CAJ #14: Gattaca

I finally had the chance to watch the movie that first dealt with the possible ethical consequences of PGD. Gattaca (1997) is an American science fiction movie, starring Ethan Hawke and Jude Law, that portrays a society in which genetic engineering has become the norm. As you may have already guessed, the title is based on the four letters of the genetic code that represent the different bases: adenine (A), thymine (T), cytosine (C), and guanine (G). Almost the entire population in the movie is born with preselected, non-medical traits, such as height, athleticism and good looks. They are only characterized according to their DNA, while nothing else matters. You are only as good as your DNA is basically the overall theme. The few people who have been conceived the traditional way face a lot of discrimination because of their genetics. This can be seen through the eyes of the lead character, portrayed by Ethan Hawke. 

I think it's a little far-fetched and extreme because there are still regulations for the use of PGD. However, parents are nowadays already given the chance to choose some of those feared, non medical qualities. What do you think? Is PGD going to lead society into becoming a master race? Will "normal" born people be faced with genetic discrimination? I think the purpose of this movie was solely to show scientists that this technology can very well get out of control. It definitely can. Maybe you should watch the movie and see for yourself. 

The link to the trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZppWok6SX88  

CAJ #13: Opinion and a TED talk

• Does the science in your topic benefit everybody? If so, who does it benefit the most?

Generally, I believe that almost everyone could benefit from PGD and other related reproductive technologies. Even though it is nowadays mostly used for infertile couples and mothers who have had multiple miscarriages to conceive a healthy child, free of genetic or chromosomal disorders, further research could make it possible to detect faulty genes that are responsible for diseases such as diabetes or obesity. It does indeed benefit a lot of women who cannot conceive the traditional way, and couples who carry genetic diseases and would like for their future children to be born without them. Additionally, there are a few private clinics (mostly in the US) who offer parents the possibility of choosing their baby’s gender as well as hair and eye color.

• If it does not benefit everybody equally, should society be paying for the research?

Let’s start with some statistics here: 1 in 8 couples has trouble getting pregnant or sustaining a pregnancy. (2006-2010 National Survey of Family Growth, CDC) And it is estimated that 350 million people worldwide suffer from rare diseases, 80 % of which are caused by faulty genes. So, if more money would go into research, scientists could be able to find out which diseases are caused by which faulty genes and generations of people with genetic disorders could be prevented. People wouldn’t have to endure the consequences of their diseases anymore. PGD can nowadays be used to test for over 100 genetic conditions. Besides, it does already benefit a lot of people, although the science is considered extremely controversial.

• A TED talk related to my CAJ:

http://www.ted.com/talks/harvey_fineberg_are_we_ready_for_neo_evolution#t-1014938

This TED talk by medical ethicist Harvey Fineberg describes three possible paths for the ever-evolving human species to further develop: to stop evolving completely, to evolve naturally — or to control the next steps of human evolution, using genetic modification, to make people smarter, more athletic and simply better. What do you think?

Did it teach me anything new? 

Everything is evolving really fast. For instance, let’s take a look at the Human Genome Project: the HGP started in 1990 and it took 13 years to sequence the human genome. It cost around 2.7 billion dollars. One year later it took “only” 20 million dollars to do the exact same job, but took only 3 to 4 months. Nowadays, you can have a complete sequence of the 3 billion base pairs in the human genome at a cost of about 20,000 dollars, in about a week.

But we also need to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages that come with such new technologies. It’s never just simply right or wrong, because there are always two sides to everything. Well, that I have learned through my CAJ experience.  

CAJ #12: How does my topic connect to other fields/CAJs?

