ElizabethGriffith

ProfessorNewport

English102

May4,2017

GeneticEngineeringandWhyItIsUnethical

Geneticengineeringisaveryhottopicrightnowbecauseoftheethicalquestions

thatarise.Geneticengineeringisinitsinfancyatthemoment,butitwillbepossibleinhumans

inthenearfuturewhichiswhymanyscientistsarequestioningthemoralityofgenetic

engineeringinhumans.TheFrankensteinEffecttiesintogeneticengineeringbecauseshouldwe

geneticallyengineerpeoplejustbecausewecan?Isitreallyprogress?Althoughgenetic

engineeringinhumanscouldpotentiallysavelives,itisunethicaltoperformrightnowbecause

anothereugenicsmovementcouldresult,therearetoomanyunknowns,adividewilloccur

betweenthegeneticallyengineeredandthenongeneticallyengineered,babieswouldjust

becomeaproductandnotanactualpersonanymore,disorderslikeAutismorDownsSyndrome

wouldbecomeeradiated,andnationalsecuritycouldbearisk.

Geneticengineeringisunethicalbecauseitisaverydangerouspathtodestruction.There

aremanythingsthatcouldhappenifhumansweretobegeneticallyengineered.Genetic

engineeringisnotpossibleatthemoment,butitwillbeintheverynearfuture.Wealreadyhave

thetechnologywejustneedtofigureouthowtouseitcorrectlyandwhatwillhappenwhenitis

used.Thedangersofgeneticengineeringareallsocialproblemsthatwouldarisejustlikewith

anynewtechnologythatemerges(Specterpar.5557).MarcyDarnovsky,oftheCenterfor

GeneticandSociety,said,Thesocialdangersofcreatinggeneticallymodifiedhumanbeings
cannotbeoverstated(Specterpar.56).Societywouldbechangedgreatlyifgeneticengineering

wasperformedonhumanswhichiswhyitisunethical.

Manypeoplecountertheclaimofgeneticengineeringbeingunethicalwithreasonssuch

asinvitrofertilization(IVF)andpreimplantationgeneticdiagnosis(PGD)arethesamethingas

geneticengineeringandparentswillstillwantthebestfortheirchildrensotheywillnotmisuse

geneticengineering,butthesereasonsareinvalid.IVFandPGDarenotthesameasgenetic

engineeringbecausegeneticengineeringwillbefarmoreadvancedthanIVFandPGDare.

GeneticengineeringcanaltertheentiregenomeofapersonwhileIVFandPGDcanonlyalter

anembryo.Parentswillstillwantthebestfortheirchildren,butitwillbeadifferentsetofthings

thattheywillwantfortheirchildren.Parentswillwanttheirchildrentobethebestpossible

human,insteadofjustwantingthemtobehappy.Becauseofthis,parentswilltreattheirchildren

likeobjectsandnothumans(Masci427428).Societywillbeverydifferentfromthewayitis

todayandnotinagoodway.Oncewestartonthepathofgeneticengineering,wecannotgo

back.

WhatIsGeneticEngineering?

Tounderstandwhygeneticengineeringisunethical,onefirstneedstounderstandwhat

geneticengineeringisandhowitworks.Geneticengineeringiswhenascientistmanuallyadds

newDNAtoanorganism.Themaingoalofgeneticengineeringistoaddatraittotheorganism

thatitdidntalreadyhave.Theaddedtraitwouldbepassedontotheengineeredpersons

offspringandtheoffspringsoffspringandsoon(Baird1325).Forexample,ifachilddidnt

haveblueeyes,ascientistcouldaddthegenetothechildsgenomeandthatchildwouldthenbe

bornwithblueeyesandsowouldthechildschildrenandsoon.
 Onealsoneedstounderstandthecurrenttechnologyforgeneticengineeringinorderto

understandwhatgeneticengineeringis.ItiscalledCrisprCas9.CrisprandCas9aretwo

differentparts.CrisprisabacteriaandCas9isanenzyme.Crisprisprogrammableandidentifies

andtargetstheunwantedgenesinthebody.CrisprproducesatypeofRNAthatleadsCas9in

therightdirection.Cas9thencutsthegenethatisunwanted.Asoftoday,CrisprCas9isthemost

efficientandcheaptoolforeditinggenes.Ithasnotbeentestedonhumans,onlyanimals,

becausescientistssimplydonotknowwhatwouldhappenifthistechnologywasusedon

humans(Wheelwrightpar.35).

