Of the Outcomes of Human Genetic Engineering

This feat is basically attained by either the addition or removal of some genes and gene sequences. Further, it is notable that the process of genetic engineering. On animal and human species, Edgar (2014) remarks that the modification may be carried out through gene carriers such as viruses. Also, the modification can be done at different levels, which may either be somatic or germ cell (alterations to the reproductive cells). Each of these often has different outcomes and confers different benefits and disadvantages to the applied subject. The transplanted cells imitate the function of the organs that are damaged, while other grafts and transplants are done in an attempt to slow down the deterioration of the failing organs as the organ for transplant is awaited.

Up to 15 people die on a daily basis as they await the organs that they require for transplant to be available. Thus, the use of bioengineered cells and organs help reduce the overall statistic by almost half the number. Before the advancements and the refining of genetic procedures and applications that are applied to human beings and other animals, the idea of gene therapy was unheard of and the benefits that the approach offers were next to what one would term as science fiction. Thus, genetic conditions and anomalies were perpetuated through generations and the associated complications would lead to various effects financially, socially and emotionally. This has been an area of concentration in current research. Further, the area has worked up a number of debates and discussions on the idea of genetic engineering and modification being applied in the designing of future human beings and babies.

While the idea and topic of “designer babies” has been labelled to go against many ethical lines of thought, it is not an entirely ill and non-plausible idea. With this prospect it will be possible to eliminate some of the diseases and conditions all together. This is by the perfection of the human genome and the enhancement of some of the traits to make man resistant and immune to some of the infections that have plagued man for centuries. Further, the general argument relies on the unethical consideration of religious approach that such a feat would amount to playing God. The overall premise in such an argument would be that natural is good and is accepted by all. However, it must be remembered that diseases, too, are natural, yet there is an inherent need to eradicate them through artificial means.

However, the overall fear rests on what such a chance would create in the future, with the outcomes being majorly speculative. By definition, genetic and germline editing procedures are hardly focused on the treatment of any existing person’s medical conditions, and is majorly focused on the editing of future generations (Stock, (2013) pp. Natural variation is important in all species for different forms of adaptations and evolutionary changes that will help the species adapt to the changing environmental conditions. If the phenomenon of gene alteration and editing is practiced on a large enough scale, some genes that are important for organisms to survive in certain situations and circumstances may be bred out altogether. Further, the reduction of the gene pool would limit the creation of new genes through crossing.

Another major risk that genetic engineering and modification is the fact that a majority of the genes are interdependent, and at the same time, there might actually code for several traits and characteristics. Thus, the elimination of such genes might actually alter a couple of other traits in the individual and lead to undesirable outcomes. Despite all the chances that human genetic engineering offers, there are numerous concerns that make the phenomenon unacceptable under certain lines of thought. Particularly, the application of human genetic engineering in the creation of designed off springs is unethical and laden with many unforeseen outcomes. Thus, the application of human genetic engineering procedures in embryology and the creation of “designer babies” is overly wrong and ethically unacceptable.