Mitochondria are organelles in cells that provide energy, and they have their own DNA. Sometimes, mitochondrial DNA has mutations in it, causing rare, deadly, and incurable diseases. Women who have defective mitochondria can pass these diseases onto their children, but mitochondrial replacement therapy allows these women to have healthy babies that are free from mitochondrial disease.
Mitochondrial replacement therapy is helpful and useful for women with defective mitochondria who want to, or are attempting to, have children. The therapy is designed to prevent faulty mitochondrial DNA from being passed down because it causes deadly diseases that often have no cure. Mitochondrial diseases plague body organs that require lots of energy, including the heart, brain, and liver.
Some people oppose the therapy because the technology used for it could be abused, potentially leading to germline modifications, which are deliberate and purposeful alterations to human DNA that have implications on future children and generations. Germline modifications could lead to the picking of desired traits for babies (as seen in designer babies) and the production of genetically modified people. The creation of people with modified genes could create problems in society as these people could be smarter, more attractive, and stronger than people without modifications. (Kula) Another reason that mitochondrial replacement therapy is opposed is that scientists and doctors do not know how mitochondrial DNA from one female may interact with the nuclear DNA of a mother in an egg, and how this mix of DNA may affect the child. (Weintraub) Three-parent baby girls can pass their mitochondrial DNA onto their future children, which can impact the generations to come. (Kula) Despite its negatives, the therapy should still be permitted so that women with faulty mitochondria can have children free of mitochondrial
Recently mitochondrial transplants, mitochondrial donations, also referred to mitochondrial replacement has become a predominant topic in the medical community, chiefly in Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Mitochondrial transplants would mean that couples who want to have a child, but the mother has defective mitochondrial deoxyribonucleic acid (mitochondrial DNA or mtDNA) could receive mitochondria from a donation. Therefore, the child would not be born with a mitochondrial disease. People who are diagnosed with mitochondrial disease have a life expectancy of nine months to fifty years, depending on when the person developed the disease. Both sides of this argument have valid opinions. Matt Ridley and Françoise Baylis wrote
What do one think of when they hear the words “Designer Babies”? A couple designing their own baby of course, and it’s become just that. Technology has made it possible for there to be a way for doctors to modify a babies characteristics and its health. Genetically altering human embryos is morally wrong, and can cause a disservice to the parents and the child its effecting.
The primary goal of genetic engineering is to predict and cure genetic disorders by changing an organism's genome using biotechnology. This is done by a nucleotide insertion or deletion that changes genetic abnormalities that’s called Therapeutic and Reproductive Cloning. Therapeutic cloning has benefits in treating various diseases through cell replication used to create organs. Reproductive cloning focuses on creating limbs, reproducing copies of human beings and designing phenotypical properties of babies before they are born. This review will compare and contrast the pros and cons of genetic manipulation through an in depth analysis of 2 articles; the first article is for a popular health website and the second article
When it comes to the topic of genetic modification some of us will readily agree that humanity would be better off without it. Where as some are convinced that genetic modification may be the best way to go for the next generation, others maintain that it will cause conflict and separation between societies. Some of us can agree that even though scientists say genetic modification is to break the cycle of cancer and other inherited diseases, I say that along with the process comes the option of changing other features in your unborn child. Genetic modification should not occur because even though some consider it a good thing there are still a lot of negative things that come from this like cell imbalance.
People should not have access to genetically altering their children because of people’s views on God and their faith, the ethics involving humans, and the possible dangers in tampering with human genes. Although it is many parent’s dream to have the perfect child, or to create a child just the way they want, parents need to realize the reality in genetic engineering. Sometimes a dream should stay a figment of one’s imagination, so reality can go in without the chance of harming an innocent child’s life.
Genetic Engineering has recently become a contentious topic within medical and social circles. Controversial topics such as Sex Selection and Designer Babies are linked to Genetic engineering. They are destructive in every circumstance. Genetic Engineering is detrimental towards the individual and all posterity.
