This project has certainly been an eye opening and rewarding experience. I got to learn about a topic I was extremely interested in, and share it in a public form. So-- Where am I now?
How has my thinking evolved?
My thinking on this topic has definitely evolved quite a bit since I first started this research. I came in having a pretty open mind because I did not know much about the topic. I feel that I certainly know enough about genome editing to hold an opinion and keep up with a conversation about it. Seeing it from the perspective that I have, I think I have a lot to bring to the table concerning this topic.
Did I find an answer to my initial question?
No way! My initial question was: Is genetic engineering ethical? It is a complex question that can be answered in many different ways. I have learned a lot about why people argue whether or not it is ethical, but I do not think there can be a simple answer to this question.
What might I want to argue about this issue, with the new information I've gained?
I feel that if I was to discuss this topic in a research paper, I would definitely narrow my scope. Initially, my question was way too broad. I think a question such as "What rights do people have to genetic engineering technology?" or "How should genetic engineering technology be restricted?" are certainly more appropriate to the argument I would make in such a paper, which is that this technology should be allowed to change the genes of those carrying congenital diseases, or life threatening ones, but now to grant preferable traits i.e., eye color, hair color, etc. I also believe that this technology should be used as it is now, such as IVF, where embryos are scanned for viability to give a child to a family that struggles with conception.
I will definitely be continuing to look into this topic outside of this academic assignment.
Thursday, July 14, 2016
Monday, July 11, 2016
Current Technology: What is In Vitro Fertilization?
Hi guys! Welcome back. After discussing the CRISPR/Cas9 technology in my last post, I thought it would be nice to talk about what current fertility technology we have, and how this couples with the rise of the genome engineering technology.
I personally know a lot about IVF, or in vitro fertilization, because my youngest brother and sister (twins) were conceived this way. It really is an amazing process, but not without it's ups and downs. My parents went through this expensive process three times, and the twins were born on their second try. Despite remembering the process and what my parents told me about it quite well, I did go to the APA, or American Pregnancy Association, website just for some fact checking.
So, what is IVF? According to the APA, In Vitro Fertilization is the "process of fertilization by manually combining an egg and a sperm in a laboratory dish, and then transferring the embryo to the uterus."
Who is a potential candidate? This technology can be used to combat many fertility problems. This can include a low sperm count in men, blocked fallopian tubes, and genetic disorders, among other things. It gives people who want to conceive the chance if they cannot on their own.
How much does it cost? However, it is quite costly. The APA cites the cost as anywhere between 12,000- 17,000 dollars for a single cycle. It is not always covered by insurance. Many couples may do more than one cycle.
What is the success rate? Obviously, there are many factors that go into a success rate. Depending on what condition you have, it may be harder or easier to work with this process. The APA also made a really important point that pregnancy rates are not synonymous with birth rates. This process does not guarantee that you will end up with a child, and you still have to pay the hefty fee regardless.
A very consistent factor that effects the success rate is your age-- the younger you are, the more likely you are to conceive a child during this process. After age forty, the success rate is between 13-18%.
When my parents did IVF, the doctors fertilized multiple embryos and inserted them all to increase the chances of conception. This is often why multiples are associated with the In Vitro process.
Okay Dani, why is this relevant? The reason I am posting about IVF, and not other various fertilization technologies is because I saw IVF very specifically popping up in many articles that I read. It seems to be the process that would be coupled with CRISPR/Cas9, because the future of genome editing will require removing the eggs and fertilizing them in the fashion of current IVF, to ensure that your designed embryo will be the one that you give birth too.
Another reason that IVF is closely linked to genetic engineering is because of the nature of the procedure-- since it is often people who have problems with fertility, the embryos are often screened for 'viability', or which of them is most likely to survive. I did not remember my parents doing this, but when I asked my mom about it, she said that the twins embryos were deemed the most viable after a scan was done. According to her, the scan was done to see which ones where the "strongest and healthiest".
Another great thing that I found while doing this research is the IVF itself has been up to some other pretty controversial business: According to an article in the New York Times Magazine, 1996 was the year of the first 'three-parent IVF'. What this means is that an embryo was successfully inserted with three types of DNA. It began with a scientist who had tried to conceive through IVF for over seven years. When she still was not conceiving through this process, she decided to take part in an experimental procedure, which involved fertilizing her egg with her husband's sperm like normal-- but then adding a small amount of cytoplasm from the egg of someone else. The woman finally gave birth to a healthy baby girl from this process, and was the first to do so. Others soon followed. Although no third party DNA was found in the daughter's cells, she was still technically a 'three-parent child'. Third party DNA was indeed found in some of the other cases. Since the side effects of the procedure could not be known, there was some wariness in continuing the process, especially when rare disorders showed up in some cases. The article goes on further to discuss the developments and mitochondria, but I found this story so incredibly interesting, and I wonder if in the future we will see this as a normal occurrance.
