A COUPLE IS asked by a futuristic fertility physician to decide which traits they wish for their unborn child. From a menu not unlike one sees in a restaurant, one can choose eye color, height, sex, musical talents, athletic abilities and intelligence, to name just a few. The chosen genes are inserted into the woman's egg, which is then fertilized and implanted in the woman's uterus to achieve pregnancy.
Too futuristic and far-fetched? Maybe. But then again, maybe not. Recently, scientists presented their first interpretations of the human genome, part of an ongoing process that is expected in time to revolutionize medicine by treating disease at its genetic roots.
Also, scientists in Portland reported they inserted a gene from a jellyfish into a monkey egg, fertilized the egg, and produced a baby monkey with the added gene in its cells. This work represents the first time the techniques of genetic engineering were used to alter a primate, intending that the change would be passed on to future generations.
Can human genetic engineering be far behind? Is science once again rushing ahead with a technique before we know how to understand and respond to the ethical dilemmas engendered by it?
Scientists, politicians and others believe that society needs to grapple with two major controversial aspects of genetic engineering before these techniques are made available to the public.
One concern is whether genetic engineering should be limited to the treatment of diseases or should include enhancement therapies that would boost traits such as height, strength and intelligence. The other aspect involves the mechanisms used to make any of these genetic alterations.
On one hand, there is somatic gene therapy, where genetic techniques are used to alter the genetic makeup of specific body cells, for example heart tissue or brain cells.
Alternatively, there is germ line gene therapy, where changes are made in the genes of reproductive cells (the egg in the monkey experiment), thus allowing changes to be passed on to future generations.
The questions engendered by these specific aspects of genetic engineering are as follows:
Would genetic engineering lead to genetic determinism based on the premise that biology and behavior are totally controlled by our genes?
In the long run, a misplaced emphasis on the influence of our genes might be the most negative consequence of genetic engineering. We must also consider the social variables that allow genes to express themselves.
