Alexis Wolf
Professor Julia Gousseva
October 29th 2017
Critical Reading 112
Are designer babies the future? Just think about it, designing the traits of your future child to look specifically however you want. The article “The Life Editor” by Michael Page discusses the idea of scientifically modifying genes and the possibilities the methods of gene editing can hold. Page describes the new innovation called CRISPR gene editing. CRISPR makes it easy to “turn off” a specific gene at a time to see what it does, and it can introduce mutations to treat cancer or find out if people are predisposed to things such as obesity and diabetes. Michael Page uses rhetorical devices such as ethos, logos and pathos to elucidate the pros and cons of genetically
…show more content…
Page uses this to his advantage to describe the negative side of gene altering. Page states “Such irresponsible behavior might be disastrous for the health of children but for now it poses no large issues.” Page also mentions the idea of “designer babies”, this brings forth issues relating to the holocaust. The Holocaust was based on the idea of a perfect race, with the technology of the CRISPR gene, who knows what could happen and what this could lead to. Page discusses the idea of “gene drives", which CRISPR makes both easier to create and much more powerful. Normally a gene variant in an organism has a 50 percent chance of being inherited by an offspring. A gene drive can insert a copy of itself into the DNA inherited from the other parent which then guarantees it will get passed to all of the organism's offspring, meaning it can spread very quickly through an entire population. In theory gene drives could be deliberately unleashed to wipe out unwanted species such as disease-carrying mosquitoes which is a plus but with the possibilities of careless mistakes there is the potential to also spread uncontrollably in the wild as a result of lab accidents. Morally the question of gene editing and if it is right to do so has been called into question, even a proposed ban has been introduced to stop the usage on human …show more content…
Page does a superior job appealing to both sides of his audience, those who are for gene editing and those who are against. Page describes equally both the pros and cons of the CRISPR gene. On one hand potentially humans could be healthier overall in the future but is it morally right? One may argue that the CRISPR technology would be used to prevent the inheritance of genetic diseases, yet this is already being done without gene editing. Page writes “It is concluded that not only should we leave the door open to germline gene editing, but there is much to be gained from research, including understanding embryonic development and finding out why some women miscarry.” Which is a good point, the world is continuously evolving and so is the technology we hold. We should never stop learning because we will never fully learn everything there is to