The ethical dilemma of designer babies | Paul Knoepfler

Summary

This script envisions a 2030 scenario where designer babies, enhanced through CRISPR technology, outperform 'natural' children, causing societal tension. It raises ethical concerns about genetic modification, the potential for a new eugenics, and the unforeseen consequences of altering human DNA. The speaker, a stem cell and genetics researcher, calls for a public debate and a moratorium on creating genetically modified humans due to the risks involved.

Takeaways

• 🧬 The script discusses the potential future scenario of designer babies created through genetic modification technology, specifically CRISPR.
• 🔮 Fast-forward to 2030, where the protagonist's daughter, Marianne, is considered 'natural' without genetic modifications, contrasting with her genetically enhanced friend, Jenna.
• 🤔 The society in this imagined future views parents who opt out of genetic enhancements as being outdated, akin to Luddites or technophobes.
• 🧐 Jenna represents a new generation of genetically modified (GM) children who are portrayed as superior in intelligence, beauty, height, and athletic ability.
• 🏥 GM children are suggested to be healthier with lower healthcare costs and immunity to diseases like HIV/AIDS and genetic disorders.
• 😟 An unsettling feeling is expressed about GM children, hinting at potential unforeseen consequences despite their apparent advantages.
• 📰 A newspaper article in the script suggests that designer babies might exhibit increased aggressiveness and narcissism.
• 🏫 The script mentions a divide in educational opportunities, with GM children like Jenna attending special schools separate from 'natural' children.
• 🌐 The rapid advancement and accessibility of CRISPR technology is highlighted, noting its potential for both scientific advancement and ethical misuse.
• 🇺🇸 The lack of legal restrictions on human genetic modification in some countries, including the US, is pointed out, raising concerns about the technology's unregulated use.
• 🚫 The speaker advocates for a moratorium on creating genetically modified humans due to the significant risks and uncertainties involved.
• 👥 The importance of public awareness and involvement in the decision-making process around human genetic modification is emphasized.

Q & A

What is the main topic discussed in the video script?

The main topic discussed in the video script is the ethical and societal implications of designer babies and the use of genetic modification technology, specifically CRISPR, to enhance human traits.

What is the year set in the hypothetical scenario presented in the script?

The hypothetical scenario is set in the year 2030.

What is the term used to describe a child who has not undergone genetic modifications in the script?

In the script, a child who has not undergone genetic modifications is referred to as a 'natural'.

What is the name of the genetic modification technology mentioned in the script?

The genetic modification technology mentioned in the script is called CRISPR.

What are some of the potential enhancements that could be introduced using CRISPR technology as described in the script?

Some potential enhancements that could be introduced using CRISPR technology include increased intelligence, beauty, height, athleticism, and immunity to certain health conditions like HIV/AIDS and genetic diseases.

What concerns does the script raise about the use of CRISPR technology for creating designer babies?

The script raises concerns about the potential for increased aggressiveness and narcissism in genetically modified children, as well as the ethical implications of altering human genetics and the societal pressures that may arise from such modifications.

What is the script's position on the legality of creating designer babies in some countries?

The script indicates that while creating designer babies is illegal in some countries, in others, including the United States, there is currently no law against it.

What recent development in the UK is mentioned in the script in relation to genetic modification?

The recent development mentioned in the script is the UK passing a new law that allows the creation of genetically modified humans for the purpose of preventing a rare kind of genetic disease.

What is the speaker's recommendation for the future of human genetic modification?

The speaker recommends a moratorium on creating genetically modified humans, emphasizing that it is too dangerous and unpredictable.

What historical event is referenced in the script to illustrate the potential dangers of unchecked scientific advancement?

The script references the rise of eugenics in the past century and the personal story of the speaker's father, who had to leave Vienna due to the eugenics movement.

What is the script's final call to action for the audience?

The script calls for public engagement and education on the topic of human genetic modification, encouraging the audience to participate in discussions and voice their opinions in upcoming meetings about the future of this technology.

