Kristen V. Brown 1/18/17
Imagine a scenario, perhaps a few years from now, in which Canada
decides to release thousands of mosquitoes genetically modified to fight
the spread of a devastating mosquito-borne illness. While Canada has
deemed these lab-made mosquitoes ethical, legal and safe for both humans
and the environment, the US has not. Months later, by accident and
circumstance, the engineered skeeters show up across the border. The
laws of one land, suddenly, have become the rule of another.
If
modern science can can defy the boundaries of borders, who exactly
should be charged with deciding what science to unleash upon the world?
A
version of this hypothetical scenario is already unfolding in the UK.
Last year, the British government gave scientists the green light to
genetically engineer human embryos. But in the US and most other
nations, this possibility is still both illegal and morally fraught.
Opponents to the practice argue that it risks opening up a Pandora’s Box
of designer babies and genetically engineered super-humans. Even many more neutral voices argue that the technology demands further scrutiny.
And
yet, the UK, at the vanguard of genetic engineering human beings, has
already opened that box. In 2015, the British government approved the
use of a controversial gene-editing technology to stop devastating
mitochondrial diseases from being passed on from mothers to their future
children. And last February, the UK granted the first license in the
world to edit healthy human embryos for research. Recently, a Newsweek headline asked whether the scientists of this small island nation are in fact deciding the fate of all of humanity. It is a pretty good question.
This alarming ethical conundrum has not escaped the notice of global governments. A National Intelligence Council report released this month concluded that “genome editing and human enhancement” are “likely to pose some of the most contentious values questions in the coming decades.” Advancements in these arenas, the report said, “will affect relations between states.” More
No comments:
Post a Comment