Gene editing is the alteration of genes in germ cells which become either sperm or eggs and are inheritable to future generations. Genetic editing has been used in agriculture to enhance crops, it is now being explored in humans too. This technology could potentially eradicate genetic diseases and prevent future generations from passing it on. Gene editing is done through the CRISPR-Cas9 system, where the embryo is edited to the desired outcome. It identifies and attacks the viral DNA and then it changes the targeted DNA strand that can be replaced or turned off. This can only be done via IVF (in vitro fertilization), which is taking the genomes of both sexes and fertilizing them in a petri dish to become an embryo then implanted back into the woman’s uterus. There is also, somatic cell modification. Which changes the adult genes of patients that are already born. Altering the cells can only make changes to the body, the edited gene cannot be passed down to further generations from that individual.
As of June 2015, the United States has no current laws prohibiting the inheritable genetic modification of humans. But, should research on gene editing continue in the U.S. with restriction or without regulations? I believe gene editing has to have restrictions, points will be brought up from both sides of the …show more content…
that are not considered life-threatening these can be treated by other means instead of gene editing. Gene editing does not have to be the main reason to help people with these disabilities. As medical technology progresses in the future, we will find ways to help them without changing the genes, as many would dislike. Recently, at the University of Washington students are developing gloves that can speak when the hands are used to communicate with American Sign Language. Advancements like these can help the patients. Instead of spending a lot of money on gene editing when it is not a life-threatening
As of June 2015, the United States has no current laws prohibiting the inheritable genetic modification of humans. But, should research on gene editing continue in the U.S. with restriction or without regulations? I believe gene editing has to have restrictions, points will be brought up from both sides of the …show more content…
that are not considered life-threatening these can be treated by other means instead of gene editing. Gene editing does not have to be the main reason to help people with these disabilities. As medical technology progresses in the future, we will find ways to help them without changing the genes, as many would dislike. Recently, at the University of Washington students are developing gloves that can speak when the hands are used to communicate with American Sign Language. Advancements like these can help the patients. Instead of spending a lot of money on gene editing when it is not a life-threatening