InVitroFertilization(IVF)andPreimplantationGeneticDiagnosis(PGD)

IVFistheprocessofextractinganeggfromawomanandfertilizingitinalaboratory

outsideofthewomansuterusandthenreimplantingitbackintothemother.PGDistheprocess

oftakingasinglecellfromthepreviouslysaidwomansfertilizedembryoandtestingitfor

diseasesthatarelifethreatening.IVFandPGDdonothavetheabilitytopasstraitsontotheir

offspringlikegeneticengineeringbecauseyouarenotalteringanentiregenome,justone

embryo(Adams543).Forexample,ifawomanoramanhadHuntingtonsDiseaseintheir

family,theycoulduseIVFandPGDtoscreenthewomansembryosforHuntingtonsDisease.

TheywouldthenbeabletopicktheembryosthatdidnthaveHuntingtonsDiseaseandre

implantthosebackintothewomansuterussothebabywouldbebornwithoutHuntingtons

disease.

ManyscientistsarguethatIVFandPGDarethesameasgeneticengineering,buttheyare

not.ThebiggestdifferenceisthatIVFandPGDarenotpasseddownthroughgenerations.IVF

andPGDareusedtoscreenembryosforlifethreateningdiseasesandcannotbeusedtoscreen
forcosmetictraitslikeeyecolororhaircolorlikegeneticengineeringcan.PGDcanbeusedto

screenforgender,butitcostsmoreandistheonlycosmeticliketraitthatPGDcanscreenfor

(Baird15).PGDcanterasedisordersordiseasesorstartanothereugenicsmovement,but

geneticengineeringcan.IfwealreadyhavePGDthatcanscreenforlifethreateningdiseases,

thenwhydoweneedgeneticengineering?EdwardLaniphier,presidentandCEOofSangamo

BioSciences,abiotechnologycompany,saysthatWecannotthinkofanytherapeuticor

humanitarianjustificationformodifyingthehumangermline.BecauseWealreadyhave

PGD,(Adams533)Lanphierisright,wedonotneedtousegeneticengineeringbecausePGDis

usefulenough.Itweedsoutthelifethreateningdiseasessothatparentscanhavehealthychildren

andthatisallthatweneed(Adams533).TheFrankensteineffectcomesintoplayherebecause

shouldwegoonestepfurtherfromPGDandIVFandgeneticallyengineerpeoplejustbecause

wecan?Isthatprogress?

ManyscientistssaythatwhenIVFandPGDfirstcameout,peopleweremortifiedlike

theyareaboutgeneticengineeringtoday,butwithIVFandPGDallyoucandecideforyour

babyisgenderandwhetherornotthebabywouldhavealifethreateningdisease.Withgenetic

engineering,parentscanchoosecosmetictraitstheywanttheirchildtohavealongwith

intelligenceorotherabilitieslikeathleticism.ThisisfardifferentfromIVFandPGDbecause

thismeansthatparentsarechoosingthingsfortheirbabythatwontnecessarilyenhancetheir

life.Enhancingababyslifewouldbechoosingtonothavealifethreateningdisease,not

choosingthebabieseyecolor.Enhancingababieslifeforanyotherreasonotherthanahealth

reasonisunethicalbecausethatwouldbethestartofanothereugenicsmovement.Thatwouldbe

weedingoutundesirabletraitsjustlikeinthemanyeugenicmovements(Baird16).The
FrankensteinEffectonceagaintiesintothisargumentbecausejustbecausewecanchoose

certaintraitsforourbabies,shouldwe?Shouldwechangethenaturalprocessofcreatinga

humanlifejustbecausewecan?