Outlines

00:00

🚀 Designer Babies and the Ethical Dilemma of Genetic Modification

The speaker, a stem cell and genetics researcher, presents a hypothetical scenario set in 2030 where designer babies are a reality, created using CRISPR technology. The audience is asked to consider the implications of such a future, where genetically unmodified children like Marianne are seen as less desirable. The story contrasts Marianne with her genetically enhanced friend Jenna, who exhibits superior intelligence, beauty, and health. The narrative touches on societal pressures, the potential for increased health care costs, and the unsettling feeling that accompanies the unknowns of genetic modification. The speaker also references a real-life event where Chinese researchers modified human embryos, hinting at a future where such practices could become more widespread.

05:02

🌐 Legal and Ethical Boundaries of Genetic Modification

This paragraph delves into the legal status and ethical considerations of creating designer babies. While some countries have laws against genetic modification, others, including the US, do not. The UK, traditionally strict on such matters, recently allowed for exceptions to prevent genetic diseases. The speaker introduces CRISPR as a revolutionary tool for genetic modification, comparing it to a Swiss army knife with capabilities to locate, cut, and rewrite DNA. The rapid evolution and accessibility of CRISPR technology raises concerns about its potential misuse, despite its benefits for scientific research. The speaker warns of the risks associated with genetic modification, including the possibility of inadvertently causing health issues and the broader implications of social Darwinism and eugenics.

10:05

🔬 The Risks and Consequences of Designer Babies

The speaker discusses the potential negative outcomes of pursuing designer babies, emphasizing the new eugenics movement and its proponents who see CRISPR as a means to an end. He raises questions about what constitutes 'better' in humans and acknowledges the seductive nature of genetic enhancement. However, he warns of the risks to individuals and the potential for misuse of genetic modification, which could lead to unforeseen health issues. The speaker also considers the impact on scientific research if designer baby experiments go awry, and the possibility of governments compelling genetic modification for economic or social reasons. He speculates on societal trends that could make designer babies fashionable, drawing parallels to current celebrity culture.

15:05

🛑 The Call for a Moratorium on Genetically Modified Humans

In the final paragraph, the speaker calls for a moratorium on creating genetically modified humans, citing the technology's newness and unpredictability. He acknowledges the tension between scientific exploration and ethical responsibility, and the challenge of self-regulation in the scientific community. The speaker looks forward to a meeting by the US National Academy of Sciences to discuss the future of human genetic modification and emphasizes the importance of public awareness and involvement in this debate. He paints a future scenario where the choice between a naturally born child and a designer baby could have profound personal and societal implications, urging the audience to consider their own decisions in such a reality.

Keywords

💡Designer Baby

A 'designer baby' refers to a child whose genetic makeup has been selected or altered, typically through genetic engineering, to include or exclude certain traits or characteristics. In the video, the concept is central as it explores a future where designer babies are a reality, and the implications of such a choice are discussed through the characters of Marianne, a 'natural' child, and Jenna, a genetically modified child with 'upgrades'.

💡Genetic Modification

Genetic modification involves altering the genetic code of an organism. The video discusses the use of CRISPR technology for human genetic modification, creating 'designer babies' with enhanced traits. It raises ethical questions about the potential consequences of such modifications, including health and social implications.

💡CRISPR

CRISPR, which stands for Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats, is a revolutionary gene-editing technology. The video uses CRISPR as an example of how genetic modification can be applied to create designer babies, highlighting its precision, affordability, and the ethical dilemmas it presents.

💡Eugenics

Eugenics is the belief in improving the genetic quality of the human population through selective breeding. The video draws a parallel between historical eugenics movements and the potential misuse of genetic modification technologies like CRISPR, warning of a 'new eugenics' that could have unintended negative consequences.

💡Moratorium

A moratorium is a temporary ban or suspension of a certain activity. In the context of the video, the speaker advocates for a moratorium on creating genetically modified humans, emphasizing the need for caution and regulation to prevent potential misuse of the technology.

