What’s the difference between genetic engineering and eugenics?
By Robert Gebelhoff,
The Washington Post
| 02. 22. 2016
Untitled Document
For a half-century, the ethics of human genetic engineering have been discussed in the abstract. Because the tools to edit DNA didn’t exist, the question was more a thought experiment than a real concern.
Today, though, the conversation has completely changed. There has been a frenzy of excitement around the possibilities of CRISPR-Cas9. The technology, which allows scientists to design proteins that unzip and replace chunks of DNA as they please, makes it possible to edit genes quickly and cheaply. Investors have poured hundreds of millions of dollars into the innovation, which seems to have endless possibilities: making crops more resilient to diseases, designing mosquitoes so they can’t carry malaria — maybe even eliminating diseases among humans by altering the genes we pass on.
Scientists are confident that the technology could one day eliminate genetic disorders in humans. However, the research is still very young, and there are major ethical questions attached to editing human DNA that the emergence of CRISPR makes even more pressing: Wouldn’t editing out inheritable traits from the human population simply amount to eugenics...
Related Articles
By Jessica Hamzelou, MIT Technology Review | 01.13.2025
Lisa Holligan already had two children when she decided to try for another baby. Her first two pregnancies had come easily. But for some unknown reason, the third didn’t. Holligan and her husband experienced miscarriage after miscarriage after miscarriage.
Like...
By Melissa Dahl, Slate | 01.13.2025
Mia used to say she’d never do in vitro fertilization. It’s a detail that feels significant now, looking back on the three long years that she and her husband, Chris, have spent trying to conceive. “When we first started trying...
By Tatiana Giovannucci, PET | 01.13.2025
Ten pregnant women and three others with their babies were repatriated to the Philippines after being pardoned by the Royal Government of Cambodia.
The women were recruited to act as surrogates in Cambodia, and were all pregnant at the time...
By Kristen V. Brown, The Atlantic | 01.15.2025
The first time Jamie Cassidy was pregnant, the fetus had a genetic mutation so devastating that she and her husband, Brennan, decided to terminate in the second trimester. The next time they tried for a baby, they weren’t taking chances...