I believe that the ability for us to edit the human genome is an amazing feat almost too tremendous to imagine. But, the reality is that with such absolute control over potential human lives, we must be diligent in ensuring we maintain our ethical standards. On the subject of the two articles listed above, it is interesting that we are discussing another medical ethics issue from China during the time of COVID-19. Rumors around this time are on the lack of supervision and enforcement of laboratory standards in relation to the virus, and here we are discussing how the Chinese government reacted to a singular scientist violating their standards. Needless to say, gene editing is not something that anybody can ignore and is a very provocative subject. I believe this is the reason Jankui preformed this experiment. I believe he knew the implications, but the ability to go into history as one of the first gene-edited baby producers was enough to make him disregard possible consequences. I believe he should have his medical license revoked and should not be able to work in a lab, as well as be held personally responsible for any related medical issues the twins might face due to the editing. The Tuskegee syphilis experiment is similar in that the participants had no information to lead them to make an informed decision about participating in the experiment. It is different in that the participants in the syphilis study were all poor black men, and these are genetically modified babies. The effect this might have is that many people may begin to question all aspects of CRISPR and its uses. This could completely hinder the development and funding due to public controversy, such as stem cell research has produced public opinions of similar natures. In conclusion, being informed is crucial in the medical world. Whether you are an experimenter, participant, or consumer you should be informed about what you are actively contributing and participating in when it comes to science.
I envy your ability to stay on topic, I'll tell ya that.
On the subject of China-- of the unethical projects that we learned about, I'd like to point out that three out of five was the USA. (Hela, Tuskegee, and project 4.1. Did you read about project 4.1? I'm still processing because holy sh-). China isn't squeaky clean, but certainly neither are we.
On the subject of China-- of the unethical projects that we learned about, I'd like to point out that three out of five was the USA. (Hela, Tuskegee, and project 4.1. Did you read about project 4.1? I'm still processing because holy sh-). China isn't squeaky clean, but certainly neither are we.
Now. The lack of over-the-line from China could be because we just don't get to hear about it. Maybe they are doing all kinds of stuff, and decided not to share. If thats true (not saying it is, but IF) then it begs the question, why tell everyone about this study? Bragging perhaps? Or was the amount of noise it made as a successful and questionable project too much to hide?
135 words