Where am I at? I feel that much of this blog has been more about the research that I'm doing than how I feel about it. I am very in support of IVF, and that may just be because of my close ties to it, but before starting this project I had no idea how closely it was related to this subject of 'designer babies'. I think that, in cases such as my parents, there is no harm in doing this. My parents were not after a blonde child, or an athletic child, they were just simply after a child. I think in other cases, where you have a genetic disease such as huntingtons, there is nothing wrong with genetically engineering an embryo so that they do not have to have that illness. As much as I understand the argument of letting nature take it's course, with the technology that we possess I see no reason not to create a world with less suffering. However, I do admit that it will have to be strictly regulated in order for this to exist. And regulations will also come with controversy-- where is the cut off? How do you say which diseases are okay to edit out and which are not?
I would love to hear what you guys think about this-- after following my research, has your opinion changed? Are you on the fence? Do you have more questions? I know I do.
--Dani
"In Vitro Fertilization (IVF): Side Effects and Risks." American Pregnancy Association. N.p., 24 Apr. 2012. Web. 09 July 2016. <http://americanpregnancy.org/infertility/in-vitro-fertilization/>.
I personally know a lot about IVF, or in vitro fertilization, because my youngest brother and sister (twins) were conceived this way. It really is an amazing process, but not without it's ups and downs. My parents went through this expensive process three times, and the twins were born on their second try. Despite remembering the process and what my parents told me about it quite well, I did go to the APA, or American Pregnancy Association, website just for some fact checking.
So, what is IVF? According to the APA, In Vitro Fertilization is the "process of fertilization by manually combining an egg and a sperm in a laboratory dish, and then transferring the embryo to the uterus."
Who is a potential candidate? This technology can be used to combat many fertility problems. This can include a low sperm count in men, blocked fallopian tubes, and genetic disorders, among other things. It gives people who want to conceive the chance if they cannot on their own.
How much does it cost? However, it is quite costly. The APA cites the cost as anywhere between 12,000- 17,000 dollars for a single cycle. It is not always covered by insurance. Many couples may do more than one cycle.
What is the success rate? Obviously, there are many factors that go into a success rate. Depending on what condition you have, it may be harder or easier to work with this process. The APA also made a really important point that pregnancy rates are not synonymous with birth rates. This process does not guarantee that you will end up with a child, and you still have to pay the hefty fee regardless.
A very consistent factor that effects the success rate is your age-- the younger you are, the more likely you are to conceive a child during this process. After age forty, the success rate is between 13-18%.
When my parents did IVF, the doctors fertilized multiple embryos and inserted them all to increase the chances of conception. This is often why multiples are associated with the In Vitro process.
Okay Dani, why is this relevant? The reason I am posting about IVF, and not other various fertilization technologies is because I saw IVF very specifically popping up in many articles that I read. It seems to be the process that would be coupled with CRISPR/Cas9, because the future of genome editing will require removing the eggs and fertilizing them in the fashion of current IVF, to ensure that your designed embryo will be the one that you give birth too.
Another reason that IVF is closely linked to genetic engineering is because of the nature of the procedure-- since it is often people who have problems with fertility, the embryos are often screened for 'viability', or which of them is most likely to survive. I did not remember my parents doing this, but when I asked my mom about it, she said that the twins embryos were deemed the most viable after a scan was done. According to her, the scan was done to see which ones where the "strongest and healthiest".
Another great thing that I found while doing this research is the IVF itself has been up to some other pretty controversial business: According to an article in the New York Times Magazine, 1996 was the year of the first 'three-parent IVF'. What this means is that an embryo was successfully inserted with three types of DNA. It began with a scientist who had tried to conceive through IVF for over seven years. When she still was not conceiving through this process, she decided to take part in an experimental procedure, which involved fertilizing her egg with her husband's sperm like normal-- but then adding a small amount of cytoplasm from the egg of someone else. The woman finally gave birth to a healthy baby girl from this process, and was the first to do so. Others soon followed. Although no third party DNA was found in the daughter's cells, she was still technically a 'three-parent child'. Third party DNA was indeed found in some of the other cases. Since the side effects of the procedure could not be known, there was some wariness in continuing the process, especially when rare disorders showed up in some cases. The article goes on further to discuss the developments and mitochondria, but I found this story so incredibly interesting, and I wonder if in the future we will see this as a normal occurrance.
