ev·er·more

From changing eye color to eliminating the risk of cancer, CRISPR has it all. CRISPR is a gene editing device that will take a gene and replace it with a new one. Whether you want to permanently change your hair color or get rid of deadly cancer, CRISPR can do it.

The biggest cause of death in the world (over 70%) are non-communicable diseases, or NCD’s. These diseases, due to genetic mutations in a person’s DNA sequence, can be treated by CRISPR. One of the biggest causes of death around the world could be cured by this miniscule device.

Sickle cell disease is an NCD that was thought to be incurable. Recently, the FDA approved the treatment of CRISPR to cure sickle cell disease. This accomplishment is not only a big step for the biotechnology industry, but also paves the way for treatments of harsher diseases, for example, cancer.

CRISPR may seem like a knight in shining armor, having the potential to save millions of lives. However, what happens if it gets into the wrong hands? What ethical problems arise with the use of CRISPR?

For starters, CRISPR can edit and change any gene, meaning it could make one person stronger, faster, smarter, etc. than others. Some may misuse CRISPR as a means to create an unfair advantage for themselves. In the wrong hands, CRISPR could cause disaster.

Not only could CRISPR be used with bad intentions, but is it ethically permissible to use CRISPR at all? When we test CRISPR treatments on humans, we have to test it on the embryo. Is it ethical to test a treatment with the risk of death and permanent effects on an embryo that will grow to be a living, breathing human?

Ethics are the moral principles that govern a person’s behavior or the conducting of an activity. In the case of CRISPR, at what age is it morally okay to test an embryo? At what age is that embryo considered a human?

The status of an embryo is not clear. We do not know whether to treat the embryo like a ball of cells or a complete person with unalienable rights. If, in fact, this embryo has rights, which rights are given? By testing CRISPR on the embryo, are we denying the embryo its rights? Are we crossing a line?

Although there are severe consequences by testing CRISPR on the embryo, not testing it on the embryo has just as many consequences. By choosing not to test CRISPR on embryos, we lose vital research that could have been used for disease cures.

In conclusion, there are pros and cons to CRISPR treatments. The question is, do the drawbacks of CRISPR persuade us from using it, or are the upsides so compelling we continue forward?