In this blog post, we will consider the ethical limits of human intervention in life in light of the remarkable advances in genetic engineering.
Along with the rapid development of cutting-edge technologies such as artificial intelligence, drones, and robots, genetic engineering is once again becoming a hot topic. Genetic engineering attracted considerable attention in 1997 with the birth of Dolly, the world’s first mammal cloned from somatic cells, but due to various issues accompanying the development of genetic engineering technology, it has not progressed significantly in the past 20 years. South Korean scientist Hwang Woo-suk cloned an Afghan hound named Snuppy, and in January 2017, Samsung chairman Lee Kun-hee’s pet dog, a Pomeranian named Benji, became the fourth animal to be cloned, demonstrating that genetic engineering and animal cloning have always attracted public attention. Although it has not yet been commercialized due to its high price, Seoul National University Animal Hospital and Dr. Hwang Woo-suk’s Suam Research Institute, which has cloned more than 700 dogs since 2005, offer a service to clone pets for about 10 million won per dog. Although genetic engineering and somatic cell cloning technology have developed beyond our imagination, they cannot be applied to human cloning or organ cloning due to legal regulations focused on ethical arguments. Even if genetic engineering technology causes many problems, from a utilitarian perspective, the benefits it will bring to our society far outweigh the risks, so we must promote technological development as quickly as possible.
First, genetic engineering technology will directly help us fight disease and prevent aging. Experiments have already shown that genetic engineering technology using stem cells can be used to replicate damaged organs, slow down or prevent the expression of genes related to cell aging, and prevent somatic cell aging. For example, it will be possible to provide cloned lungs to patients with pulmonary fibrosis caused by genetic mutations without harming anyone else in society. In addition, if genetic engineering technology develops further, it will be actively used in the treatment of mental illnesses with complex causes, such as schizophrenia, which is caused by hundreds of abnormal gene expressions, and will be able to overcome the limitations of drug treatment. Health care professionals predict that combining genetic engineering with disease control and aging prevention will contribute to reducing medical expenses. If genetic editing can prevent people from developing Alzheimer’s disease, it will save a lot of money in hospital and nursing care costs in old age. As such, the positive effects of advances in genetic engineering and genetic editing technology on human health are enormous.
However, the development of genetic engineering technology has been slow for decades. The answer to this is relatively simple and clear. According to Professor Sung-Ho Yoo of the Department of Forensic Medicine at Seoul National University College of Medicine, no one is willing to sponsor experiments that are subject to strict legal regulations, and due to the nature of capitalist society, research that is not profitable is bound to encounter obstacles. According to Article 47 of the Act on Bioethics and Bioethics, the development of gene therapies for “genetic diseases, cancer, acquired immunodeficiency, and other diseases that threaten life or cause serious disabilities” is legally restricted. In fact, Kolon Life Science’s gene therapy for degenerative arthritis has not yet been officially approved due to ethical issues, and the bioindustry in Korea is unable to advance due to legal restrictions. In contrast, Japan has significantly relaxed legal restrictions on the development of gene therapies to attract foreign investment, and in the United States, Theranos’ genetic analysis services are already commercialized and sold in pharmacies. In her paper, “Biotechnology and International Regulation,” Professor Bae Young-ja of the Korea Institute of Science and Technology Policy argues that the development of biotechnology can only be achieved through active discussion of transnational norms and the domestic laws of individual countries. Therefore, only by relaxing current legal restrictions can we dream of the endless practical applications of genetic engineering technology.
Of course, genetic engineering technology raises many ethical and moral issues. First, as author Putnam argues in his book The Gene Revolution and Bioethics, the first reason why human cloning and the excessive development of genetic engineering technology should be rejected is instinctive intuition. From a religious perspective, manipulating the bodies created by God and allowing someone to decide how others should live is contrary to human dignity and the morals of our society. Furthermore, the development of genetic engineering technology could ultimately lead to political issues. John Locke’s tabula rasa theory, which has greatly contributed to social change as the ideological basis of social progress, is the doctrine that all humans are born with a blank slate and that everything is determined by education. This theory has been refuted by Richard Dawkins’ “The Selfish Gene” and psychologist Steven Pinker’s “The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature” with a vast amount of scientific data, but humanity still places importance on the ideological value of equality. Those who strongly oppose genetic engineering worry that gene editing could lead to the creation of superior individuals and groups from birth. They argue that this would increase the likelihood of them becoming the upper class in a capitalist society. However, this is a problem that can be adequately addressed through legal regulations. For example, suppose that gene editing is performed through in vitro fertilization. The government should only allow gene editing in cases where there is suspicion of specific genetic disorders, such as Down syndrome, which has three chromosomes in the 21st chromosome pair, or heart disease. Before placing in vitro fertilized embryos in the mother’s womb, all embryos would be supervised by a government agency, and only gene editing to correct fatal defects would be legalized. This would prevent the emergence of so-called “super babies” who are tall, handsome, healthy, and intelligent in the upper class. Babies born differently due to gene editing could cause controversy similar to eugenics. However, as Steven Pinker argues in Blank Slate: The Modern Myth of Human Nature, equality in human society is political equality, not genetic sameness. Therefore, opposing genetic editing of babies who may be born with fatal defects on the grounds that it is akin to eugenics is “extreme egalitarianism that does not recognize even individual differences.” Of course, gene editing is not as ethically simple as this, but at the very least, gene editing to mitigate defects should not be judged by eugenic standards.
It is clear that the advancement of genetic engineering technology will bring overall benefits to our society. And we are all aware of the problems that genetic engineering technology can cause. However, the benefits are too great to abandon genetic engineering, a technology with unlimited potential to bring about a new paradigm shift for humanity. In order to progress, our society has always strived to overcome and resolve problems, even if they exist, as long as the benefits outweigh the costs. The same applies to genetic engineering. If there are problems, we must strive to find solutions, rather than abolishing the technology altogether. However, technological advances can also raise serious ethical issues, so we need to take time to discuss them publicly, reach a social consensus on technological development, and find the right utilitarian solutions.
With the development of advanced technologies, genetic engineering has been the subject of intense interest since the 20th century, but its progress has been slowed by the risks associated with technological advances. Genetic engineering technology, which will benefit human health and bring economic benefits, is an area that presents a new paradigm for our society and must not be abandoned. Therefore, the elite members of our society must compete to promote and achieve technological development for the practical application of genetic engineering technology. We must continue our efforts until the day when babies born in Africa, on the other side of the globe, are resistant to malaria thanks to gene editing.