• Carola Ponjevic: Genetic engineering and enhancement 

Even though the foremost goal of PGD was to detect genetic defects, it has become a tool for enhancement. More couples now make use of this technique to choose their baby’s gender as well as its eye and hair color. It is, of course, considered extremely controversial and unethical because genetic engineering and enhancement is seen as the first step for creating real “Designer Babies”.

http://carolaamina.blogspot.co.at/

• Alexandra Perfler: Genetics 

This has probably everything to do with my CAJ. New developments and findings in genetics research made it possible to even develop reproductive procedures in the first place. And it hasn’t stopped there. Scientists are eager to develop more techniques to cure diseases during early embryonic stages.

http://peralexa.blogspot.co.at/

• Artur Shefer: Longevity and human immortality; Transhumanism 

PGD is believed to someday, in the not too distant future, be able to provide couples with the possibility to preselect traits such as longevity for their future child. Maybe with Aubrey’s findings, geneticists can finally figure out the genes that would make these traits possible.

http://arturshefer.blogspot.co.at/

• Katharina Pelich: Stem cells 

This is directly related to my CAJ as stem cells are derived from embryos that were created with in-vitro fertilization in order to help scientists figure out how to treat specific diseases, possibly grow organs etc.

http://kathyp92.blogspot.co.at/

• Katja Wallner: Eugenics 

A lot of people believe that PGD and other reproductive technologies will pave the way for eugenics, a term which is almost always associated with the Nazi time, to enhance the genetic material of human beings.

http://sparklyzombiecat.blogspot.co.at/

CAJ #11: Arguments against PGD and Co.

Hey Everyone,

As indicated from my previous posts, there isn’t a great deal of PGD supporters out there. Frankly, all technologies and techniques associated with reproductive biology and genetic engineering raise a lot of ethical concerns. But why are so many people against the notion of finding out ways to eliminate even more diseases to have a perfectly healthy child? Let’s look at some of the arguments of those opponents to try to see why they are so reluctant to welcome this futuristic trend.

Playing God. You will almost always come across the argument which says that interfering with the genetic code is against nature and that we are basically assuming God’s role. Humans have no right to change another human being’s DNA, and especially not for enhancement purposes.

Eugenics. According to the Oxford Dictionary, eugenics is “the science of improving a population by controlled breeding to increase the occurrence of desirable heritable characteristics.” PGD is used to detect defects and then discard the embryos that include undesirable traits. This could lead to creating a homogenized society, or a master race, similar to the idea Adolf Hitler had in mind. Variation, however, allows for innovation. Opponents argue that there are some amazing and inspiring people who happen to be disabled but contribute a lot to science and other fields. For instance, Stephen Hawking who is paralyzed due to amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) or Albert Einstein who had learning disabilities. These disabilities didn’t stop neither from becoming one of the successful physicists in the world and forming the theory of relativity, respectively. PGD and other genetic engineering technologies are therefore seen as a discrimination against the disabled community.

Discrimination against the poor. Not only is PGD extremely time consuming, but it is also a highly expensive procedure. It is therefore only accessible to wealthy couples. As a consequence, only the poor will have to suffer.

It is unsafe. The viral vectors that are used to bring the DNA into the cell may cause lethal immune responses or even tumors. While this argument may be valid today, it is probably a technical problem that will eventually be circumvented. Another safety argument is that when transgenes become inserted into the genome, they may disrupt functional genes and cause mutations. This has been seen during trials in mice. There is still no 100 % guarantee that this technology works on everyone equally. There is also a chance of misdiagnosis, about a 20 % chance of damaging the embryo during the biopsy process, and other yet unknown complications.

Pressure. Some women's health advocates worry that genetic engineering could create new pressures for the mother. Genetic enhancement could be subtly or coercively suggested by a partner, but also by third party groups with financial incentives such as insurance companies, a doctor, a social circle, current fashions, biotech marketers or mass media advertisers. It is not implausible that women could lose the ability to make genetic decisions about their own baby if the medical establishment or national government decided to regulate genetic engineering in some way.

Policy. What is a “medical necessity”? What is considered a “serious genetic disorder”? That’s when medical opinions vary and so a policy cannot be made to guarantee an equal distribution of PGD.

Technologies that involve changing DNA will always be full of controversy. Do you feel that you now understand both sides to it? Honestly, I do.