💡Genetic Disease

A genetic disease is a disorder caused by abnormalities in an individual's DNA. The video mentions that genetically modified children, like Jenna, are immune to certain health conditions, including HIV/AIDS and genetic diseases, showcasing one of the potential benefits of genetic modification.

💡Healthcare Costs

Healthcare costs refer to the expenses incurred in the prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and management of medical conditions. The script suggests that genetically modified individuals may have lower healthcare costs due to their enhanced health, which could influence societal and governmental attitudes towards genetic modification.

💡Social Darwinism

Social Darwinism is the application of Darwin's theory of evolution to social and economic contexts, suggesting that competition and 'survival of the fittest' apply to human societies. The video implies that the advent of designer babies could lead to a form of social Darwinism, where those with genetic enhancements may have societal advantages.

💡Genetic Swiss Army Knife

This metaphor from the video describes the multifunctional nature of CRISPR technology, which can locate specific DNA sequences (like a GPS), cut DNA at precise locations (like scissors), and edit the genetic code (like a pen). It illustrates the precision and power of CRISPR in genetic modification.

💡Pandora's Box

Pandora's Box is a metaphor for a situation where the consequences of an action are unknown and potentially disastrous. The video uses this metaphor to describe the first use of CRISPR on human embryos in China, suggesting that this action has opened up a realm of possibilities, both positive and negative.

💡In Vitro Fertilization (IVF)

In vitro fertilization is a process where eggs are fertilized by sperm outside the body, and then implanted in a uterus. The video uses IVF as an example of how a new technology can rapidly transform society, drawing a parallel to the potential impact of genetic modification on human reproduction.

Highlights

The concept of designer babies is being explored with the advancement of genetic modification technology, specifically CRISPR.

In a hypothetical 2030 scenario, designer babies like Jenna have become a reality, possessing numerous genetic enhancements.

Marianne, a naturally born child, faces social stigma for not being genetically modified in a world where it's common.

Genetically modified children are portrayed as healthier, more intelligent, and immune to certain diseases compared to their non-modified peers.

Despite the benefits, there's an underlying concern about the psychological and social implications of designer babies.

A study suggests that designer babies may exhibit increased aggressiveness and narcissism.

The separation of designer and natural children in education systems could lead to further societal division.

CRISPR technology allows for precise genetic editing, likened to a Swiss army knife with tools for locating, cutting, and rewriting DNA.

The rapid and affordable nature of CRISPR has revolutionized genetic research but also poses ethical concerns.

The potential misuse of CRISPR could lead to a new form of eugenics, with both positive and negative consequences.

The speaker's father was born in Vienna and had to flee due to the rise of eugenics, highlighting the historical context of genetic discrimination.

A moratorium on creating genetically modified humans is suggested due to the unpredictable and potentially dangerous outcomes.

The public is largely unaware of the ongoing genetic modification revolution and its personal implications.

There is a need for public education and engagement on the topic of human genetic modification.

The US National Academy of Sciences is set to discuss the future of human genetic modification, indicating the urgency of the issue.

The potential for governments to mandate genetic modification in citizens could lead to widespread societal changes.

The comparison between naturally born and genetically modified children raises questions about parental decisions and societal values.

The rapid spread of CRISPR technology and its accessibility to thousands of labs worldwide poses a significant ethical challenge.

The speaker calls for a halt on creating designer babies to prevent unforeseen consequences and to foster a public discourse on the matter.

Transcripts

Translator: Joseph Geni Reviewer: Joanna Pietrulewicz

So what if I could make for you

a designer baby?

What if you as a parent-to-be

and I as a scientist decided to go down that road together?

What if we didn't?

What if we thought, "That's a bad idea,"

but many of our family, friends and coworkers

did make that decision?

Let's fast-forward just 15 years from now.

Let's pretend it's the year 2030,

and you're a parent.

You have your daughter, Marianne, next to you,

and in 2030, she is what we call a natural

because she has no genetic modifications.

