Introduction
According Shalem et al.(2104), Cluster Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats
(CRISPR) is a segment of DNA that contain short base sequence repetition and are involved in
the defense mechanism of viruses to prokaryotic organisms. With the rapid growth of science
and technology, gene editing is widely used. CRISPR is an important gene editing tool that can
be used in correcting disease causing mutations in humans. Also CRISPR makes gene editing
cheaper and easier. Despite CRISPR being important, it is facing lots of controversies since most
people do not think it is safe to apply it in humans. This report will try to look at some of the
controversies that arose with the implementation of CRISPR in the human embryos. Gene
editing is aimed at helping some people who are suffering from diseases that do have a cure.
Some of this diseases include cancer and HIV/AIDS. This can be achieved since it allows
scientists a way to cut through the DNA and replace it with others.
Gene editing
For instance, a Chinese scientist and researcher, Dr. He Jiankui in 2018 came out and said that
he had made the first babies using gene editing. This came as a proof to CRISPR able to modify
human embryos. The embryos of the babies were edited before they were implanted into their
mother’s womb. He said that the babies were born under normal circumstances and there were
no effects that came with the editing.
Dr. Jiankui eliminated the gene known as CCP5 in the DNA and he hoped that he was to make
the babies resistant HIV, cholera and smallpox. Also CRISPR was thought to cause people to
have unique features like different eye color and more powers. He said that the parents of the
Running head; Genetic Editing
babies can now live without fear of being discriminated as they will not contract the virus
causing AIDS.
Problems of gene editing
Doudna (2014) says that gene editing is thought to make plants be resistant to diseases and also
the humans. But there are some ethical problems that are associated with it. Examples include;
According to Paul et al.(2016), researchers believe that gene editing will be passed to the future
generations and since it has not been proven not to have any adverse effects, it should not be
carried out for reproductive purposes. Kleinstiver et al(2016) says that the public is not made
aware of the complications that come along with gene editing. Therefore, they are not aware of
what they want. Ran et al(2013) says that another problem is that there is no harmonization
between the countries that are doing gene editing. If there could be harmonization, then they
would be sharing ideas and also their findings.
Solutions
Paul (2016) says that gene editing should not be carried out on clinical reproductive purpose
until enough information has been gathered. This is because it may bring preimplantation genetic
disorder.
Also gene editing should not be allowed to cure diseases until it is proven to be safe since it may
cause the problem of polygenic disorders to the future generation. On the other hand, Hsu et
al(2013) says genes editing should be managed through policy regulation. This is to curb the
problem of people without enough information carrying out gene editing.
Evaluations
Running head; Genetic Editing
of this solutions brings about advantages and disadvantages. For instance when gene editing will
not be used in reproductive purposes, it will help control the preimplantation problem but also it
will be disadvantageous of finding out the cure to some diseases.
Also on the issue of not using it to cure diseases. It allows the scientists to gather more
information through research but it also makes the people living with those incurable diseases
loose hope.
Also on the issue of policy regulation, this will help in stopping people who do not have enough
knowledge and skills from doing gene editing.
Conclusion
Gene editing can be a two sided coin that is: very helpful if enough research is done. It can help
cure some diseases that are incurable and at the same time it can be used to make children born
to be immune to some viruses that affect the people in todays’ world. But if gene editing is not
properly managed, it can bring some serious damages that will be very difficult to revers or
repair.
References
Doudna, J. A., & Charpentier, E. (2014). The new frontier of genome engineering with CRISPR-
Cas9. Science.
Hsu, P. D., Lander, E. S., & Zhang, F. (2014). Development and applications of CRISPR-Cas9
for genome engineering. Cell.
Running head; Genetic Editing
Kleinstiver, B. P., Pattanayak, V., Prew, M. S., Tsai, S. Q., Nguyen, N. T., Zheng, Z., & Joung, J.
K. (2016). High-fidelity CRISPR–Cas9 nucleases with no detectable genome-wide off-target
effects. Nature.
Paul, J. W., & Qi, Y. (2016). CRISPR/Cas9 for plant genome editing: accomplishments,
problems and prospects. Plant cell reports.
Ran, F. A., Hsu, P. D., Lin, C. Y., Gootenberg, J. S., Konermann, S., Trevino, A. E., … & Zhang,
F. (2013). Double nicking by RNA-guided CRISPR Cas9 for enhanced genome editing
specificity. Cell.
Ran, F. A., Hsu, P. D., Wright, J., Agarwala, V., Scott, D. A., & Zhang, F. (2013). Genome
engineering using the CRISPR-Cas9 system. Nature protocols.Shalem, O., Sanjana, N. E.,
Hartenian, E., Shi, X., Scott, D. A., Mikkelsen, T. S., … & Zhang, F. (2014). Genome-scale
CRISPR-Cas9 knockout screening in human cells. Science, 343(6166), 84-87.
Shin, S. E., Lim, J. M., Koh, H. G., Kim, E. K., Kang, N. K., Jeon, S., … & Kim, J. (2016).
CRISPR/Cas9-induced knockout and knock-in mutations in Chlamydomonas
reinhardtii. Scientific reports, 6, 27810.