From the perspective of some activists against gene therapy, they feel as though if it were to be used in a way to enhance one's own abilities. It could possibly have a destructive outcome especially if applied to an unborn/newborn child. These activists believe that if possessed in the wrong hands it may cause ethical issues such as altering a child's basic height, weight so forth. This type of treatment is called germline therapy, however the Government does not allow the research to be funded, so it is all only theory as it has not occured yet. But in factuality the cells that are implanted inside a patient's body may cause dozens of issues, as shown in the statement “Several studies have already shown that this approach can have very serious health risks, such as toxicity, inflammation, and cancer.” (GHR) With these issues it will cause even more problems, especially if someone is being treated for cancer. If they were to either retain the cancer or develop a new possibly worse type of cancer it will affect not only the patient but it will also halt the research of gene therapy which in turn will slow down the process for finding a safe
One of the most necessary uses of genetic engineering is tackling diseases. As listed above, some of the deadliest diseases in the world that have yet to be conquered could ultimately be wiped out by the use of genetic engineering. Because there are a great deal of genetic mutations people suffer from it is impractical that we will ever be able to get rid of them unless we involve genetic engineering in future generations (pros and cons of genetic eng). The negative aspect to this is the possible chain reaction that can occur from gene alteration. While altering a gene to do one thing, like cure a disease, there is no way of knowing if a different reaction will occur at the cellular or genetic level because of it; causing another problem, possibly worse than the disease they started off with (5 pros and cons of gen. eng.). This technology has such a wide range of unknown, it is simply not safe for society to be condoning to. As well as safety concerns, this can also cause emotional trauma to people putting their hopes into genetic engineering curing their loved ones, when there is a possibility it could result in more damage in the
One of these moral dilemmas is that genetic engineering changes the traditional dynamic that occurs between the parent and the offspring. This issue arose over the possibility of having a human embryo with three genetic parents which is now possible due to genetic engineering. The procedure in question “involves transplanting the chromosomes from a single-cell embryo or from an unfertilized egg into a donor egg or embryo from which the chromosomes have been removed”(Foht). The procedure itself is very useful for women with mitochondrial disorders but the issue involved with this is that the embryo would technically have three biological parents. There needs to be a real concern about “the way genetic engineering can alter the relationship between the generations from one of parents accepting the novelty and spontaneous uniqueness of their children to one where parents use biotechnology to choose and control the biological nature of their children”(Foht). There is a special relationship between children and their parents that may be disappearing very soon due to these techniques. Children could be born never truly knowing one of their genetic parents. If these procedures continue to prosper people will have to “accept arrangements that split apart the various biological and social aspects of parenthood, and that deliberately create
There are opposing viewpoints on the incorporation of gene therapy into modern medicine. Many scientists and individuals from the public find genetic therapy to be unethical. In contrast, others see it as a revolutionizing technology that will change medicine and produce treatments and preventions to genetically inherited diseases. Reece briefly mentions the challenging decisions that accompany technological advancements. The ethical concerns that arise with gene therapy include; is the usage of DNA technology adequate to determine if people have genes for inherited diseases, should the tests be voluntary, should genetic testing be obligatory (Reece, et al. 2018). These ethical values vary within people and are commonly determined by values,
The controversy arises from both the techniques and aims of gene therapy. Gene therapy attempts to correct the "deleterious effect(s) of a genetic disorder"(Wheale & McNally, 212) through the replacement or repair of defective genes in human cells. The basic technique of such therapy involves either replacing the activity of a defective gene with a previously dormant gene or inserting genetic material into defective cells(212). The danger of such therapy is due to risks inherent in the techniques. Scientists, for example, may not fully and accurately...
Gene therapy has been a very controversial issue since its origin in 1990 when A four-year old girl became the first gene therapy patient. She has adenosine deaminase (ADA) deficiency, a genetic disease which leaves her defenseless against infections. Gene therapy involves substituting normal genes for the genes associated with a disease or disorder otherwise altering a person’s genetic makeup. Each gene has a specific code for what it is supposed to do. So, on top of our genome, we have a complex epigenome. These epigenomes consist of all kinds of different markings. The genes themselves are not altered when epigenetic effects occur; however, their effect is altered. Gene therapy can be categorized in to two different types—somatic cell therapy and reproductive cell also referred to as germline therapy. Somatic cells involves targeting
The major argument raised in favour of germline gene therapy originates from its usefulness. Every year, approximately 7.9 million newborns suffer from a genetic defect (Lobo & Zhaurova, 2008). This therapy, which has a therapeutic impact on not only the person whose gene is altered, but also for future generations, may be the only effective way to address these virtually incurable conditions, such as mitochondrial disease (Mckie, 2014). However, others have argued that because the procedure is unaltera...
From observing the origin of the 2-bp deletion of the ND2 gene of the mtDNA from the paternal germ line, it is thought that this mutation occurred in embryogenesis and thus paternal leakage of the mtDNA was mainly exhibited during early stages of fertilization and embryo development (Schwartz & Vissing 2002).
Human Genetics Alert believes “Once we begin to consciously design ourselves, we will have entered a completely new era of human history, in which human subjects, rather than being accepted as they are will become just another kind of object, shaped according to parental whims and market forces”. HGA gives background information on the current available resources used in Genetic Engineering. Mentioned later in the article, “Most scientists say that what is preventing them from embarking on HGE is the risk that the process will itself generate new mutations, which will be passed onto future generations. Official scientific and ethical bodies tend to rely on this as the basis for forbidding attempts at HGE, rather than any principled opposition to the idea.” The idea of creating mutations in humans is one of the main reasons why human genetic engineering is such a controversial topic. The main positive effect on HGE is the elimination of a disease in a family line. Although this is true, genetic engineering is rarely the only option for curing a genetic disease. A pregnant woman that has a disorder that is most likely to be passed on has several options. The woman could adopt a child, or choose to not have children, as well as using donor eggs and sperm. HGA understands there are limited choices for helping and preventing HGE from occurring, “Not only are there no accepted criteria for deciding