protecting the

bacterium from attack. Scientist then figured out the CRISPR system was programmable.

Allowing scientist to edit live cells and change DNA sequences for animals, plants,

microorganisms, and even humans.

Some people may be very enthusiastic about the idea of having the power to create the

perfect child or living eternally. Others may say this goes against morals, values, and the

environment.

A survey by the Pew Research Center shows a distrust of scientists and a real discomfort

with the idea of tampering with the natural way of life. The survey was an eye opener from the

public about the true idea of being human and what morals are important to them personally. In

the survey, most of the public was against every idea about genetic engineering including

preventing disease in babies. The Pew survey introduced three ideas that could possibly be an

option in the future: using gene editing to protect babies from disease, implanting chips in the

brain to improve peoples ability to think, and transfusing synthetic blood that would enhance

performance by increasing speed, strength and endurance (Kolata, 2016). Not only was the

public reluctant because of morals and ethics but also for safety. Most, at least seven out of 10,

thought scientists would rush to offer each of the technologies before they had adequately tested

or even understood them (Kolata, 2016). The fears they have experience are also the fears I

encounter with the thought of changing mankind with only a lab.

 As knowledge of genetic engineering grows I wonder what will be the limit for

scientist who approach this idea of changing humans as we know them today. Genetic

engineering is not only this idea of changing the way we look but also curing incurable diseases.

As I think, What if I had cancer or What if my child is born with down syndrome, would I

be able to say no to a cure? These are questions that have been in debate, especially tying into

religion. With the implementation of the Human Genome Project we have seen knowledge of

genetics growing and how it has shaped the world. Christians have not fell short of any of these

new developments. As we learn more about the roles that DNA (deoxyribose-nucleic acid) plays

in our development, Christians will be theologically pressed to think through questions of

morality and how both nurture and nature influence those questions (McKenzie, 2009). Seems as

though those who are religious, morals and ethics plays a huge role in their everyday lives and

decision making. As part of the Pew Research Center survey, they discovered 63 percent of

evangelical Protestants said gene editing to protect babies from serious diseases was meddling

with nature. In contrast, 81 percent of atheists and 80 percent of agnostics said it was not

fundamentally different from other ways humans have tried to better themselves (Kolata, 2016).

This statement by Kolata has showed the different thoughts on what is morally wrong or what is

only humans bettering themselves. Without a doubt in my mind I believe technology has

improved the world and shaped us into the people we are today. So who am I to say, genetic

engineering is a lost cause.

Some people may argue this will improve the human race, later providing benefits for

our children. I cant say I disagree completely simply because a world without disease would be

amazing. A team based at Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children in London recently used

gene editing to treat a one-year-old girl with leukemia, who is now in remission. More
technology is in the pipeline. A team based at Perelman School of Medicine at the University of

Pennsylvania reported in this weeks Nature Biotechnology that they were able to correct a

genetic liver disease in newborn mice. Taking this technology into human embryos could correct

devastating genetic diseases in the womb (McFadden, 2016). I then ask the question to myself,

If parents were given the chance to use this kind of technology to save their child would they do

it? .This is a difficult question to answer because I would want to believe the parent would want

their child to live, but Would this really work?, is the question I assume scientist are most

likely to get. Building trust with the public is something scientist will have to work at. Of course

over time with case after case having proved successful, people will start to be more curious. If

science could eliminate suffering in the world, is there anything bad that could come from it? No

one is for certain that this would soon take over the world and become the next best thing.

We cannot predict the future nor can we ignore the fact that technology is changing for

the better and knowledge of genetics is growing. We have to consider the facts that the

environment will not be able to withstand immortal life on earth. We already have more people

on earth than what we have enough resources for. We have to also consider the benefits of

genetic engineering. As I have researched throughout this paper, I realize I have no clear cut

decision as to whether I agree or disagree with this idea. There are pros and cons to this new idea

that is approaching. The human race as a whole, we have to decide if we are going to embrace

this idea or try to find ways to make this possible or rid it off as just another failed experiment?

Lets ask ourselves these questions before we begin to clasp this new development.
 Bibliography

Kolata, Gina. "Building a Better Human With Science? The Public Says, No Thanks." The New

York Times. The New York Times, 26 July 2016. Web. 29 Nov. 2016.

Kurzgesagt. "Genetic Engineering Will Change Everything Forever CRISPR." YouTube. YouTube,

10 Aug. 2016. Web. 29 Nov. 2016.

McFadden, Johnjoe. "Genetic Editing Is like Playing God and What's Wrong with That? |

Johnjoe McFadden." Opinion. Guardian News and Media, 02 Feb. 2016. Web. 29 Nov.

2016.

McKenzie, Michael. "The Christian and Genetic Engineering - Christian Research Institute."

Christian Research Institute. CRI, 21 Apr. 2009. Web. 29 Nov. 2016.