EugenicsandGeneticEngineering

Tofurtherunderstandwhygeneticengineeringisunethicalonefirstneedstoknowthe

historyofeugenics.Thefirsteugenicsmovementbeganinthelate1800searly1900s.This

movementsurroundedtheencouragementofbreedinghumanbeingsfordesirabletraits.

Individualswithcognitivedisabilitiesandjustanysortofdisabilitywereforcefullysterilized.

Peopleofracesotherthanwhitewerealsoseenasundesirableandforcefullysterilized.After

WorldWar1,eugenicsbecamemorepopularwithorganizationsandevenlawspassedinthe

favorofsterilization.WhenHitlergainedpower,eugenicswasmorepopularthaneverbefore.

HitlerwantedtopurifythehumanracebykillingmillionsofJewishpeopleandmanyother

ethnicities.HewantedtocreatearacethatwassuperiortoallracescalledtheAryans.These

peoplehadblondehairandblueseyes.Hitlereventuallylostpower,buthewasnotthelast

dictatortoleadaeugenicsmovement.In1994,theRwandagenocideoccurredandanother

genocideoccurredalsointhe1990sinYugoslavia(Adams541542).Itisimportanttonote

thatthereisalonglistofothergenocidesandeugenicmovementsthathaveoccurredthroughout

thecourseofhistorybesidestheonesmentionedabove.

Theprobabilityofhistoryrepeatingitselfistoogreatwhichwasprovedbytheprevious

paragraph.Thishighprobabilityofanothereugenicsmovementhappeningiswhygenetic

engineeringisunethical.Anothereugenicsmovementwillhappen,butwiththeeradicationof

unfavorabletraitsinsteadofraces.Westudyhistorysowecanlearnfromit,butthatdoesnt
alwayshappen.Thefactthatvariouseugenicmovementshavehappenedshowsthatanotherone

willeventuallyhappen,butinadifferentwaythanbefore.Thereisnoescapingitandgenetically

engineeringsomeoneisthestartofthenextmoderneugenicsmovement(Masci432).The

Frankensteineffecttiesinherebecauseshouldwepossiblystartanothereugenicsmovementin

thenameofscience?
 AnotherreasonwhygeneticengineeringisunethicalisbecausetheeradicationofAutism

orDownsSyndromecouldoccur.Intheeugenicsmovement,anykindofdisabilitywasseenas

undesirablesothepersonwiththedisabilitywasforcefullysterilized,butwithgenetic

engineeringwecantakeoutapersonsdisabledgeneentirely.DavidMasciinhisarticle,

DesignerHumansexplainsthedefinitionofeugenicsasimprovingthehumanracethrough

controlledscientificbreeding(Masci

431).Thisisexactlywhatwewouldbe

doingtothehumanracewithgenetic

engineering.Diseaseswouldbeerasedfirst

andthendisorderswouldbetheonlything

leftwhichwouldcreatetheperfecthuman

race(Masci431432).Thistiesinwiththe

Frankensteineffectbecauseitraisesthe

questionofjustbecausewehavetheabilitytocurecertaindisabilitiesanddisordersshould

we?Manypeoplesaythathavingsomeoneintheirlifewithadisabilityenhancestheirlife

becauseitshowsthemthateveryoneisdifferentandweneedtoenjoythelittlethingsinlife.

Havingsomeoneinyourlifewithadisabilityputsyourownlifeintoperspectiveandifweget

ridofdisabilitiesthenourliveswillnothaveperspectiveorquality.