CAJ #10: Modified Sperm Technology

Hey Everyone,

I’ve just read this new article on yet another technique that could lead to, according to the UK’s leading fertility doctor, Lord Winston, THE breakthrough in genetics medicine! I don’t know how you guys see this, but it seems to me that scientists and doctors never cease to search for new developments to scare/ surprise us. This new method involves inserting new genetic material into sperm to replace defective genes. With this new technique, developed by Dr. Winston and his team, it could be possible to create healthy babies without manipulating the embryos at all. Artificial fertilization would be needed. This might lead to making reproductive technologies seem less frightening since embryos could stay the way they are. But where can these healthy genes be taken from? Dr. Winston and his team are currently working on creating modified pigs whose organs could be transferred into humans without causing any medical problems. In 2012, the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology already published a research report showing that introducing new genetic material via a viral vector into the sperm of mice leads to the presence and activity of those “designer sperm” genes in the resulting embryos. Who comes up with these discoveries, right? Well, this guy here:

This is what he had to say about this futuristic technique:

“Artificial insemination is an easy way to get something pregnant. You just modify the sperm beforehand. The idea we had was not using embryos at all. We’ve always been interested in trying to make transplant organs from the pig which would not be recognised by the human immune system. It’s a step forward in genetic research which is really interesting because if you can modify large animals and you don’t need to use IVF then obviously the biggest large animals, clearly, is ourselves."

He does also acknowledge the risk of working towards an era of eugenics, but he states that every technology has its advantages and downsides and that people should not misuse it.

“You could easily see how this kind of thing could be used in North Korea for example. I don’t think it’s very likely it will be used in the UK in a mischievous way but I’ve no doubt that given the burgeoning market, given the desperation of people who want to enhance their children in all sorts of ways, humans might be tempted to use this and that therefore it does become a form of eugenics. I’m not trying to make an exaggerated claim for what we have done at all but I think the reproductive technologies are being misused in my view. This is far more likely to be a serious threat than cloning. Cloning seems a useless technology.”

This innovative, yet still highly experimental technique could pave the way for a new development in genetics and for more diseases to be effectively cured–if it someday proves to be successful in humans.

CAJ #9: Creating a baby from DNA of three people–why not?

No, I didn’t make this up and yes, it is–thanks to the quickly advancing DNA technology–possible to combine DNA of three parents to conceive a baby. Why settle with only two parents when you can have three, right?

Of course, this special process is not applied just for the fun of it. It’s a recent technique, developed by British scientists, which can serve to eliminate specific diseases that are caused by the mitochondria, tiny structures that supply power to cells, which are inherited solely from the maternal side. You might wonder why these diseases can’t be solved with PGD only. I’ll tell you why:

99.8 percent of our DNA is located inside our cells and is inherited evenly from our parents. The remaining 0.2 percent, however, comes from our mitochondria, the parts of the cells that function as the power supplies, and passes directly from our mother to us. Now, disorders in the mitochondria can cause very serious medical conditions, such as muscular dystrophy, heart failures, sight loss and brain damage. About one in 6,500 babies is born carrying some sort of mitochondrial diseases. And because this 0.2 percent comes straight from the maternal side, there is no chance to replace it with DNA from the father. So what can be done for these babies? Just add a third, female parent’s DNA to the mix. For this, a specialized type of IVF is used wherein the genetic material from the mother’s egg is transferred into the donor egg that has its own genetic material removed beforehand. This donor egg containing the mother’s genetic material is then fertilized with the father’s sperm. The baby still receives its physical traits completely from its biological parents, but that 0.2 percent of mitochondrial DNA that would cause so much trouble is provided from the female person who donated the donor egg. The result: a mitochondrial disease-free baby thanks to healthy mitochondrial DNA from an extra parent. 



