Release date: 2017-06-27
If the complete elimination of malaria, the end of cancer, or the cure of a fatal genetic disease is the most likely scenario that is about to happen, imagine what kind of future will we reach? Complete? Youth forever? Still a few hundred years of life?
If we open the door to genetic editing, it's all possible. However, our greatest responsibility is to avoid turning it into a Pandora's box, leaving the world with many monsters created by the lack of ethical issues.
Clearing HIV and treating AIDS
HIV inserts its DNA into the host's genome. Because it can sleep for many years, some medical treatments can delay the virus, but they can't permanently kill the virus. In 2015, scientists used CRISPR technology to remove HIV cells from living cells in patients in the laboratory, proving that it is possible to use this method to treat AIDS. This year, they experimented with 99% of cells infected with HIV in the laboratory. They were able to remove 48% of the virus from the mouse's body DNA by tail-injecting the CRISPR-treated sample into the mouse. Although the experiment is still in its infancy, it seems to mean that CRISPR may be the ultimate solution for the treatment of HIV and AIDS.
New era drugs
CRISPR / CAS9 may also mean a revolution in the pharmaceutical industry. New drugs can be developed to treat diseases that were previously considered to be fatal and incurable. Pharmaceutical giant Bayer and startup CRISPR Therapeutics announced a $300 million joint venture to develop a drug based on CRISPR technology for the treatment of heart disease, blood diseases and blindness. Their cooperation may mean that drug development in the new era may be more focused on genetic methods. Perhaps in a few decades, humans can treat cancer or AIDS through pills or injections.
Super plant
When it comes to genetic modification, plants are always the first to be thought of in GMOs. No different from CRISPR. Researchers are experimenting with genetic editing tools to improve crop resistance to pests and diseases and tolerance to the environment. A research team from Rutgers is conducting a long-term project to genetically engineer grapes used for winemaking and grasses used for making lawns for implementation in a variety of other crops.
Enhance human intelligence?
In the era of smartphones, smart homes, smart cars and artificial intelligence, many people are worried that artificial intelligence may be able to take over the world (Steven Hawking even said that the development of all artificial intelligence may mean the end of the human era, Elon Musk said Agree), and therefore trying to improve the intelligence of human beings seems to be a wise idea.
A recent study identified 74 genetic variants that would be used to predict 20% of the changes that occur in humans during school hours. This is a series of intelligence related to normal intelligence, and you can pass on yourself The genome was sequenced to understand.
One of the authors of the study, James J. Lee, a researcher at the University of Minnesota, said: "In my opinion, CRISPR can in principle be used to improve the expected intelligence of the embryo. So, be cautious here. And this is not only because Some people think that intelligence is not only related to several genes in the correct sequence. Creative intelligence? The idea of ​​random circulation? What is the ability to produce memory? All these problems need to be studied, and still can't determine whether it can be genetics. The perspective of the study.
Editing humans?
Here we will talk about the most controversial issues that genetic editing may bring. Editing the genome of human beings has entered the realm of God for humans, or for some people.
The enormous bioethical problem of human genetic editing begins with pre-selecting embryos that can survive, and abandons those embryos that are determined to die, until the baby can be effectively edited. This is no longer an unreachable possibility, it is about to begin to appear.
Pregnant women need to undergo many tests during pregnancy. Many of them will choose to check if the fetus has a fatal genetic disease. For example, if a small embryo is diagnosed with Down syndrome, the mother can decide to terminate the pregnancy. In most cases, they will do this.
So whether you like it or not, and whether you are negative about it, it is already happening.
In addition, researchers at the Francis Creek Institute in London hope to genetically modify human embryos to better understand the earliest stages of human life and reduce the number of abortions.
Custom baby?
Imagine the following situation: You and your wife decide to have a child. After pregnancy, you meet with the genetic designer and then start talking about how your child should look good and what qualities he or she has. You decide to have a beautiful and healthy boy with blond hair. He should be smart, have bright, big eyes, and have a strong immune system. They are strong, tall, and have a good smile.
At the same time we imagine a darker situation. If, with the advancement of biotechnology, in a fully controlled society, a leader can determine the biological “components†of the people to produce blue-collar workers, white-collar workers or killing robots – without compassion and free will. Transgenic soldiers.
Are we far from such a society?
Genetic editing of embryos carries a huge risk because CRISPR can accidentally edit genes with DNA sequences similar to their targets and cause irreversible mutations in the embryo. This is a terrible and very shocking result, and we must do our utmost to avoid this situation.
Youth forever or eternal life?
What happens if we can eradicate the disease and design a perfect healthy human? What if we also find the genes that cause aging and can eliminate it with the help of CRISPR? After living for two or three hundred years, will we look like our 22-year-old when we die?
How should we deal with this situation? This will completely change our perception of species and our relationship with nature, even life and death itself. What if there is a problem? What will happen to this situation? What if we remove the malaria gene from the mosquitoes and accidentally kill them? What if something bigger happens?
Can we even consider these issues buried in our little universe?
How will our best philosophers provide their insights? Because we not only need science, but also philosophy, religion and ethics to keep up with the rapid development of technology and provide advice.
what can we do? What should we do?
When Chinese researchers used CRISPR to edit the genome of human embryos in April 2015, the world's most important geneticists, biotechnologists, and bioethicists decided to come together to discuss the issue. They gathered in Washington to discuss the future of genetic editing and reached a public opinion that basic research should continue, but gene editing should be suspended in pregnant embryos.
However, CRISPR itself cannot be prevented in other types of research. A few months after the Chinese experiment reported, in February 2016, the Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority (HFEA) allowed British scientists to use CRISPR on useless human embryos. According to reports, in June 2016, an advisory committee in the United States gave a green light to the use of CRISPR for human testing.
Genome editing did not appear overnight. Eric Meslin, director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Indiana, reminds us that we have been talking about manipulating genes for 40 years since the 1970s. He said that like the development of cloned sheep Dolly, patients died of gene therapy, and stem cells have been arguing in the early 2000s. All of these sounds existed as long as the ethical issues of CRISPR appeared.
Bioethics usually strikes a balance between regulation and licensing – with too many licenses, researchers ignore the moral structure of society; too many restrictions mean slow progress, and scientists will start outside the allowed range. Action. They believe that bioethicists need to be more involved in the discussion of CRISPR. However, the most important issue is that researchers, politicians, sociologists, theorists, and even ordinary citizens around the world must be involved in the discussion of technologies that have the power to undermine our research and medical world. Come.
David Lemberg, a founding editor of Bioethics Today and an associate professor of community health at the National University of America, said that the role of bioethicists and stakeholders representing many groups should be based on precautionary principles to monitor and limit research.
He added: "Just because we can do one thing does not mean that we should do this thing." While we need to promote advances in the treatment of these diseases, we also need a group of bioethicists to ensure that we maintain the values ​​that human beings should have.
Source: Flint Creation (micro-signal firestone-link)
Gelatin Size 2 Empty Capsule,Empty Gelatin Capsule Size 2,Pink Empty Gelatin Capsules,Hard Gelatin Empty Vacant Capsule
Ningbo Jiangnan Capsule Co., Ltd. , https://www.jncapsule.com