TheeradicationofAutismorDownsSyndromebringsmetodiscussthetopicof

tolerance.Toleranceisnottreatinganindividualdifferentlybecauseofanyreason.Toleranceis

notthinkinglessofsomeonebecauseyoufeelthatyouaresuperior.Tohavetolerancemeansto

accepteveryoneandeverythingthatmakesthemthem,notshunningpeoplebecauseyouthink
thattheydontdeserveyourtoleranceordontmatchuptoyoursuccess.Toleranceisnot

prejudiceordiscrimination.Toleranceisnoteradicatingdisordersthatarentevenharmfulor

understoodcompletely.Toleranceisrealizingthatpersonswithdisabilitiesmakeyourlifebetter,

notworse.Personswithdisabilitiesshowusthathumansarenotperfect,takingawaypeople

withdisabilitiescompletelyisnottolerance,itisthecompleteoppositeoftolerance.Taking

awaypeoplewithdisabilitieswouldbetakingawayourhumanityandtheprogresswehave

madeoftoleranceandacceptancethusfar.

WhatDoesGeneticEngineeringMeanforBabies?
 Anotherreasonwhygeneticengineeringis

unethicalisbecausebabieswouldjustbecomea

consumergoodandnotanactualbaby.Children

wouldnotbelovedthesamewaythattheyaretoday

becausehavingachildwouldjustturnintoa

competitionofwhatparentcouldhavethebestbaby,

likeaconsumergood.Ifparentscanpickandchoose

howtheywanttheirbabytobeandlookthenisnt

thatjustlikepickingthebestappleatthegrocery

store?Manypeoplearguethatparentswillstillbe

parentsandnotgooverboardwiththeprocessofgeneticengineering,butthatisnottruebecause

isnttheactofpickingoutgenesforyourchildtohavealreadytreatingthatchildlikea

consumergood?Childrenandsocietywouldntbehappyanymorebecauseeverythingwillbe

onebigcompetition,liketheconsumerindustry(Masci428).Havingchildrenwontbeabout

wantingtoactuallyhaveachildanymoreitwillbeaboutwhosechildisthebestchild,likea

consumergood.Lovewillnotexistanymore.Theprocessofoneparenthavingasuperiorchild

willwanttomakeotherparentshavesuperiorchildrenalso.Itwillbecomeanimageissue.It

willbethesameasparentsflashytheirshiny,expensive,newcarstotheirfriends,exceptwith

babies.

Manypeoplealsoarguethatparentswillstillwantthebestfortheirchildrenandforthem

tobehappysotheywillonceagainnotgooverboardwithpickingouttraitsfortheirchild,but

thisisalsonottrue.Parentswontbeparentsanymore.LeonKass,abioethicsprofessoratthe
UniversityofChicago,says,Toreallyproducetheoptimumbaby,youdhavetoturn

procreationintomanufacturing,whichwoulddegradeparenthood.(Masci429)Thesimpleact

ofgeneticallyengineeringachildisgoingoverboardbecausehavingachildisntaboutactually

wantingachildanymore,itsabouthavingthebestproduct.Havingachildwillturninto

manufacturingachild,likeaconsumergood(Masci428429).TheFrankensteinEffecttiesin

herealsobecauseisitreallyprogressifchildrenaretreatedlikeconsumergoods?

Theideaofbabiesbecomingconsumergoodswillbefurtherenhancedbytheclass

divisionsthatwillcomealongwithgeneticengineering.Geneticengineeringwillalmost

certainlybeveryexpensivewhenitfirstbecomesavailabledividingthepeoplewhocanafford

geneticengineeringwiththeoneswhocannot.Wehaveclassdivisionstoday,butnotlikethis

(Baird1516).Classdivisionstodayarebasedonwealthandopportunitynotsuperiorgenes.A

completelynewclasswilldevelopanddividethehumanracefurtherthanitalreadyis.There

willbesuperiorpeoplewhoaregeneticallyengineeredandinferiorpeoplewhoarenot

geneticallyengineered.Thesuperiorpeoplewillleadbecausetheyhavethebestgenesandthe

inferiorpeoplewillbelikehomelesspeopletodayexcepttheywillbehomelessandpoor

becauseoftheirgenes,notbecauseofalackofmoney(Masci429430).TheFrankensteineffect

comesintoplayherebecauseisitreallyprogressifonlycertainpeoplearegenetically

engineeredandnotall?