Sounds great? Well, this procedure has not become legal yet because it is considered, once again, extremely controversial and rather experimental. The main reason why this procedure hasn’t been legalized yet is because it is considered germ line gene therapy, since the replaced DNA is passed on from generation to the next. Where is the harm in that if this procedure can eliminate mitochondria related diseases within the family? The problem is that other diseases or defects could be unknowingly passed on as this technique hasn’t been tested for that long. Several people have also expressed moral and ethical concerns, arguing that this technique could truly pave the way for Designer Babies and eugenics (=the prospect of creating a perfect human population by breeding for certain genes). It is also argued that traditional IVF combined with PGD could be used instead to prevent mitochondrial defects by using only a donor egg. This would mean that the baby wouldn’t be biologically related to the mother since there would be only the father’s sperm and the donor’s egg. To put a baby through the unknown risks and consequences of this technique over safe egg donation so that a mother can be biologically related to her child is believed to be even more unethical.

The UK government, however, is set to end the debate and legalize this inheritable human genomes modification. Ministers had decided that the health risks of mitochondrial diseases outweigh all concerns and that regulations will most certainly be drafted by the end of 2014. It is predicted that by early 2015, the UK is going to become the first country worldwide to perform this “three-parent babies” procedure. While many scientists and doctors welcome this new era in genetics, others claim that it will result in more harm than good as the technique is too experimental and hasn't passed enough of the safety texts.

What do you think? Great solution to eradicate severe mitochondrial diseases in the first place, or just another way for scientists to “play god”?

CAJ #8: My mum is not happy about this!

I deliberately chose to talk to my religious, not-very-fond-of-technology mum about the highly controversial topic of Designer Babies. My sister was in the same room but did only join my laughter and, well, it was quite a fun discussion!

I began to explain that I am currently working on a journal to learn more about this advanced technology that is used to “design” a baby outside the mother’s body. I tried, as simple as possible, to explain the procedure known as preimplantation genetic diagnosis and that through this and in-vitro fertilization, doctors are given the chance to genetically modify embryos to reduce genetic disorders. She immediately remembered the movie we once watched together in which a girl was ‘created’ to help keep her older sister alive. So I asked her what she thought of this technology and she wasn’t entirely against it. She actually thought it was great because it can prevent unborn children from having genetic diseases. She also added that it is a wonderful opportunity for infertile couples. Then I continued telling her that this technology is far more advanced than most of us realize and that in the not too distant future, it will be possible to preselect all sorts of traits and qualities to create perfect human beings. She asked what I meant and I elaborated and told her that parents, wealthy parents in particular, will most certainly be able to choose traits such as height, longevity, appearances, etc., just like it is already possible to select the gender. “What are they teaching you at this university?” were her exact words. After my sister and I had finished laughing, I told her that this gender selection is really possible due to the fact that only the X and Y chromosome needs to be identified. She couldn’t really believe it, but got really angry and said that this is not natural anymore and that god is the only one who decides the gender and the other traits. I decided to defend this concept of designer babies and asked her further why she thought that this isn’t acceptable but that it is okay for babies to be born without diseases. Why shouldn’t parents have the chance to provide their children with the very best? She couldn’t quite present some objective arguments because she kept saying that it is simply not right to create a baby the way you want it since having a baby is a miracle by god and that scientists have no business interfering with that. I argued that god created the earth and everything in it and that he wanted us to profit from it all, so why shouldn’t we benefit from this advanced technology as well? She starred at me and asked what was wrong with me and if I now consider doing that someday. It went on like this for a couple of minutes with my sister and I laughing even more as my mum told my dad, who had just arrived home, that we had gone crazy and wanted to interfere with god’s creation.

This conversation proved that this growing trend of designer babies will certainly cause a lot of controversy. I honestly don’t know yet what to think of it all, but since I have been reading a lot on this topic lately, I now see things from other perspectives and have therefore become more open minded.

CAJ #7: The prospect of “Designer Babies”: innovative or frightening?

If you had been given the choice, wouldn’t you have wanted to be born with a different eye color, skin tone or a smaller nose? Perhaps you would have chosen to be more athletic, taller or thinner. So, why is it publicly considered so wrong to make use of this advanced technology to provide our children with the very best there is? Why is the prospect of creating healthy, good looking, almost impeccable human beings seen as an abomination to human nature?