And because you and your partner consciously made that decision,

many in your social circle, they kind of look down on you.

They think you're, like, a Luddite or a technophobe.

Marianne's best friend Jenna, who lives right next door,

is a very different story.

She was born a genetically modified designer baby with numerous upgrades.

Yeah. Upgrades.

And these enhancements were introduced

using a new genetic modification technology

that goes by the funny name CRISPR,

you know, like something's crisp,

this is CRISPR.

The scientist that Jenna's parents hired to do this

for several million dollars

introduced CRISPR into a whole panel of human embryos.

And then they used genetic testing,

and they predicted that that little tiny embryo, Jenna's embryo,

would be the best of the bunch.

And now, Jenna is an actual, real person.

She's sitting on the carpet in your living room

playing with your daughter Marianne.

And your families have known each other for years now,

and it's become very clear to you

that Jenna is extraordinary.

She's incredibly intelligent.

If you're honest with yourself, she's smarter than you,

and she's five years old.

She's beautiful, tall, athletic,

and the list goes on and on.

And in fact, there's a whole new generation

of these GM kids like Jenna.

And so far it looks like

they're healthier than their parents' generation,

than your generation.

And they have lower health care costs.

They're immune to a host of health conditions,

including HIV/AIDS and genetic diseases.

It all sounds so great,

but you can't help but have this sort of unsettling feeling,

a gut feeling, that there's something just not quite right about Jenna,

and you've had the same feeling about other GM kids that you've met.

You were also reading in the newspaper earlier this week

that a study of these children who were born as designer babies

indicates they may have some issues,

like increased aggressiveness and narcissism.

But more immediately on your mind

is some news that you just got from Jenna's family.

She's so smart,

she's now going to be going to a special school,

a different school than your daughter Marianne,

and this is kind of throwing your family into a disarray.

Marianne's been crying,

and last night when you took her to bed to kiss her goodnight,

she said, "Daddy, will Jenna even be my friend anymore?"

So now, as I've been telling you this imagined 2030 story,

I have a feeling that I may have put some of you

into this sci-fi frame of reference. Right?

You think you're reading a sci-fi book.

Or maybe, like, in Halloween mode of thinking.

But this is really a possible reality for us,

just 15 years from now.

I'm a stem cell and genetics researcher

and I can see this new CRISPR technology

and its potential impact.

And we may find ourselves in that reality,

and a lot will depend on what we decide to do today.

And if you're still kind of thinking in sci-fi mode,

consider that the world of science had a huge shock earlier this year,

and the public largely doesn't even know about it.

Researchers in China just a few months ago

reported the creation of genetically modified human embryos.

This was the first time in history.

And they did it using this new CRISPR technology.

It didn't work perfectly,

but I still think they sort of cracked the door ajar

on a Pandora's box here.

And I think some people are going to run with this technology

and try to make designer babies.

Now, before I go on, some of you may hold up your hands and say,

"Stop, Paul, wait a minute.

Wouldn't that be illegal?

You can't just go off and create a designer baby."

And in fact, to some extent, you're right.

In some countries, you couldn't do that.

But in many other countries, including my country, the US,

there's actually no law on this, so in theory, you could do it.

And there was another development this year that resonates in this area,

and that happened not so far from here over in the UK.

And the UK traditionally has been the strictest country

when it comes to human genetic modification.

It was illegal there,

but just a few months ago,

they carved out an exception to that rule.

They passed a new law

allowing the creation of genetically modified humans

with the noble goal of trying to prevent a rare kind of genetic disease.

But still I think in combination these events are pushing us

further towards an acceptance

of human genetic modification.

So I've been talking about this CRISPR technology.

What actually is CRISPR?

So if you think about the GMOs that we're all more familiar with,

like GMO tomatoes and wheat

and things like that,

this technology is similar to the technologies

that were used to make those,

but it's dramatically better,

cheaper and faster.

So what is it?

