Genetic Engineering
Final Paper
Sociological Theory
Genetic Engineering
The debate program I chose was Intelligence Squared and was on the Prohibition of Genetically Engineered Babies. The debate was mediated by John Donvan and took place in February 2013. The two views were for and against the prohibition of genetically modifying the human genome. To start off the debate two debaters on each side stated their case. For prohibiting were Sheldon Krimsky, a professor at Tuft’s University and chair of The Genetic Council For Responsible Genetics, and Robert Wintson, a professor of science and society as well as an emeritus professor of fertility studies at Imperial College, London. On the opposite end were Nita Farahany, a research professor at Duke’s institute for Genome Sciences and Policy and a member of the Presidential Commission for the study of bioethical issues, and Lee Silver, a professor of molecular biology at Princeton University and author of the book “Challenging Nature”. In the argument against banning genetic modification of babies I chose Nita Farahany’s argument. She started her debate by stating that she only wanted to convince the listener of two things: that we already can and have safely genetically engineered babies and that a middle ground of prudent vigilance, public oversight and debate is better than outright prohibition. She said that prohibition calls for an outright and complete ban on genetic engineering of babies and is no more outlandish than embryotic screening and taking prenatal vitamins. This technology has the possibility to avoid mitochondrial dysfunctions that cause rare but serious disease such as heart failure, dementia, and even death in the one in five thousand cases that a child is born with this defect. Mitochondrial DNA is passed from mother to every child, even if inactive, and only genetic engineering can safeguard this. The two techniques that are used are pronuclear transfer and maternal spindle transfer and at least thirty
Sociological Theory
Genetic Engineering
The debate program I chose was Intelligence Squared and was on the Prohibition of Genetically Engineered Babies. The debate was mediated by John Donvan and took place in February 2013. The two views were for and against the prohibition of genetically modifying the human genome. To start off the debate two debaters on each side stated their case. For prohibiting were Sheldon Krimsky, a professor at Tuft’s University and chair of The Genetic Council For Responsible Genetics, and Robert Wintson, a professor of science and society as well as an emeritus professor of fertility studies at Imperial College, London. On the opposite end were Nita Farahany, a research professor at Duke’s institute for Genome Sciences and Policy and a member of the Presidential Commission for the study of bioethical issues, and Lee Silver, a professor of molecular biology at Princeton University and author of the book “Challenging Nature”. In the argument against banning genetic modification of babies I chose Nita Farahany’s argument. She started her debate by stating that she only wanted to convince the listener of two things: that we already can and have safely genetically engineered babies and that a middle ground of prudent vigilance, public oversight and debate is better than outright prohibition. She said that prohibition calls for an outright and complete ban on genetic engineering of babies and is no more outlandish than embryotic screening and taking prenatal vitamins. This technology has the possibility to avoid mitochondrial dysfunctions that cause rare but serious disease such as heart failure, dementia, and even death in the one in five thousand cases that a child is born with this defect. Mitochondrial DNA is passed from mother to every child, even if inactive, and only genetic engineering can safeguard this. The two techniques that are used are pronuclear transfer and maternal spindle transfer and at least thirty