As with nearly all medical interventions that have to do with reproductive biology, PGD causes a great deal of controversy, to say the least. It is therefore outlawed in many countries, such as in Austria and Switzerland, and accessible in certain countries, like in the UK, US and China but with limitations to its application. For instance, this procedure is, in addition to detecting diseases, allowed to be used for sex selection to avoid sex-linked diseases but strictly forbidden solely for sex selection. Perhaps I need to first establish that there is a difference between therapy and enhancement. Therapy involves the use of technology to treat or cure diseases, while enhancement is the process of selecting specific traits to “designing” a desired baby. The term “Designer Babies” was originally taken from designer clothes and is currently used by the press and opponents only to indicate the disapproving implication of the transformation of human beings. While the foremost use of PGD is to prevent serious genetic disorders, it is, however, difficult to draw the line as to what a ‘serious’ disorder is. While some people may interpret serious conditions as something interfering with a person’s survival, others think it is something preventing an equal advantage in life quality.

Even though the idea of using advanced reproductive technologies for enhancement has been raising most of the ethical questions, there are still thousands of people who oppose the alteration of the genetic code to screen for genetic disorders. These people argue that being an embryo is as much a part of the lifecycle of a human as an infant, child or adult and that it must not be discarded if a genetic defect has been diagnosed. An embryo is a form of life and should be respected, much like pro-life campaigners (e.g. anti-abortionists) would say. They believe that scientists shouldn’t attempt to “play God” and interfere with his creation. On the other hand, supporters state that if we want to draw a line on Designer Babies, we have to draw it in a different place. We should at least use these advances within genetics to detect diseases. To say to never genetically engineer an embryo because it is not the ‘norm’ in our society and leave children impaired or dying, is not the right ethical course either. Did you know that it is possible for PGD to prevent 5 to 10 percent of all cancers? More recently, PGD has been used to diagnose cancer predisposition syndromes, such as for breast cancer. And so scientists claim that not using these technologies would be immoral and unethical.

There is also an ethical concern regarding the purpose of savior siblings. These embryos are conceived with the aim of saving their sick sibling’s life by providing a tissue-matched blood stem cell transplant. How ethical is it to bring in a life in order to save another? In addition, most of the savior siblings are exposed to a number of medical procedures from the day they were born. Not only do they suffer from physical pain and stress but can also suffer from tremendous psychological stress. They might see themselves as only a means to save their siblings and nothing more.

It is indeed a heated issue that is not likely going to become the “norm” soon. However, it also took people some time to get used to the concept of IVF and now it has become commonplace. But where should the line be drawn in relation to all the ethical concerns? More on the ethical debate in the following posts!

CAJ #6: Computational Genomics

Computers–what do they have to do with genetic engineering?
Well, sequencing the first human genome took an effort of almost ten years, but the introduction of advanced computer technology has enabled to complete a DNA sequence within just a couple of hours. This is achievable through Computational Genomics, also referred to as Computational Genetics, which is used to quickly analyze entire genome sequences of cells and organisms into a set of data. One example of this field is the HGP that could not have been completed in 2003 if it had not been for the developed, computational sequencing methods. Nowadays, there is no need for geneticists to spend endless days in laboratories using highly toxic and radioactive chemicals to sequence genomes, as it used to be the case around the 1970s. Computational genomics is one of the numerous sub fields of computational biology which has become an essential tool to biological discovery and “involves the development and application of data-analytical and theoretical methods, mathematical modeling and computational simulation techniques to the study of biological, behavioral, and social systems” (Wikipedia). This computational science has been used to help create accurate models of the human brain, sequence genomes and much more. The sub field, in particular, focuses more on whole genomes, rather than on single genes, in order to have a better understanding of how the DNA of a living organism determines its biological function at the molecular level–and beyond. It is also intended to be used to sequence genomes of other types of life, such as animals and bacteria.