It's actually like a genetic Swiss army knife.

We can pretend this is a Swiss army knife

with different tools in it,

and one of the tools is kind of like a magnifying glass

or a GPS for our DNA,

so it can home in on a certain spot.

And the next tool is like scissors

that can cut the DNA right in that spot.

And finally we have a pen

where we can literally rewrite the genetic code in that location.

It's really that simple.

And this technology, which came on the scene just three years ago,

has taken science by storm.

It's evolving so fast, and it's so freaking exciting to scientists,

and I admit I'm fascinated by it and we use it in my own lab,

that I think someone is going to go that extra step

and continue the GM human embryo work

and maybe make designer babies.

This is so ubiquitous now.

It just came on the scene three years ago.

Thousands of labs literally have this in hand today,

and they're doing important research.

Most of them are not interested in designer babies.

They're studying human disease

and other important elements of science.

So there's a lot of good research going on with CRISPR.

And the fact that we can now do genetic modifications

that used to take years and cost millions of dollars

in a few weeks for a couple thousand bucks,

to me as a scientist that's fantastic,

but again, at the same time,

it opens the door to people going too far.

And I think for some people

the focus is not going to be so much on science.

That's not what's going to be driving them.

It's going to be ideology or the chase for a profit.

And they're going to go for designer babies.

So why should we be concerned about this?

We know from Darwin, if we go back two centuries,

that evolution and genetics profoundly have impacted humanity,

who we are today.

And some think there's like a social Darwinism at work in our world,

and maybe even a eugenics as well.

Imagine those trends, those forces,

with a booster rocket of this CRISPR technology

that is so powerful and so ubiquitous.

And in fact, we can just go back one century to the last century

to see the power that eugenics can have.

So my father, Peter Knoepfler,

was actually born right here in Vienna.

He was Viennese, and he was born here in 1929.

And when my grandparents had little baby Peter,

the world was very different. Right?

It was a different Vienna.

The United States was different.

The world was different.

There was a eugenics rising,

and my grandparents realized,

pretty quickly I think,

that they were on the wrong side of the eugenics equation.

And so despite this being their home

and their whole extended family's home,

and this area being their family's home for generations,

they decided because of eugenics

that they had to leave.

And they survived, but they were heartbroken,

and I'm not sure my dad ever really got over leaving Vienna.

He left when he was just eight years old

in 1938.

So today, I see a new eugenics

kind of bubbling to the surface.

It's supposed to be a kinder, gentler, positive eugenics,

different than all that past stuff.

But I think even though it's focused on trying to improve people,

it could have negative consequences,

and it really worries me

that some of the top proponents of this new eugenics,

they think CRISPR is the ticket to make it happen.

So I have to admit, you know,

eugenics, we talk about making better people.

It's a tough question.

What is better when we're talking about a human being?

But I admit I think maybe a lot of us

could agree that human beings,

maybe we could use a little betterment.

Look at our politicians

here, you know, back in the US --

God forbid we go there right now.

Maybe even if we just look in the mirror,

there might be ways we think we could be better.

I might wish, honestly, that I had more hair here, instead of baldness.

Some people might wish they were taller,

have a different weight, a different face.

If we could do those things, we could make those things happen,

or we could make them happen in our children,

it would be very seductive.

And yet coming with it would be these risks.

I talked about eugenics,

but there would be risks to individuals as well.

So if we forget about enhancing people

and we just try to make them healthier using genetic modification,

this technology is so new

and so powerful,

that by accident we could make them sicker.

That easily could happen.

And there's another risk,

and that is that all of the legitimate, important genetic modification research

going on just in the lab --

again, no interest in designer babies --

a few people going the designer baby route,

things go badly,

that entire field could be damaged.

I also think it's not that unlikely

that governments might start taking an interest in genetic modification.

So for example our imagined GM Jenna child

who is healthier,

if there's a generation that looks like they have lower health care costs,

it's possible that governments may start trying to compel their citizens

to go the GM route.

