4/14/2020
Background
Man’s attempt to produce desired traits in plants and animals by guided selection has been occurring for hundreds of years. But it was not until the pioneering work of Gregor Mendel in the 1860’s that the foundation for the modern study of genetics was birthed. Even then, Mendel’s work did not receive attention until the turn of the twentieth century when other researchers rediscovered his work and built upon it, proposing that a cell’s chromosomes were involved in heredity. In 1906, the term ‘gene’ was coined by William Bateson who discovered that several traits were inherited through “the same chromosome and moved together as units.”1
Several years later, Colombia University professor T. H. Morgan’s landmark book, The Theory of the Gene, solidified Mendel’s work. This led to experimentation using X-rays on fruit flies in 1927 by H. J. Muller, for which he won the Nobel prize. Muller’s work demonstrated that mutations could be induced which influenced public concern on the effects of radiation in the aftermath of the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
During the 1950’s and 60’s the double-helical structure of the DNA molecule was discovered and mapped, and in 1972 DNA molecules were successfully synthesized in the lab. In 1982 human insulin was synthesized, and the first sanctioned gene therapy trial was performed in 1990 in the United States.2
The continued scientific research into DNA led scientists to begin to understand how genetic information was copied during cell division and how genetic mutations could occur through errors in the copying process. They also started to understand how DNA’s own adaptive immune system might work and coined a term for it in 2002 known as CRISPR.3 As research continued by scientists around the world, they developed genome editing tools using CRISPR whereby they could ‘edit’ specific genes to make desired changes.
This simplified diagram shows how the CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing tool works.4
Image credit: Genome Research Limited.
Eugenics movement
A dark thread of the genetic revolution produced the eugenics movement. Eugenics is a term coined by Francis Galton in the late 1800’s with the idea that the human race could be improved by allowing “the more suitable races or strains of blood a better chance of prevailing speedily over the less suitable.”5 Between the years 1907 and 1937 the eugenics movement, with its underlying racist assumptions, took significant root in America, with some 32 states passing forced sterilization laws,6 resulting in more than 60,000 forced sterilizations by 1958.
American sterilization laws of the early 1900’s were upheld as models and copied by Nazi Germany. By the end of the Nazi era, some 350,000 forced sterilizations had been performed under the 1933 statute, known as the “Law for the Protection of Genetically Diseased Offspring.” These forced sterilizations, based on pseudo-scientific ideas of “racial hygiene,” set the stage for the German euthanasia movement and eventually for the Nazi extermination of 6 Million Jews.7
Genetic Engineering Terms
For purposes of this discussion, “Genetic Engineering” is understood to refer to a range of interventions that would include the following:8
Genetic testing and screening
Various procedures to attempt to identify genetically related disorders.
Genetic therapy
Attempts to correct genetic defects in cells. The two different types of gene therapy are:
- Germ-line therapy which alters the sperm or ovum cells, and so effect future generations; and,
- Somatic cell therapy that only affects human body cells, not the sperm or ovum.
Genetic enhancement
Attempts to genetically modify an organism so as to improve a characteristic such as height, intelligence, memory, or life span.
Cloning
The creation of one of more individuals with a genotype identical to that of the parent.
Recombinant DNA
Molecules of DNA from two different species are inserted into a host organism to produce new genetic combinations that are of value to science, medicine, agriculture, and industry.9
Biblical/Logical argument -The Christian Ethical Framework10
There are three frameworks and five factors that, taken together, help the Christian ethicist apply a biblical and logical understanding to moral issues generally, and genetic engineering specifically:
Three Frameworks
- Deontological – Emphasizes duties and rules and seeks to determine what is intrinsically right in a given situation. This would bring attention to values such as the sanctity of human life (God created man in His image11), and the demands of biblical justice.
- Teleological – Ethical decisions are made on the basis of the end result. Seeks to determine such things as what a good human looks like, and whether it is even desirable to create humans that are smarter, taller, or stronger, i.e., the ‘haves’ and the ‘have-nots’.
- Consequentialist – These utilitarian systems, informed by the previous two frameworks, focus on the consequences of our decisions and the cost-benefit. This would look at who the beneficiaries are and if the outcomes are worth the costs involved. Seeking a cure for cancer might bring a greater benefit than spending resources on a very rare genetic disorder.
Five Factors
- Norms – Concerned with making sure that the commands, precepts, and principles of Scripture are not being violated. Life is not disposable in the name of research because it violates the sanctity of life.