So, why computational genomics? Genomics are sequenced with computers and algorithms for the following reasons:

• reduction of the cost for detailing genomes; therefore, no need for additional experiments 
• detection of defects in DNA sequence
• fast location of genes by sorting through the genetic material
• identification and simplification of the information by implementation of mathematical algorithms and analysis 

A screenshot of a sequenced genome

Thanks to computational genomics, a great deal of base pairs and sequences have been able to be defined and registered online in the GenBank sequence database (=virtual collection of all available DNA sequences and their protein/base translations). Although considered highly unethical, it will be able to have several positive outcomes, such as:

• individualized healthcare; it could allow for doctors to prescribe medicine and treatments based on the patient’s pre-analyzed genetic patterns 
• finding new cures to rare diseases
• reducing the cost and time for genomic sequencing 

This field of science is, however, still ‘under construction’. There are several other research projects who are currently working on this area to come up with new numerical and computational approaches. But since computing plays a crucial role in the field of genomics, it is predicted that software and system improvements will soon be available.

CAJ #5: The Human Genome

Since the turn of the millennium, a group of scientists have found out more about the human genome–the genetic blueprint for a human being–through the international Human Genome Project (HGP) that was conducted from 1990 to 2003. Why was this project of great importance to genetic engineering? Here is why: Our human body resembles a complicated, encrypted code that scientists attempt to crack through mapping the human genome. Everything we are physically and that makes us unique is controlled by around 25, 000 genes that are located within our DNA (=deoxyribonucleic acid). Each chromosome of our total of 46 chromosomes holds an assortment of genes. These genes create different proteins that, among other things, determine specific structures or functions in the human body. For instance, how the organism looks or how it fights infections. DNA, the building block or molecule of life, comprises the genetic code which is basically the description of who we are. This code contains four letters, each representing a different base/protein: adenine (A) which always pairs with thymine (T), and cytosine (C) which always pairs with guanine (G). The particular order of these bases is extremely important. Long, double-stranded molecules, which are made up of four of these proteins each, are pulled together into the shape of a double helix (see image below). 

The human genome is the complete map of our DNA wherein all the genetic material can be found, the double helix that contains all of our genes. In order to identify all the genes and to determine the sequences of the entire human genome that contains approximately 3.2 billion base pairs, or letters, the HGP was launched in 1990. Because of this international 13-year effort that was sponsored by the Department of Energy and the National Institutes of Health in the US, approximately 25, 000 genes could be analyzed and their DNA sequenced. This made it simpler and more efficient for scientists to screen embryo cells for genetic or chromosomal defects. Kind of awesome, isn’t it?

For a more animated explanation, see the following short video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJycRYBNtwY

Although it would be technically feasible to manipulate the genes of embryo cells to go further than “only” prevent diseases of genetic or chromosomal nature, it is not yet actively applied due to serious ethical concerns worldwide. In February, 2009, when a fertility clinic in Los Angeles offered couples the possibility to choose their baby’s eye and hair color, public outrage ensued. 

This is, however, only the beginning of what genetic engineering will be able to do, especially with the rapid advances within genetics research. So what does this mean for society? According to Dr. Eric Swedin, Professor at Weber State University, “One can easily imagine in 50 to 100 years the popularity of 400-pound football linebackers, workers with superior strength or stamina, workers who excel in mathematics, or workers whose bones and organs can better withstand the effects of zero gravity for functioning in outer space.” While the Human Genome Project has already mapped out almost every gene and chemical base pair of the human genome, scientists continue to uncover the effects and interactions of each gene to learn which genes control specific traits, such as a person’s intelligence or athletic ability. As further techniques are being looked into to achieve these goals, it will not be long until we can modify genes for enhancement. 

Awesome or kind of creepy? You decide for yourself!

CAJ #4: How does it all work?

