Navigating the Science and Ethics of Designer Babies
In November 2018, the world of science was rocked by a startling announcement. Chinese scientist He Jiankui revealed that he had created the first genetically edited babies—twin girls named Lulu and Nana 1 6 .
Children whose genetic makeup has been artificially selected or modified to include particular traits, raising profound questions that straddle science, ethics, and society.
Just because we can edit human genes, does that mean we should? This question lies at the heart of the CRISPR revolution.
CRISPR-Cas9 is a gene-editing technique that has been described as "genetic scissors" for its ability to cut DNA at specific locations, but a better analogy might be a word processor for genes 6 .
| Aspect | Claimed Result | Actual/Potential Issues |
|---|---|---|
| HIV Resistance | Complete immunity | Only one twin had both CCR5 copies modified 3 |
| Health of Babies | "Healthy as any other babies" | Unknown long-term health effects |
| Specificity | Precise CCR5 targeting | Mosaicism and off-target effects 2 3 |
| Ethical Framework | Primary Concern | Policy Implication |
|---|---|---|
| Safety Precaution | Unintended genetic consequences | Moratorium until proven safe |
| Therapeutic Only | Slippery slope to enhancement | Limit to serious disease prevention |
| Justice-Centered | Inequality and discrimination | Regulate for equitable access |
Attention is shifting toward polygenic traits—characteristics influenced by multiple genes . Companies now offer polygenic embryo screening for conditions like diabetes and schizophrenia .
The regulatory environment remains fragmented with different approaches worldwide:
Limit embryo selection to disease avoidance
Allow selection of traits for increased well-being
Temporary bans until safety resolved 1
The power to edit the human germline represents both an incredible scientific achievement and a profound moral responsibility.
Alleviate human suffering by eliminating devastating genetic diseases
Safety concerns, societal division, and potential inequality
How we navigate the complex interplay of science, ethics, and policy will determine whether gene editing becomes a transformative tool for human betterment or a source of division and inequality.