Dear Editor,
I am writing concerning the hidden threats brought by the advancement of genome editing.
Genome engineering, also known as gene editing, has been in the spotlight since the technique was first discovered. Undoubtedly, it has provided so many possibilities, yet being a hot potato, it has also stirred up controversy among the public. For a long time, gene editing on human bodies has remained a taboo subject. In 2018, followed by the He Jiankui affairs, the issue came into the limelight once again. The contentious experiment has thrown us a worth-pondering question: is gene editing a blessing or a curse?
Undeniably, genome engineering could benefit humans in various ways. For instance, through modifying genes, gene-modified crops can better adapt to the environment, which in a way leads to a great surge in crop yield. Given that the world population may probably hit ten billion within three decades, these gene-enhanced crops could be a possible solution to tackle the upcoming food crisis. Meanwhile, genome editing could offer a cure for genetic diseases like Thalassemia and Hemophilia. Inheritance of such diseases may be fixed by replacing the ‘flawed’ genes before the babies are born.
Nevertheless, gene editing is never only sunshine and roses.
One major concern is that the technology is still not mature at this moment. Indeed, even the most advanced gene editing technologies like CRISPR, TALENs and ZFNs still involve a lot of risks. Off-target effect is a case in point. As all we know, genome engineering is basically the removal and replacement of particular DNA strands; miscreation of unintended and unpredictable insertions, deletions, translocations and mutations during gene editing, known as off-target effects, is highly possible due to the immaturity of the technology. Worsening the situation, off-target effects are usually hard to detect, where the defective genes will be passed to next generations. In short, genome editing is not that reliable; at least, it is not an ultimate antidote.
Besides, genetic modification on humans is also frequently being condemned for its immorality. The recent He Jiankui affair is a typical example. During the experiment, two gene-edited twins nicknamed Lulu and Nana were claimed to be created with altered HIV resistance. Soon after scientist He announced his research, immediate condemnation from different parties came to him. The BBC called him a ‘gene editing rogue’ while China’s Science Minister warned scientists not to cross the ethical boundary.
The reasons behind are no-brainers. What if there were adverse impacts on the twins? Who should bear the responsibility? Who can bear the responsibility?
Last but not least, in the wake of He Jiankui’s scandal, many realized that the current restrictions against genome engineering are far from enough. In this era where terrorists have devoted themselves to wreaking havoc, genome editing could be used to create biological weapons. Without strict prohibition, the threat of another Tokyo subway sarin attack was not impossible, where fatal microorganisms will be used in replacement of sarin gas.
In conclusion, Pandora’s Box has been opened. With well-developed legislation, genome engineering could or might be a final antidote for human diseases; yet it could definitely harm humans if without solid control. Unless there are firm restrictions, there would be a sword of Damocles hanging above humanity.
Yours faithfully,
Chris Wong