Scientistsarguethatovertime,geneticengineeringwillbecomeavailabletoeveryoneso

therewillnolongerbeadividebetweenpeople,butwhataboutthedivisionthathasalready

occurredbeforethetechnologybecomeswidelyavailable(Weinberger89)?Ifeventually

everyonecanaffordgeneticengineeringtherewillstillbegrownpeoplewhoarenotgenetically
engineeredwhowillbeseenasinferior.Thedividewillstillbethere(Masci430).Then,once

theungeneticallyengineeredpeopleeventuallydieoffandeveryoneintheentireworld

becomesgeneticallyengineered,willweactuallybehumansanymore?

WillGeneticallyEngineeredPeopleBeHumans?

Humanityisnotbeingperfect.Havingtheperfectsetoftraitsthatgeneticengineering

willgiveapersonisnothuman.Nosinglehumanisperfectandnevershouldbe.Onceweve

crossedthelineofcreatingaperfecthuman,wecannevergobackandthathumanisnota

humananymore.Ahumanisnotmadetofitacertaincriteriaandnevershouldbe.Allhumans

aredifferentandunique.Everyoneshouldbeuniqueandstandoutfromoneanother,notblendin

likegeneticengineeringwillultimatelydotous.

Becauseofclassdivisionsthatwillarise,therewillbetwodifferentraces,onewhois

superiorandonewhoisinferior.Thesuperiorracewillbeakindofsuperhumanthatwillform.

Designerbabies:EugenicsRepackagedorConsumerOptions?ByStephenL.Bairdisapeer

reviewedjournalarticleabouttheeffectsofgeneticengineering.Hemagnifiesthefactthatonce

westartgeneticengineering,wewontbeabletostop.Wewillcreateasuperhumanracewhich

willresultinanothereugenicsmovement.Becauseofanothereugenicsmovementhappening,

babieswilljustbeseenasaconsumergood,justlikehowpeoplewereseenintheeugenics

movement.Seeingbabiesasconsumeroptionswillhappenandcauseanothereugenics

movement.Bairdcountersthisargumentbyusingtheexampleoforgantransplants.Heexplains

thatbecauseorgantransplantsareunnatural,likegeneticengineering,whatiforgantransplants

wereseenasunethicaltodaylikegeneticengineeringisseen(Baird1516)?Bairdmisseda

crucialpointtothiscounterargumentbecauseorgantransplantsarecompletelydifferentfrom
geneticengineering.Organtransplantsaredonetosavesomeoneslifenotenhanceit.Genetic

engineeringisforthesolepurposeofenhancingoneslifeandorgantransplantswillnevercreate

asuperhumanraceormakeapersonsuperiortoanyoneelse.

WhatWouldGeneticEngineeringMeanforTheWorld?

Anothervalidpointagainstgeneticengineeringisthepossibilityofageneticarmsrace

(Metzlpar.2).ThispointwasbroughtupbyJamieMetzlinhermagazinearticle,Genetic

Engineering&TheFutureofMankindaboutwhatgeneticengineeringcouldleadto.Metzl

pointsoutthatChinahasahistoryofpopulationcontrolandoftenripchildrenfromtheirhomes

sotheycanbetrainedfortheOlympics.ThismeansthatChinawouldmostlikelyengineertheir

childrentobethebestathletes,scholars,etc.TheU.S.andothercountrieswouldthenhaveto

catchupwithChina.ThisissueisextremelyrelevantintodaysworldconsideringtheU.Sand

Chinahaveneverbeenonthebestterms.Chinaisalsocurrentlyresearchingthegenomesof

highlyintelligentpeopleandtryingtofindthespecificgeneforgeniussowhywouldntthey

jumpatthechancetogeneticallyengineertheirchildrentobethebestofthebest?Thiswould

causeanationalsecurityissuebecauseofallofthedifferentviewpointsongeneticengineering

thatdifferentcountrieswillhave.Thesedifferencesinopinionscouldcauseglobalwarfare

(Metzlpar.215).Morequestionsariseinthisargumentalso,shouldwepotentiallycauseglobal

warfarejustbecausewecanmakethemostsuperiorhumans?Whenistherisktoogreat?