Where am I at? I feel that much of this blog has been more about the research that I'm doing than how I feel about it. I am very in support of IVF, and that may just be because of my close ties to it, but before starting this project I had no idea how closely it was related to this subject of 'designer babies'. I think that, in cases such as my parents, there is no harm in doing this. My parents were not after a blonde child, or an athletic child, they were just simply after a child. I think in other cases, where you have a genetic disease such as huntingtons, there is nothing wrong with genetically engineering an embryo so that they do not have to have that illness. As much as I understand the argument of letting nature take it's course, with the technology that we possess I see no reason not to create a world with less suffering. However, I do admit that it will have to be strictly regulated in order for this to exist. And regulations will also come with controversy-- where is the cut off? How do you say which diseases are okay to edit out and which are not?
I would love to hear what you guys think about this-- after following my research, has your opinion changed? Are you on the fence? Do you have more questions? I know I do.
--Dani
"In Vitro Fertilization (IVF): Side Effects and Risks." American Pregnancy Association. N.p., 24 Apr. 2012. Web. 09 July 2016. <http://americanpregnancy.org/infertility/in-vitro-fertilization/>.
Saturday, July 9, 2016
Friday, July 1, 2016
Genetic Engineering and Mass Media
Genetic Engineering: A new topic? Maybe not.
Although research is now coming to light on genetic engineering and new technology such as Crispr 9, the truth is it has been on our radar for years. Science fiction has long commandeered the topic of Genetic engineering. And with Dystopian stories rising is pop culture, such as books like The Hunger Games, Uglies, and Divergent, this topic keeps coming up again and again. Without even knowing it, we are being instilled with the fear of becoming a society like this-- a society that controls the genes of it's people, and will do anything to protect it.
And while we may be far away from anything like this happening, it is still understandable to carry hesitation when faced with such realistic and terrifying outcomes. Some of the more famous and interesting ones i've come across (without spoilers, just in case!) in my research are:
Gattaca:
IMBD describes this movie as a society set in an ambiguous future, where "genetic engineering of humans is common and DNA plays the primary role in determining social class." This type of genetic testing can tell you what kind of temperament the person has, as well as the predicted age they will die. If your parents select the best traits before your birth, you are considered a 'valid' person, and are given the more exclusive jobs in the community. The main character, Vincent, dreams of going to space, and takes the place of a 'valid' person to do so. This story explores what rights people have despite their genes, and how far genetics go in shaping a person and predicting their future. The topic of this movie can be particularly influential because it is based around people not having rights to choose, and being discriminated against because of their 'imperfect' genetics, which is a right we all hold dear.
Brave New World
Brave New World by Aldous Huxley is possibly one of the most famous dystopian books, and is a must read for anyone interested in this topic. In the book, society is split up into five different castes: Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, or Epsilon. Each caste decides what kind of role you have in society (ex. Alphas are the highest in society). They are specifically formed for their caste, because rather than traditional reproduction, they are created in a lab, and are altered and exposed to different conditions before they are born. For example, the Epsilons are exposed to an extreme amount of alcohol while they are in the womb, to purposefully make them incompetent. This book is great because it explores the rights of free thought surrounding this topic of altering humans for a purpose, much like what could be done with genetic engineering.
Other Related Media:
- Captain America
- Deadpool
- Any of the X-men
- The Island
- The Divergent Series
- The Uglies Series
There are many, but i'm sure I don't have all of them here! I would be interested to hear comments on other movies/books/other-media that are related to this idea of Genetic engineering and designer babies.
Can we change our 'fate'?
All of these books and movies seem to have something in common: the human race takes something very powerful and goes in the completely wrong direction with it. A couple questions I had while reading and going through all of these were: Does it have to be this? Is there a way that this can be used purely for good, and not get out of control? If so, how? What sort of regulations should be put on this technology? Does the government have the right to keep this technology from the people who want to use it to 'design' their babies?
So far, I think i'm coming up with more questions than answers! ;) In the next post I hope to examine the notorious technology that is 'Crispr- 9' and look at some of the laws/regulations that have already been put into place.
Until next time!
Dani
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)