What if a technology that holds promise for cancer treatment heralds the era of “designer babies”? This concept is more than just speculation. It is a pressing bioethical concern that requires our attention.
Traditionally, the medical industry focuses on healing. Antibiotics are given for infections, chemotherapy and radiation remain standard cancer treatments, and over-the-counter medications temporarily relieve illnesses such as the common cold. This reactive approach is designed to deal with health problems only after they occur, rather than attempting to cure death, which has long been considered ultimately incurable. system.
Can we carefully explore the curative potential of CRISPR without invading eugenics-like enhancements?
But a movement of scientists and futurists called “transhumanists” is changing all that. They propose a future in which biomedical technologies not only react to disease, but actively prevent disease by accessing the human genome at its source. Imagine viewing the human genome as a piece of software, a system ready for reprogramming. The role of scientists and doctors could transform into that of engineers, modifying our very DNA and eradicating diseases such as cancer before they take root. Is ending death itself far behind?
At the heart of this ambition is CRISPR-Cas9, a revolutionary gene editing tool hailed by the National Institutes of Health as the “preferred method” for genome modification. According to the NIH, the virus has the ability to “alter any region of the genome.” Using CRISPR, scientists can target and eliminate genetic “malware” long before it manifests as a disease.
vchal/Getty Images
Using CRISPR to modify the human genome is largely prohibited by international law because of its unknown, potentially species-altering consequences. If you tamper with a part of your genome, there's no way to know what the effects will be several generations later. However, due to the illegal actions of Chinese scientists, Dr. He Jiankuigave the world a glimpse of the immediate practical application of CRISPR.
Zhangkui made headlines in November 2018 when he announced the birth of twin girls Lulu and Nana, whose genomes had been edited to make them resistant to HIV. His announcement caused a global uproar, and he was later sentenced to three years in prison for engaging in “illegal medical practices.” But his illegal experiments had already opened Pandora's box. Has the world just witnessed a cure for AIDS? Could his experiments be applied to other deadly and terminal illnesses?
Although CRISPR appears to have miraculous potential to cure incurable diseases, it also has a dark side. The ability to manipulate human DNA was something 20th century eugenicists could only dream of, and 21st century transhumanists seem intent on cloaking the ambitions of their predecessors in more palatable forms. is.
Joe Allen, a transhumanist analyst and author of Dark Ion: Transhumanism and the War Against Humanity, describes the dual ambitions of the transhumanist movement: to heal injured people and to protect humanity through technologies such as: It explains how to “strengthen” someone to become stronger, smarter, and more beautiful. Crisper:
There are two goals [regarding the transhumanists] — Healing and Strengthening. The first step is healing. They are genetically engineering new treatments, such as mRNA “cures” and CRISPR gene therapy, to overcome suffering. Applications include everything from eliminating HIV and malaria to eliminating Tay-Sachs disease and cancer. The next step is reinforcement. The dream is to create smarter, stronger, and more beautiful humans through targeted germline mutations (sperm, egg, or zygote), both postnatally and prenatally. The latter produces semi-permanently mutated lineages.
Allen references Nicholas Agar's term “liberal eugenics” or “soft eugenics” to describe the transhumanist aims of CRISPR. “Rather than totalitarian states forcing genetic hygiene on their citizens, free market consumers will increasingly choose to 'upgrade' their own biological capabilities and that of their children,” he said. “Deaf,” he explains.
If you think this is a fringe movement, recent research shows that pew, cambridgeand harvard university Show otherwise: About one-third of Americans are resistant to eugenics-like enhancements that alter the human genome to optimize strength, intelligence, and beauty. Allen poignantly concludes that “this idea is no longer radical.”
As resistance to this technology is broken, several important bioethical issues will grow in both importance and relevance. The first concern is socio-economic. Does the current rift between elites and “the rest” have a genetic dimension? Allen describes this danger as the emergence of “a genetic elite, Humanity 2.0, who will exploit or replace Humanity 1.0.” I'm doing it. Those who can afford to change their germ line to be “alpha plus” in Huxleyan fashion will be sitting on the unfortunate “gamma and epsilon”.
Another concern is whether the opposite happens, i.e., if genetic tampering backfires. If, as Allen states, “a critical mass of the population is genetically modified, but they do not become superhumans but instead become stylized breeds of distorted genetically abnormal mutants,” then God There is a good chance that those of us who play this role will become the instruments of our own demise. .
Technology always comes at a razor edge. On the one hand, there is incredible progress and potential for progress. On the other hand, incredible and often unforeseen damage can occur. Can we harness its benefits without falling into its shadow side? Can we carefully explore the healing potential of CRISPR without invading eugenics-like enhancements? History has proven that the promise and danger of technology go hand in hand. We should not rush to open Pandora's box in hopes of CRISPR's healing potential and instead discover that the hand of transhumanists has reached out to us, or that irreversible damage to the entire human genome .
