What actually is better? Gene editing poses real problems

Francoise Baylis, Philosopher, Author, "Altered Inheritance," weighs in on gene editing.

A genetic disease runs in your family. Your doctor tells you that, should you wish to have a child, that child is likely to also carry the disease. But a new gene-editing technology could change your fate. It could ensure that your baby is -- and remains -- healthy. Even more, it could potentially make sure your grandchildren are also free of the disease. What do you do? Now, imagine it's not a rare genetic disorder, but general illness, or eye color, or cognitive ability, or athleticism. Do you opt into this new world of genetically edited humans? And what if it's not just you. What your friends, neighbors, and colleagues are also embracing this genetic revolution? Right now, science doesn't give you that choice. But huge advancements in CRISPR technology are making human gene editing a reality. In fact, in 2018, a Chinese scientist announced the first genetically modified babies; twin girls made to resist HIV, smallpox, and malaria. The promise of this technology is clear. But gene editing is not without its perils. Its critics say the technology is destined to exacerbate inequality, pressure all parents (and nations) into editing their children to stay competitive, and meddling with the most basic aspect of our humanity. In this context, we ask the question: Should we use gene editing to make better babies?

The full “Use Gene Editing To Make Better Babies” debate will be released on Friday, February 18th. Check it out here

#debate #intelligencesquared #iq2us #geneediting #crispr #ethics #genesismachine #georgechurch #marcydarnovsky #amywebb #francoisebaylis #opentodebate

===================================

Official site

Open to Debate Twitter

Open to Debate Facebook

===================================