Imagine being able to engineer your baby, to filter out all the possible medical problems, and perhaps enhance its intelligence, athleticism or looks. Genetic manipulation is indeed no longer just the stuff of science fiction. The rather colloquial term “Designer Baby”, which is mostly used by journalists and not by scientists, made its way from sci-fi movies and into the Oxford Dictionary, where it is defined as “a baby whose genetic makeup has been artificially selected by genetic engineering combined with in-vitro fertilization to ensure the presence or absence of particular genes or characteristics.” In other words, creating a healthy baby with optional preselected, nonmedical qualities by using embryo screening technologies. But how are Designer Babies made? To explain this as efficient as possible, I am going to first give you a step-by-step explanation before delving more deeply into the theory and exact techniques behind this concept.

Before doctors can even begin to verify the genetic makeup of embryos, a number of steps have to be successfully completed beforehand. 

1. An embryo has to be created in a laboratory using in-vitro fertilization (IVF). As most of you may know, IVF, which was first performed in 1978, is the term used to describe the process in which a baby is conceived outside the mother’s womb. This method has been giving otherwise infertile couples a chance to have a baby of their own. For this, a woman’s eggs and a man’s sperm are being put together in test tubes to ensure fertilization. Zygotes (=the earliest developmental stage of an embryo) are formed. 
2. Within the first five days of the embryo’s creation, the zygotes reach the eight-cell stage. A single cell, called blastomere, is then carefully extracted to perform a process known as embryo biopsy. 
3. The cell is genetically analyzed /screened for genetic defects and chromosomal problems. 
4. After approximately 48 hours, after the results are available, healthy embryos (usually one or two) are implanted back into the woman’s uterus to develop. 

Short video to introduce the technology: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjL2XoNIO54 

This genetic screening of embryos that is done prior to implantation is performed through a procedure known as preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD or PIGD), also referred to as preimplantation genetic screening or embryo screening. The innovative diagnosis technology involves the use of several genetic screening mechanisms, depending on the nature of the condition, such as Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization (FISH), Comparative Genomic Hybridization (CGH) or polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to help identify genetic and chromosomal abnormalities in embryos and thereby virtually ensure healthy outcomes. So far, this procedure, in combination with IVF, has been used to:

• check for specific genetic disorders; mainly for monogenic disorders (=disorders caused by a single gene) such as sickle cell disease, spinal muscular atrophy and Huntington disease, and for chromosomal abnormalities such as a balanced translocation or Down Syndrome. There are also infertile couples who choose to conceive through IVF and PGD so as not to pass on their inherited condition.
• increase the chances of a successful pregnancy (mostly for women aged above 35) and reduce spontaneous miscarriages by selecting an embryo that seems to have the greatest potential. Technical drawbacks such as the invasiveness of this procedure as well as the maternal age factor can sometimes work against the desired effect of PGD. 
• to preselect the sex of the baby for medical (when there is a higher risk for either to inherit a specific disease, such as X-linked diseases) and non-medical reasons such as for “family balancing”. Some genetic diseases are indeed specific to one of the genders, such as the disorder hemophilia which usually affects boys. In case there is a history of hemophilia in the family, only female embryos are chosen. 
• specifically select an embryo for the presence of a particular disability, such as deafness, so that the child would share the same characteristics with its parents. 
• to treat a sick sibling by selecting embryos that have the same tissue types as the sibling to become a suitable donor. These children are called “savior siblings” as their foremost purpose is to provide an organ or cell transplant to their siblings who suffer from diseases, such as leukemia or Fanconi anemia, that are only treatable with hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. For this, fertilized zygotes are tested for genetic compatibility and exclusion of genetic disorders. (See also the novel My Sister’s Keeper and its film adaptation)

PGD has first been successfully performed in 1989 and even though it is considered a highly controversial procedure, it became increasingly used during the 1990s to detect severe genetic diseases, such as Tay Sachs disease and Duchenne’s muscular dystrophy, and prevent them from being transferred to future generations. As it is only a recent development, this procedure does involve risks, such as premature birth, birth defects and developmental delays, but they have been rare so far. It is, however, a very invasive procedure that is prohibited in numerous countries, and one that is highly expensive. PGD could also be easily used to select traits like intelligence, height, looks and considerably more. The debate is over the ethical aspect and whether it should be legal to interfere with such characteristics when there is no medical reason to do so.

