You need to have JavaScript enabled in order to access this site. Dashboard DPSY-6215-1/CPSY-6215-1/PSYC-5215-1/PSYC-6215-1 (11/28/2022-02/12/2023)-PT27 Week 10: Learning Resources Skip To Content Dashboard Account Dashboard Courses Calendar Inbox History My Media Charlotte Help Close 2 Outline Introduction There are numerous sides to the argument concerning the benefits and risks of gene editing. Due to the potential for creating "designer babies," some individuals argue that gene editing must be outlawed completely. Many people think that gene editing ought to be legal since it has the potential to eliminate hereditary disorders. Hook: CRISPR, a revolutionary gene-editing technique, is controversial due of its most potent use. Therefore, prohibiting gene editing is a poor decision. a. Reason 1: Gene editing has the promise of eliminating diseases. i. Evidence 1a: A potential novel immunotherapy for cancer treatment may be developed and evaluated with the use of gene editing. T-cells engineered using CRISPR can seek out and destroy malignant cells. ii. Evidence 1b: A individual ’s genetic makeup may be used by researchers to develop new medicines. Several pharmaceutical firms are already using CRISPR technology in the research and development of new medicines. b. Reason 2: Human average lifespan is prolonged via gene editing. i. Evidence 2a: Genome editing has the potential to lengthen the lifespan of humans. Human life expectancy has risen exponentially over the last several centuries, and this upward trend is predicted to continue. ii. ii. Evidence 2b: It is feasible that genetic engineering may allow us to live much longer. It is conceivable for some common ailments and diseases to manifest at a later date and kill us far earlier than is expected. Reason 3: Changing genes in particular tissues or organs, simplifying disease research by focusing on culprit genes, developing disease cell models, as well as deactivating pig viruses such that pig organs might someday be employed to substitute human organs are just a few instances of how this innov.

1. You need to have JavaScript enabled in order to access this site.
Dashboard
DPSY-6215-1/CPSY-6215-1/PSYC-5215-1/PSYC-6215-1
(11/28/2022-02/12/2023)-PT27
Week 10: Learning Resources

2. Skip To Content
Dashboard
Account
Dashboard

3. Courses
Calendar
Inbox

4. History
My Media
Charlotte
Help
Close
2

5. Outline
Introduction
There are numerous sides to the argument concerning the
benefits and risks of gene editing. Due to the potential for
creating "designer babies," some individuals argue that gene
editing must be outlawed completely. Many people think that
gene editing ought to be legal since it has the potential to
eliminate hereditary disorders.
Hook: CRISPR, a revolutionary gene-editing technique, is
controversial due of its most potent use. Therefore, prohibiting
gene editing is a poor decision.
a. Reason 1: Gene editing has the promise of eliminating
diseases.
i. Evidence 1a: A potential novel immunotherapy for cancer
treatment may be developed and evaluated with the use of gene
editing. T-cells engineered using CRISPR can seek out and
destroy malignant cells.
ii. Evidence 1b: A individual ’s genetic makeup may be used by
researchers to develop new medicines. Several pharmaceutical
firms are already using CRISPR technology in the research and
development of new medicines.
b. Reason 2: Human average lifespan is prolonged via gene
editing.
i. Evidence 2a: Genome editing has the potential to lengthen the
lifespan of humans. Human life expectancy has risen
exponentially over the last several centuries, and this upward
trend is predicted to continue.
ii. ii. Evidence 2b: It is feasible that genetic engineering may
allow us to live much longer. It is conceivable for some
common ailments and diseases to manifest at a later date and
kill us far earlier than is expected.

6. Reason 3: Changing genes in particular tissues or organs,
simplifying disease research by focusing on culprit genes,
developing disease cell models, as well as deactivating pig
viruses such that pig organs might someday be employed to
substitute human organs are just a few instances of how this
innovation is being applied.
i. Evidence 3a: It might be used to fix defective DNA in human
embryos, preventing potentially fatal diseases from being
passed down to future generations.
ii. ii. Evidence 3b: Gene editing has already made it possible to
alter people's immune cells to fight cancer and HIV.
iii. Opposing View: Changing or altering genes is unethical and
might have negative consequences.
i. Refutation 1:
Since the alterations we made to reproductive cells are passed
down through generations, it is unwise to alter them. We are
liable for the effects of any inherited condition that causes a
disability or death. Furthermore, these alterations will be passed
down via the generations. Human clinical trials including
germline gene editing cannot be undertaken in an ethical way.
Conclusion
References
Cavaliere, G., Devolder, K., & Giubilini, A. (2019). Regulating
genome editing: for enlightened democratic governance.
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 28(1), 76-88.
Gyngell, C., Douglas, T., & Savulescu, J. (2017). The ethics of
germline gene editing. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 34(4),
498-513.
Khalil, A. M. (2020). The genome editing revolution. Journal of
genetic engineering and biotechnology, 18(1), 1-16.
Ma, H., Marti-Gutierrez, N., Park, S. W., Wu, J., Lee, Y.,

7. Suzuki, K., & Mitalipov, S. (2017). Correction of a pathogenic
gene mutation in human embryos. Nature, 548(7668), 413- 419.
E Memi, F., Ntokou, A., & Papangeli, I. (2018, December).
CRISPR/Cas9 gene-editing: Research technologies, clinical
applications and ethical considerations. In Seminars in
perinatology (Vol. 42, No. 8, pp. 487-500). WB Saunders.
Petersen, B. (2017). Basics of genome editing technology and
its application in livestock species. Reproduction in Domestic
Animals, 52, 4-13.
Rojas-Vasquez, R., & Gatica-Arias, A. (2020). Use of genome
editing technologies for genetic improvement of crops of
tropical origin. Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture (PCTOC),
140(1), 215-244.
Wang, X., Niu, Y., Zhou, J., Yu, H., Kou, Q., Lei, A., ... &
Chen, Y. (2016). Multiplex gene editing via CRISPR/Cas9
exhibits desirable muscle hypertrophy without detectable
offtarget effects in sheep. Scientific Reports, 6(1), 1-11.