By Ebenezer Appiah, Staff Writer
The modern classic Back to the Future, depicts a distant world much like something you’d see in a sci-fi fantasy. That world isn’t so distant now. In fact, the “future”, showcased in the popular movie franchise, was nearly 8 years ago in real-time. While we certainly haven’t reached the point of flying cars, society has progressed to developing mind-breaking innovations, and their applications can open doors for the potential to solve majorly pressing issues or welcome a new and terrifying reality.
The premise of selectively engineering humans for more or less desirable traits is not a novel idea. In fact, the basic groundwork for these ideals can in part be traced to not-so-ethical applications throughout history, largely rooted in race purity and eugenics. However, the advent of gene-editing technologies, which repeats particularly clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic (CRISPR), welcomes room to explore the potential benefits of such technology. The ability to address terminal diseases on a genetic level aids in solving some of the largest health crises we have dealt with for decades on end. These opportunities range from terminal cancers, cardiovascular diseases, and physical ailments, or preemptively predicting the presence and absence of certain traits. The integration of such solutions works to massively improve the field of modern medicine, a benefit felt by all.
In this sense, the advent of such technology is uniquely human, for it grants us the capacity to severely reduce if not completely eliminate the basis of many individuals suffering. Modern medicine has advanced to the point where we can significantly prolong the lives of these individuals, but at times it simply isn’t enough. For instance, the fallback of intensive chemotherapy in cancer patients is something that many survivors of the disease note is a significant challenge. It impairs their mood, warps their sense of themselves, and by extension their reality, it affects their eating habits and diets, ultimately these current solutions albeit effective, leave survivors feeling a shell of their former selves. When met with such a development, it’s hard to reject the overwhelming good it can offer.
However, this capacity is only felt when used in the hands of the correct actors. Not only is there a valid concern in regard to the integration of such developments into Big Pharma and the potential disparities that may ensue, but there is a moral quandary to address as well. Where do we draw the line in the sand? An ethical obligation to preserve humanity can only be as true as how this technology will be used.
The power this grants to scientists and communities may far extend beyond a justifiable reach. For instance, CRISPR technologies can uniquely edit germline cells, the sex cells inherited from a mother and father that consist of much of their offspring's genetic markup. Any change to these cells constitutes a complete overwrite of all future offspring's genetic makeup. This potential life has no ability to consent to this alteration, but further, the uncertainty that this technology will be accessible raises additional questions relating to equity. Will it be the case that wealthier families can create physically and mentally superior offspring? Can we even consider that to be ethical, understanding the already large disparity that exists amongst classes in regard to opportunity and resources? At a basic level, can we even justify the potential to manipulate human life to this degree? One article cannot possibly navigate the dense inner workings and implications of this potential reality, but it is a good place to start in terms of sparking a growing conversation.