Dear Marcy Darnovsky,

       My interest in the controversy of whether or not we should edit the human genome brought me to your article, “Should Heritable Gene Editing Be Used on Humans” in The Wall Street Journal. Because you’re a policy advocate and not a scientific researcher, I think you bring a different, yet well-informed perspective to this issue. Your article tells us some of the potential dangers that could come with editing the human genome, including: the irreversible impact on the child’s cells, the enhancement of traits in a child, and the ethical concerns that could be detrimental to one’s health. I value your cautious attitude when you contemplate the complexity of this issue. You understand that this could potentially cure diseases, but you believe that the method has not been proven to be safe or effective enough for it to be worth the risk and it could lead to the enhancement of children. I share your fear that the “regulatory line between traits construed as medical and those that are clearly enhancements would be impossible to draw or to hold” (para. 23). Although it would be nice if all researchers wanted to improve this method for curing those who have diseases, I agree that it will be hard to regulate the research of those who want to do it for enhancement purposes and designer babies.

      While I agree that regulating the human genome may be difficult and have ethical issues associated with it, I think that the benefits that could come from this technique outweigh the potential risks. When it comes to advancements in medicine or science, most methods that go against popular belief start off as controversial. I think it is important that we start off small and perfect the technique and identify areas for improvement. By starting off with an incurable disease that causes death at a young age, it will hopefully give the child a better chance at life. Even though you say it will be hard to regulate and people will do what they want, it is important to let the researchers try and start out with a lot of regulations that let the public ease into this idea and let the technique be perfected, instead of going to waste.  

      I believe that human genome editing should be allowed, in order to advance methods to cure diseases like HIV and genetic disorders. I hope that you take these ideas into consideration when you decide whether or not human genome editing should be used. Although we may share different opinions, I know that we both just want what is best for others.

 

Regards,

Nicole Kruppa