Look at China's one-child policy.

It's thought that that prevented the birth of 400 million human beings.

So it's not beyond the realm of possible

that genetic modification could be something that governments push.

And if designer babies become popular,

in our digital age --

viral videos, social media --

what if designer babies are thought to be fashionable,

and they kind of become the new glitterati,

the new Kardashians or something?

(Laughter)

You know, are those trends that we really could control?

I'm not convinced that we could.

So again, today it's Halloween

and when we talk about genetic modification,

there's one Halloween-associated character

that is talked about or invoked more than anything else,

and that is Frankenstein.

Mostly that's been Frankenfoods and all this other stuff.

But if we think about this now and we think about it in the human context

on a day like Halloween,

if parents can in essence costume their children genetically,

are we going to be talking about a Frankenstein 2.0 kind of situation?

I don't think so. I don't think it's going to get to that extreme.

But when we are going about hacking the human code,

I think all bets are off in terms of what might come of that.

There would still be dangers.

And we can look in the past

to other elements of transformative science

and see how they can basically go out of control

and permeate society.

So I'll just give you one example, and that is in vitro fertilization.

Almost exactly 40 years ago,

test tube baby number one Louise Brown was born,

and that's a great thing,

and I think since then five million IVF babies have been born,

bringing immeasurable happiness.

A lot of parents now can love those kids.

But if you think about it, in four decades,

five million babies being born from a new technology

is pretty remarkable,

and the same kind of thing could happen

with human genetic modification and designer babies.

So depending on the decisions we make in the next few months,

the next year or so,

if designer baby number one is born,

within a few decades,

there could well be millions of genetically modified humans.

And there's a difference there too, because if we, you in the audience, or I,

if we decide to have a designer baby,

then their children will also be genetically modified, and so on,

because it's heritable.

So that's a big difference.

So with all of this in mind,

what should we do?

There's actually going to be a meeting

a month from tomorrow in Washington, D.C.

by the US National Academy of Sciences

to tackle that exact question.

What is the right path forward with human genetic modification?

I believe at this time

we need a moratorium.

We have to ban this.

We should not allow creating genetically modified people,

because it's just too dangerous and too unpredictable.

But there's a lot of people --

(Applause)

Thanks.

(Applause)

And let me say, just as a scientist,

it's a little bit scary for me to say that in public,

because science generally doesn't like self-regulation and things like that.

So I think we need to put a hold on this,

but there are many people who not only disagree with me,

they feel the exact opposite.

They're like, step on the gas, full speed ahead,

let's make designer babies.

And so in the meeting in December

and other meetings that are likely to follow in the next few months,

it's very possible there may be no moratorium.

And I think part of the problem that we have

is that all of this trend,

this revolution in genetic modification applying to humans,

the public hasn't known about it.

Nobody has been saying,

look, this is a big deal, this is a revolution,

and this could affect you in very personal ways.

And so part of my goal is actually to change that

and to educate and engage with the public

and get you guys talking about this.

And so I hope at these meetings that there will be a role for the public

to bring their voice to bear as well.

So if we kind of circle back now to 2030 again, that imagined story,

and depending on the decisions we make, again, today --

literally we don't have a lot of time --

in the next few months, the next year or so,

because this technology is spreading like wildfire.

Let's pretend we're back in that reality.

We're at a park,

and our kid is swinging on the swing.

Is that kid a regular old kid,

or did we decide to have a designer baby?

And let's say we went the sort of traditional route,

and there's our kid swinging on the swing,

and frankly, they're kind of a mess.

Their hair is all over the place like mine.

They have a stuffy nose.

They're not the best student in the world.

They're adorable, you love them,

but there on the swing next to them,

their best friend is a GM kid,

and the two of them are kind of swinging like this,

and you can't help but compare them, right?

And the GM kid is swinging higher,

they look better, they're a better student,

they don't have that stuffy nose you need to wipe.

How is that going to make you feel

and what decision might you make next time?

Thank you.

(Applause)