On December 4, I attended a discussion hosted by Professor Nilay Yapici entitled “Age of Gene Editing: CRISPR and Beyond.” Having had a vague interest in the topic before attending, I was glad to get more information about gene editing from someone who was knowledgeable in the subject. Firstly, I learned that gene-editing technology has become less expensive over time due to the introduction of a CAS9 protein which makes the editing process more efficient. I also learned that this technology is being used by people called “bio-hackers” who want to edit their genes to “improve” themselves in some way, and that buying CRISPR with certain desired genes is actually relatively inexpensive. There has also been a significant controversy surrounding He Jiankui, a Chinese researcher who used the technology to implant HIV-resistant genes into twins in vitro. It is clear that people are beginning to take advantage of the technology, and I am curious to see how it will be used as it becomes more mainstream.

As far as the ethics and social issues of gene editing are concerned, I was fascinated by the other students’ views about CRISPR and gene editing. Hearing others’ opinions helped me shape my own view on the subject as well. I believe that the technology, as it inevitably develops further, should not be used to “design” each and every part of a newborn — after all, variation between people is valuable and makes the world more exciting, and the newborn baby might grow to wish that their genes had not been edited in the first place. However, I believe that gene-editing for unborn babies should be used in cases where the baby might have a genetic disease that gene-editing could fix — gene-editing would create a higher quality of life for them in that situation. I also believe that experimentation on gene editing (and the edits that one can make) should be regulated, but I believe that making changes that would be beneficial to all mankind — such as promoting a gene that increases intelligence, should one exist — should be allowed and research into making such changes should not be too heavily inhibited. However, I do believe that gene-editing for some quality like increased intelligence should only be done to newborns if the same technology can be applied to adults, whose neurons have stopped growing — no one wants to be “outdated.” 

I was very happy to have attended this discussion, and I found it fascinating to learn that research on CRISPR is being done here on campus. I believe that the technology has an enormous potential to do good for humanity, but also a potential to create more disparities and health risks if used incorrectly.