Research Essay
Research Essay
Agatha Jagla
English 1102-130
7 May 2019
Historically, society has always been against the controversial procedures of genetic
engineering. However, in recent years, attitudes have started to shift in favor of using certain
genetic procedures in medical care. This attitude shift is caused by a lot of research that has
proven that genetic engineering provides countless medical benefits. An example of such
research comes from China where Dr. He Jiankui has successfully managed to alter
mitochondrial genes in a pair of twins. When Dr. He Jiankui announced his results at a Human
Genome Editing Submit that was being held at the University of Hong Kong, he was faced with
severe backlash. Critics argued that his work was illegal and therefore should have never been
done despite its success. However, if genetic engineering was legalized, Dr. He Jiankui’s finding
would have been a revolutionary medical breakthrough that would forever change medical
genetics. Since medical procedures are advancing at such a rapid pace, the U.S government
needs to implement regulations on medically beneficial gene therapies so that medical clinic can
use them to treat patients. Despite that, not all gene therapies are created equal as those that alter
embryos are risky and unethical. Thus, gene therapies such as therapeutic cloning and gene
research that would be done on somatic (body) cells should become a part of standard medical
Jagla 2
care while gene therapies such as reproductive cloning that harm embryos or reproductive cells
Even with the limited research that has occurred, there is one gene therapy that stands out
due to its endless benefits. This gene therapy is therapeutic cloning. The most important
application of this procedure is its ability to repair damaged organs. Therapeutic cloning is a
technique in which a nucleus from a patient’s cell is transferred to a somatic stem cell that has
had nucleus removed. With the addition of a nucleus, these stem cells can differentiate into any
type of cell such as those that makeup organs. Once the engineered cells are placed into damaged
tissue, they take up and maintain the tissue’s function. This technique is revolutionary because
there are thousands of people who need organ transplants. However, most are unable to get them
because there is a severe lack of organ donors. If this technique became a part of standard
medical care, then anyone who needs an organ could easily get one. As a result, thousands of
lives would be saved annually. Additionally, therapeutic cloning results in the production of cells
that are genetically identical to the host. This is a very important factor because “the use of
autologous cells avoids rejection, and thus [harmful] side effects....can be avoided” (Koh & Atala
196). In the past, tissue rejection was a major concern of organ transplants but now, thanks to
therapeutic cloning, rejection would become a thing of the past. Using therapeutic cloning to
engineer tissue is also beneficial to those who do not need organ transplants. With this technique
it would be possible for patients to have a ready-made supply of their own tissue should they
genetic disorders and infertility. Recent research has proven that using therapeutic cloning in the
Jagla 3
form of genome editing can cure “multifactorial disease such as cancer, diabetes, age-related
illness, and protect against the burden of chronic disease” (Drabiak 3). As a result, “genome
editing [can be used as a] preventive medicine that will rid society of the burden of disease”
(Drabiak 3). This means that doctors will now be able to cure previously incurable diseases that
most people will develop during their lifetime. Putting genome editing to use would not only
prevent millions of people from suffering from common diseases, but it would also save the
healthcare industry millions to billions of dollars. A lot of common diseases require patients to
take medicine for the rest of their life. However, this technique can cure these diseases so that
patients do not have to be on pills for the rest of their life. No pills mean health insurance
companies won’t have to spend so much money on paying for patients medications. Besides just
curing diseases, gene editing can cure infertility. According to Drabiak “approximately twelve
percent of couples in the U.S. suffer from impaired fecundity… [which is] the inability to get
pregnant or carry a baby to term” (Drabiak 3). This illustrates just how big of an issue infertility
is in today’s society. If nothing is done about this, birth rates may fall below replacement rates.
This will result in an aging population that puts great stress on the economy. An aging
population means that there will be a smaller workforce but a greater demand for workers to help
Currently, not only are genetic engineering practices not being put into use, but research
is also very limited due to a lack of funding. This needs to change because additional genetic
research will result in medical benefits such as specific treatments for patients. An example of
relevant and effective gene research is pharmacogenomic research. This research studies how
one’s genes affect how their bodies respond to medications. Thus, “the aim of [this] research is
Jagla 4
to ensure “the right medicine for the right patient”” (Williams & Schroeder 90). If this research
medications would eliminate dangerous side effects as well as reduce waste since medicine will
not be wasted on patients who can’t benefit from it. Another beneficial gene research is
researching population genetics. Knowing the genetic makeup of the population will help
researchers discover the links that exist between genes and diseases. If this research gets
legalized, “it will become possible to give tailor-made advice on lifestyle...to people [who are] at
risk of developing particular diseases” (Williams & Schroeder 91). Besides just advice, this
research will result in new drugs that can directly target genes that have a predisposition of
causing diseases. In this way, many genetic diseases will be prevented. A major problem with
gene therapies is that it is super expensive. However, if the government were to fund gene
research, then resulting medical discoveries would more than pay for themselves. Additionally,
with adequate funding, scientists can invent new techniques and improve old ones so that genetic
Despite all of the medical benefits that genetic engineering would provide, people are
hesitant to use it because they believe that it is unethical. This because they believe that often
patients do not fully understand what they are consenting to when they agree to get a procedure
done. Currently, “there is no international consensus about what to disclose...to patients” (Rosier,
Guedj, Calvas 2). This means that doctors do not have to disclose potential side effects.
However, in order for a medical procedure to become a part of standard medical care, it needs to
have extensive and thorough regulations that make sure that the procedure isn’t harmful to the
patient. Furthermore, there has been a global push for the legalization of gene therapies. This
Jagla 5
global movement would never exist if the benefits of gene therapies did not far outweigh its
risks. Moreover, people who oppose gene therapies argue that if genetic techniques were to
become common practice, then dangerous practices such as gene doping would also be allowed.