- Context – Making sure that choices are put within the proper context. For example, if a ‘perfect’ child is born after being genetically manipulated, will other children in the family that are not genetically enhanced be viewed as less valuable?
- Intention – In order to be pleasing to God, the intent must be correct. Bringing honor and glory to God and correctly loving our neighbor should be the intent.
- Means – A good result can only be allowed by a morally good means. Using human beings as test ‘guinea pigs’ without full informed consent should not be done merely to discover potential genetic cures.
- Consequences – Determining and understanding the short and long term results upon individuals and society. Due to human shortsightedness, it is necessary to inform our decisions with a deontological perspective when genetic technologies are applied.
Contextual Perspective
“Scientists say they have used the gene editing tool CRISPR inside someone’s body for the first time.”12 According to an article in USA Today on March 4, 2020 – about 6 weeks prior to this paper being written, a patient at Casey Eye Institute at Oregon Health & Science University in Portland was treated for an inherited form of blindness. It would take several weeks before they would know if the surgery was successful.
Dr. Eric Pierce at Massachusetts Eye and Ear, one of the leaders of the study, said that, “One of the biggest potential risks from gene editing is that CRISPR could make unintended changes in other genes…” but, that the team “…have done a lot to minimize that [problem]”.
Charles Albright, chief scientific officer at the company developing the treatment is quoted as saying, “We think it could open up a whole new set of medicines to go in and change your DNA.”
The article notes that: “All of these studies have been done in the open, with government regulators’ approval, unlike a Chinese scientist’s work that brought international scorn in 2018. [Dr.] He Jiankui used CRISPR to edit embryos at the time of conception to try to make them resistant to infection with the AIDS virus.13 Changes to embryos’ DNA can pass to future generations, unlike the work being done now in adults to treat diseases.”
My View
There is a great opportunity for benefit in correcting malformed genes that disable humans from a normal functioning life such as the inherited blindness example above. However, using this technology to select traits such as intelligence, or bigger stronger physicality would, I believe, be tampering with human nature in a way that goes beyond the accepted reparative nature of the medical field and the Christian ethic.
It would only take one rogue person with knowledge of DNA, a CRISPR tool, and access to a lab, to wreak havoc on the human race. Some have suggested that the world’s current bout with COVID-19 may be caused by a lab-made virus. At the time of this writing, scientists had debunked that theory. But, as reported in the journal Nature Medicine on March 17, 2020, the reality of such a situation appearing in the future is certainly plausible.14
Appendix
There are some who believe that the theory of Darwinian Evolution is true. For them, tampering with human DNA poses no ethical dilemma. I reject Darwinian Evolution, and write about this in my paper titled, Darwinian Evolution Rejected.
1 John Jefferson Davis, Evangelical Ethics, (New Jersey: P&R Publishing Co, Forth Ed, 2015) pg 275
2 Davis -brief history condensed from pgs 276-277
3 Pronounced “crisper” [which] stands for Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats, which are the hallmark of a bacterial defense system that forms the basis for CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing technology. In the field of genome engineering, the term “CRISPR” or “CRISPR-Cas9” is often used loosely to refer to the various CRISPR-Cas9 and -CPF1, (and other) systems that can be programmed to target specific stretches of genetic code and to edit DNA at precise locations… https://www.broadinstitute.org/research-highlights-crispr 4/5/2020
4 https://www.yourgenome.org/facts/what-is-crispr-cas9 4/11/20
5 Cited in Ben Mitchell, “Genetic Engineering-Bane or Blessing?” Ethics and Medicine 10, 3 (1994): 51
6 Davis pg 313
7 Davis, pg 277
8 Davis, pg 279
9 https://www.britannica.com/science/recombinant-DNA-technology 4/9/20
10 Davis, pgs 281-83 (summarized)
11 Genesis 1:26, 27 “Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness;” … And God created man in His own image.”
12 https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2020/03/04/crispr-gene-editing-tool-used-inside-patient-blindness-portland/4950458002/ Accessed 3/4/20 (Italics added)
13 On 30 December 2019, the Shenzhen Nanshan District People’s Court sentenced He Jiankui to three years in prison and fined him 3 million RMB (US$430,000). https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/30/business/china-scientist-genetic-baby-prison.html 4/8/20
14 “Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 [COVID-19] is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus.” https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9 4/9/20