More on the technologies and the ethical side can be found in my next posts. Bye for now! ;-)

CAJ #3: Average Joe Narrative Text

… about how ‘Designer Babies’ might affect the life of an average Joe in 2039 

Friday, June 8, 2039: It is quite early in the morning but I am unusually wide awake. I cannot help but think if my husband and I should have been more open-minded and considered providing our child with the very best. Today’s basketball game at Benjamin Franklin High School, Philadelphia is the reason I am feeling slightly guilty. This game is going to determine whether or not my 18-year-old son Joe will be awarded a sports scholarship. He has been working extremely hard to get here and even though I know he is going to do the best he can, I doubt it will be good enough. That is, unless the couch who will be selecting one of the team players takes into consideration that two of those boys are genetically designed and that this is beyond unfair to the rest of the team. However, I do not think he will. I used to read a lot of articles about infertile couples going through IVF to be given the chance to conceive and others using the technology to be able to choose the baby’s sex. But it had never crossed my mind that the technology could become advanced to a point where couples can preselect athletic traits for their children. How is anyone supposed to even compete against such a ‘perfect’ person? Isn’t the world competitive enough as it is? I have seen those two boys play before and it is like they were born to play sports. It is almost eerie, although they seem to be just like any other of their classmates. Still, I hope Joe can somehow impress the couch as he is truly talented...for a ‘traditional’ boy.  

CAJ #2: Introduction to Designer Babies

Hey Everyone,

Welcome to my Current Affairs Journal! This project is certainly going to be a time-consuming challenge, but I hope you will find at least something interesting about it. I chose the highly controversial topic of Designer Babies for my Current Affairs Journal simply because I have always been particularly interested in the advanced technology that is used to “design” a baby outside the mother’s body.

So, as I started reading through some articles on the topic, I realized that even though most of us are somewhat familiar with this growing trend of designer babies, there is far more to it than we are aware of. Did you know that the concept of designer babies make the social as well as the scientific world fear for the future? Isn’t it supposed to be providing infertile couples with the chance of a healthy child, nothing more? How much effort is put into the procedure and how refined is the technology?

Nowadays, advanced reproductive technologies such as in-vitro fertilization (IVF) and a procedure known as preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) allow doctors to genetically modify embryos and thereby reduce the chances of genetic disorders, creating ‘Designer Babies’. While the idea of genetically engineered embryos was primarily intended for infertile couples to select embryos with healthy genes, it is now feared that it will not be long until people will eventually desire to preselect specified traits so that their children can turn out to be impeccable. Selecting the gender of a child is already possible due to the fact that only the X or Y chromosome needs to be identified; however, other traits are more difficult due to the amount of genetic material required. Recent studies showed that every single chromosome in an embryo can be scanned for genes involved in anything from Down Syndrome to lactose intolerance using a single microchip. The question arises: how advanced is this and what are the ethics behind this?

As mentioned in the beginning of the post, there is indeed a good deal to write about. I am looking forward to elaborating these questions in my following posts as well as to discussing the laws behind designer babies, the exact techniques and new developments.  

CAJ #1: Abstract for Designer Babies

This Current Affairs Journal aims to provide readers and myself an insight into the highly controversial topic of Designer Babies that makes the social world fear for the future. The focus lies on the exact techniques and new developments as well as on the laws and ethics behind this advanced technology that is used to “design” a baby outside the mother’s body. Further aspects might follow if they are considered relevant to the topic. The amount of information used to discuss and elaborate the subjects of the CAJ was collected, in from of articles and scientific papers, and summarized from the Internet. While working on the journal, it has become more evident that the reproductive technologies behind the concept of designer babies, such as preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and Computational Genomics, are far more advanced than we are aware of. It is believed that in the foreseeable future, wealthy parents will be able to preselect all sorts of qualities such as height and longevity to create a world with impeccable human beings. Due to this technological advancement, it can be predicted that more couples will be inclined to opt for conceiving this way and that this growing trend will undoubtedly influence the future.