Despite that, most people fail to realize that most genetic procedures that are considered
dangerous have practical medical benefits. An example of a positive use of gene doping is to
cure muscular dystrophy which is when one’s muscles are greatly weakened. Yes, there are
inadequate uses to this technique such as athletes using it to improve their athletic performance.
However, with extensive government regulation, one can be sure that gene doping will only be
Although gene therapies such as therapeutic cloning and stem cell research should
become a part of health care, genetic engineering on embryos should remain prohibited as its
benefits do not out weight its risks. An example of genetic engineering on embryos is
organism with the goal of planting the [embryo] produced by the technique into the uterus of an
adult female to create a new organism”. The main reason that reproductive cloning should be
prohibited is that altering and messing with embryos is unethical. As mentioned earlier,
reproductive cloning is still very risky so research to perfect this technique would require
sacrificing thousands of embryos in the name of science. This is immoral because only one’s self
should be the one to decide if they live or die, not the scientists who are experimenting on the
embryos. Who are we to decide who gets to live and who gets sacrificed? It is our duty as
humans to protect all other humans even if they are not born yet.
Jagla 6
Furthermore, reproductive cloning is unethical because it would allow for the creation of
designer babies whose genes have been permanently altered to physically or behaviorally
past…that try[ed] to improve the human race” (Sandel 51). This illustrates that enhancing babies
is morally wrong because it would give a few kids a major advantage in today’s society. Also,
children are not Build-A-Bears whos traits can be picked out for them. Parents should love their
children for who they are no matter what they look like.
Besides reproductive cloning being unethical, it is also a very risky procedure. Not a lot
of research has been done in this area. For this reason, it is unclear if children conceived using
this method will be healthy. Although, as mentioned earlier, the twins that Dr. He Jiankui altered
were born healthy, there is no guarantee that they will remain that way. This has never been done
before so it is uncertain whether the procedure has any hidden side effects that could affect the
child’s quality of life as they get older. Furthermore, if other gene therapies were put into use
instead then “areas where adult stem cells are successful, the controversial embryonic stem cells
may not be necessary” (Kian & Leng 298). This is to say that there are alternative options to
Additionally, research conducted by the Bioethics Advisory Committee (BAC) has demonstrated
that the “public is overwhelmingly against [reproductive cloning]” (Kian & Leng 294). This is
due to the fact that people are afraid of cloning an entire human because it can easily go astray.
The government has a duty to do what's right for its citizens. So if people are afraid that
Jagla 7
reproductive cloning can lead to medical malpractice, the government should listen to its citizens
Although reproductive cloning should remain illegal, it is important to mention that there
are a few benefits to this procedure. One of these is that by modifying embryos, doctors could
potentially prevent children from being born with genetic disorders or birth defects. A second
benefit is that reproductive cloning would “allow couples suffering from certain forms of
infertility to have children who are genetically related to them” (Sparrow 1). Nonetheless, people
fail to realize that these benefits come at a high cost. An example of a such a cost is that
reproductive cloning is still very experimental and “has not yet been shown [to] almost always
result in only physically healthy babies, [so], before we use the method, we are morally obligated
to get the informed consent of the person to be conceived” (Lane 3). With this in mind, it is
crucial that parents who want to conceive a child using reproductive cloning start thinking about
what they are putting their baby through instead of just thinking about what's most convenient
Initially, it might be difficult and costly to implement gene therapies into hospitals all
over the nation. Nevertheless, the millions of lives that will be saved or improved as a result of
these procedures make the initial struggle worth it. After seeing all of its benefits, it's finally time
to stop talking about gene therapies and actually put therapeutic cloning and gene research into
action. Every century has its own medical breakthroughs that forever change people's lives. The
medical breakthrough for the 21st century could be therapeutic cloning and gene research if only
the government would make these beneficial procedures a part of standard medical care.
Jagla 8
However, the government also has a duty to protect its citizens from unethical medical practices.
For that reason, reproductive cloning should remain illegal for the time being.
Works Cited
Law, Medicine & Ethics, vol. 46, no. 4, Winter 2018, pp. 991–1009. EBSCOhost,
doi:10.1177/1073110518822001.
Kian, Catherine Tay Swee, and Tien Sim Leng. “The Singapore Approach to Human
Stem Cell Research, Therapeutic and Reproductive Cloning.” Bioethics, vol. 19, no. 3, June
Koh, Chester J., and Anthony Atala. “Therapeutic Cloning Applications for Organ
Transplantation.” Transplant Immunology, vol. 12, no. 3/4, Apr. 2004, pp. 193–201. EBSCOhost,
doi:10.1016/j.trim.2003.12.006.
Cloning.” Bioethics, vol. 20, no. 3, June 2006, pp. 125–135. EBSCOhost,
doi:10.1111/j.1467-8519.2006.00486.x.
www.dictionary.com/browse/reproductive-cloning.
Jagla 9
Sandel, Michael J. The Case against Perfection: Ethics in the Age of Genetic
Philosophy, vol. 34, no. 2, Apr. 2009, pp. 102–118. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1093/jmp/jhp014.
Williams, Garrath, and Doris Schroeder. “Human Genetic Banking: Altruism, Benefit
and Consent.” New Genetics & Society, vol. 23, no. 1, Apr. 2004, pp. 89–103. EBSCOhost,
doi:10.1080/1463677042000189598.
Zimmer, Carl. “Genetically Modified People Are Walking Among Us.” The New York Times,