TheUnknown

Therearetoomanyunknownswithgeneticengineering.Scientistsdonotknowwhat

wouldhappenifanactualpersonwasgeneticallyengineered.Thepersoncouldsufferamutation

thatwouldcausethemseriousharmlaterinlifeorearlyinlife.Thiseffectismultipliedbythe
factthatageneticallyengineeredpersonwouldpassdownhis/hergenestohis/heroffspring.The

wholegenepoolwouldbeeffectedandchangedforever.Geneticallyengineeredpeoplecanalso

passtheirgenesdownthroughsexualintercoursewhichcouldpossiblyalterthewholegenepool

oftheentireworldgivingeveryoneanunwantedmutation(Adams533534).GeorgeAnnas,of

BostonUniversity,says,Theproblemhereisthatdifferentgenesreactdifferentlywitheach

other,sothatwhenyouaddnewones,youdontknowwhatyouregoingtoget(Masci436).

Annasiscorrect,noscientistknowswhatwouldhappeniftheyweretogeneticallyengineer

someonewhichiswhyitshouldnotbedone.Scientiststodayarejustsimplynotsmartenoughto

understandwhatwouldhappenifapersonwasgeneticallyengineeredanditwouldbeagrave

mistaketotrytogeneticallyengineersomeoneanytimesoon(Masci436).TheFrankenstein

Effectappliesherealsobecauseshouldwepotentiallychangetheentiregenepooljustbecause

wecan?Shouldwepotentiallyputtheentireworldindangerinthenameofscienceand

research?

IsItWorthIt?

Thereisapossibilitythatgeneticengineeringcouldcurediseasesandsavelives,butit

couldalsoharmsomeoneandthatpersonsoffspringandmaybeeventheentireworldbecause

oftheunknowns.Rightnow,geneticengineeringistooriskyandunderdeveloped.Many

scientistsinWashingtonD.C.havecalledforamoratorium,orban,ontheresearchofgenetic

engineeringuntilmoreisknown.Thesescientistswanttodiscussthepossibleprosandconsof

geneticengineeringandtheethics.Althoughbansandmoratoriumsaresomewhatuseless,

becausetheyarentalaw,manyscientistsfromallovertheworldagreethattheethicsanduses

ofgeneticengineeringneedstobediscussedmorebeforeanyactualhumanexperimentsbegin
(Adams539540).Scientistsallovertheworldagreethatgeneticengineeringisunethicaland

areaskingotherscientisttoagreewiththemwhichmaybeawarningsigntostayawayfrom

geneticengineering.Eventhoughgeneticengineeringhasthepossibilityofcuringdiseasesand

savinglives,itcouldcauseevenworseunwantedmutationsifwegoforwardwithoutknowing

everythinggeneticengineeringwillactuallydotoaperson.

Inasurvey,Iconductedaboutgeneticengineeringinhumans,amajorityofpeoplehad

fearsaboutgeneticengineering.Manypeoplewerefearfulofitfavoringthewealthy,another

eugenicsmovementhappening,peoplewillnolongerbeunique,andtheunknownsideeffects.

Somepeopledidnthaveanyfears,butthefearsthatpeopledidhavearevalid.Someofthefears

peoplehaveareexactlythereasonswhygeneticengineeringisunethicalsuchasthepossibility

ofanothereugenicsmovementandtheunknownsideeffects.Thesefearsarethereasonswhy

manyscientistshavecalledforabanongeneticengineeringandwhygeneticengineeringis

unethical.

