The controversy over”designer babies

This is an interesting topic, here are some arguments that might give you a heads up:

1."We are playing God."This argument is used whenever a newtechnology is invented or proposed.It was used against Benjamin Franklin's lightning rod (which took awayGod's prerogative to strike down those the Deity thought evil) and itwas used against small poxvaccination. This is kin to the emotionalargument that says we should not interfere with nature. Medicaltechnologies do not see nature as benign, and they are by their veryexistence interfering with nature.

2. It is unsafe.In recent years, there have been several deaths due to geneticengineering. The viral vectors that are used to bring the DNA into thecell may cause lethal immune responses or even tumors. While thisargument may be valid today, it is probably a technical problem thatwill eventually be circumvented. Another safety argument is that whentransgenes become inserted into the genome, they may disrupt functionalgenes and cause mutations. This has certainly been seen in mice.

3. Do we know which traits to enhance or get rid of?Genetic engineering assumes that we know which traits are good and whichare bad. However,what is good in one environment might be deleteriousin another. The genes for sickle cell anemia may be deleterious whenhomozygous, but advantageous when heterozygous. A gene for a lymphocyteadhesion molecule may usually be a good thing; but a mutation of thisgene might protect one against HIV. If we know which genes or suites ofgenes produce aggressive or docile phenotypes should we change them?Are certain alleles or combinations of alleles deleterious insome situations but in others predispose towards acts of genius? Wejust don't know.


Hope it helps