Month: February 2019

This week I am going to take a look at STEM cells. I thought it would be interesting to look at one of the most used and accepted forms of genetic engineering in humans. To preface this post, STEM cells are super complicated stuff. For this post I tried really hard to get the basic point across about what they do and how they do it, but I honestly still do not know that much about them, so hopefully you can learn a few things from the post.

To give you some useful background info, according to the mayo clinic STEM cells are “cells from which all other cells with specialized functions are generated.” Interesting fact about STEM cells is that under the right conditions—either in the body or in a lab—they can divide and create more cells called daughter cells. These daughter cells can then either become STEM cells and reproduce more or become specialized cells to fill a need like blood cells or bone cells for example.

Using STEM cells has almost become common practice in recent years. They are typically used for treating cancer and helping to regrow and replace diseased cells, studying how diseases work, and testing new drugs to check that they work safely and effectively. They are one form of human genetic modification that really is not super controversial and is widely accepted across the board.

However, there is some slight controversy (as there is with everything) specifically regarding one type of STEM cell. Embryonic STEM cells come from human embryos that are three to five days old—called blastocysts at this stage. These types of STEM cells are the most versatile. They are a great tool to be used in researching how early human development works. They also can divide into more STEM cells or become any other type of cell in the human body and these are the ones commonly used to repair or regenerate tissue or organs that are diseased.

The controversy comes into play because the cells are coming from a fertilized human egg/embryo/blastocyst. The eggs/sperm—if procured ethically—come from informed donors who recognize what the purpose of their donation is. The embryos are then created through in vitro fertilization in a lab. The National Institute of Health recognized the concerns and potential for major ethical issues with these types of cells, so they set up some guidelines that state that embryonic STEM cells can only be used when the embryo is no longer needed.

There is also a question surrounding altered adult cells. Scientists have figured out a way to genetically reprogram normal adult cells to transform into STEM cells that act similarly to embryonic STEM cells. So far these types of altered cells appear to be working correctly in animals and in tests, but nobody is sure yet if there would be any adverse effects if these altered adult cells were injected back into a human.

Aside from those two cases, STEM cells are really not a controversial issue and one of the only instances in which human genetic engineering is viewed as wholly positive. STEM cells are used to test drugs. Currently scientists can use them to test out cancer and tumor treatments to see how they would effect all of the different types of cells in the body—because STEM cells can become any cell they need to be. But, probably the most important use of STEM cells is in cell-based therapies.

I did some reading about how STEM cells could be used in this function and it is really interesting and exciting. Nowadays we typically use organs of the recently deceased in transplants to hopefully save the lives of people with diseased or failing organs. But, with this new technology we could engineer STEM cells to grow as new heart muscle cells to help fix someone’s broken heart or as new insulin producing cells in the pancreas. This last one is particularly exciting because it is basically a cure for type 1 diabetes.

Sadly though, we are still not fully ready to go forward with this type of STEM cell therapy. So far it has really only been used for cancer patients who have received chemo therapy as a way to heal the healthy cells that have been damaged by chemo. Hopefully, scientists will continue to work with STEM cell therapy so that we will see STEM cell transplants become more common in the near future. This is one use of human genetic engineering that I am fully in support of and can say is doing all good and seemingly no harm.

Today I decided that an intriguing topic to discuss would be the concept of designer babies and what they could potentially mean for our world. In my last post on this blog I wrote a little bit about the potential issues that could arise as a result of this, but with this post I will be going more in depth on the issue and would could come from it.

First, a little background on what designer babies really are. According to The Embryo Project Encyclopedia at Arizona State University, designer babies are humans that are genetically engineered in vitro. They can be genetically engineered to have specific traits for example: a certain gender or genes that are disease-free or resistant to certain diseases. You also might think that designer babies must be a new concept, but you would be wrong. In as early as 2004 the term “designer baby” was officially entered into the Oxford English Dictionary. Using in vitro fertilization is considered a form of gene editing by some and it is nothing new in the world of reproductive medicine—the first in vitro fertilized baby was born in 1978. Since then, many babies have been conceived this way if the parents had trouble with infertility or if the parents carry genes that may put their children at risk to contract serious genetic diseases.

The first ever case of a true “designer baby” did not occur until the late 90’s. In 1996 a couple from Fairfax, Virginia used in vitro fertilization as a means to ensure that their third child would be a girl—they already had two boys and they wanted a daughter to complete their designer family. Something worth considering when discussing in vitro fertilization would be the cost. According to a fertility website in vitro fertilization will start at around $12,000 for the first cycle and for each additional needed cycle the costs would be roughly $7,000. This is not where the costs stop though, for each cycle a patient would need fertility medications which can cost between $1,500 to $5,000 per cycle.

Obviously, these costs are not feasible for all people. This is where a few ethical issues can be found. For those who cannot afford in vitro fertilization it may seem unfair that it possibly puts their children at a greater risk to develop or be born with genetic diseases or conditions that those with more money can have edited out of their children. Also something to think about, the people who can afford to go through with in vitro fertilization may have a better ability to get good healthcare for any potential problems their child would have. Whereas those who cannot afford in vitro fertilization probably would not have the money or the best health care plans that would allow them the best possible help for any potential sick kids. Basically, if genetic diseases and disorders were to be eradicated in the wealthier parts of society, the already less fortunate would be stuck trying to navigate an extremely expensive healthcare system to support their child putting them at an even greater disadvantage.

An important question to ask would be where do doctors and others in the medical field stand on this issue. Well, according to the Council of Ethical and Judicial Affairs, it is acceptable to go through with genetic selection and manipulation if it is with the purpose to prevent, cure or treat genetic disease. On the other hand it is not ethical to engage in genetic selection or manipulation for “benign traits” unless three specific criteria are satisfied. These criteria are: “a clear and meaningful benefit to the child, there could be no trade-off with other characteristics or traits, and all citizens would have to have equal access to the genetic technology, irrespective of income or other socioeconomic characteristics.” Though it is important to recognize that these are not laws, they are rules for physicians who are members of the American Medical Association (AMA) and the penalty for not adhering to these rules would be a loss of membership.

Another potential ethical issue with designer babies would be the extreme socioeconomic divide it could cause. I briefly mentioned this in my last post, but it’s worth bringing up again. If it became commonly available for people to pick out their children’s traits as long as they could afford the price we would begin to see the wealthier people separate themselves psychically from everyone else. Imagine a world where you could pay to have your child be everything you want them to be. It would simply be unfair to the less wealthy who would not be able to afford to pick out their traits, still be reliant upon the genetic lottery.

Designer babies are certainly a concept that have had a positive impact in our world today. However, if we let things slip and people attempt to abuse the technology we could see some major issues arise as a result of this powerful technology.