Inconclusion,geneticengineeringisunethicalbecauseofthepossibilityofanother

eugenicsmovement,therearetoomanyunknowns,babieswouldbecomeaconsumergood,and

certaindisorderscouldbecomeerasedcompletely.AsHankGreely,alawyerandethicistat

StanfordUniversity,sayshecantreallysaywhatitisgoodfor.(Regaladopar.30)He

explainshowgeneticengineeringisntmedicallynecessarybecausewehavePGD.Heisright,

geneticengineeringisntmedicallynecessary.Whateverwaygeneticengineeringisusedforis

anunethicalway.

Ipredictthatifweusegeneticengineeringforreasonsotherthanmedicalones,itwill

ruinthehumanrace.Wewontbehumansanymorewewillbeexperiments.Anothereugenics
movementwillhappenandthehumanracewillultimatelycollapsebecauseofthis.Ipropose

thatmuchmoreresearchneedstobedoneongeneticengineeringbeforeiteverbecomes

possible.Researchonthepossiblesideeffectsneedtobeconducted.Weneedtoknowwhatwill

happentoapersonifthatpersonisgeneticallyengineered.JenniferDoudna,abiologistatthe

UniversityofCalifornia,Berkley,said,Ifeelthattheresearchthatneedstobedonerightnowis

tounderstandsafety,efficacy,anddelivery.(Regaladopar.45)Doudnaisright,researchneeds

tobedoneontheramificationsongeneticengineeringbeforewegoanyfurtherwithgenetic

engineeringinhumans.
 WorksCited

Adams, Jill U. "Manipulating the Human Genome." CQ Researcher, vol. 25, no. 23, 19 June

2015, pp. 529-52. http://libproxy.uww.edu:2648/cqresearcher/document.php?

id=cqresrre2015061900&type=hitlist&num=1. Accessed 10 Apr. 2017.

Baird, Stephen L. "Designer Babies: Eugenics Repackaged or Consumer Options?" The

Technology Teacher, Apr. 2007, pp. 12-16. EBSCOHost.

http://libproxy.uww.edu:2059/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=784da168-de60-40c1-846f-

68e7eccd7529%40sessionmgr4010&vid=7&hid=4112. Accessed 10 Apr. 2017.

Masci, David. "'Designer' Humans." The CQ Researcher, vol. 11, no. 19, May 2001, pp. 425-

40. CQ Researcher. http://libproxy.uww.edu:2648/cqresearcher/document.php?

id=cqresrre2001051800&type=hitlist&num=0. Accessed 10 Apr. 2017.

Metzl, Jamie. "Genetic Engineering & The Future of Humankind." Ivy Magazine, Apr. 2015.

http://www.geneticsandsociety.org/article.php?id=8500. Accessed 10 Apr. 2017.

Regalado, Antonio. "Engineering the Perfect Baby." MIT Technology Review, 5 Mar.

2015. EBSCOhost. https://www.technologyreview.com/s/535661/engineering-the-perfect-

baby/. Accessed 10 Apr. 2017.

Specter, Michael. "The Gene Hackers." The New Yorker, Nov. 2016,

www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/11/16/the-gene-hackers. Accessed 12 Apr. 2017.

Weinberger, Jerry. "What's at the Bottom of the Slippery Slope: A Post-Human

Future?" Perspectives on Political Science, vol. 32, no. 2, Apr. 2003, pp. 86-93. EBSCOhost.
 http://libproxy.uww.edu:2059/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=784da168-de60-40c1-846f-

68e7eccd7529%40sessionmgr4010&vid=9&hid=4112. Accessed 10 Apr. 2017.

Wheelwright, Jeff. "The Revolution Will Be Edited." Discover Magazine, June 2016,

discovermagazine.com/2016/June/11-revolution-will-be-edited. Accessed 10 Apr. 2017.