Science has advanced far within the last decade. It is hard to believe the first iPhone was introduced merely 11 years ago and that we can now bring pixelated images into the real world using 3D printers. Yet as humans are reaching more dangerous types of technology such as artificial intelligence and artificial pathogens, we are reaching another form of technology which could eliminate diseases: gene-editing.

By the use of a certain bacterial enzyme called CRISPR-Cas9, humans are able to direct the enzyme to modify DNA by programming it with directions in the form of RNA, allowing the enzyme to add, delete, or change parts of DNA. The enzyme accomplishes it by targeting a specific piece of DNA and removing the sequence while adding its own modified version. Though the technology is still in its early phases, the possibilities are virtually limitless. The goal of gene-editing is currently to make humans immune to pathogens and disease as much as possible. However, the technology itself has opened up the possibility to modify the human body, which in turn could cause us to modify our bodies even more rather than just pathogen immunity. We could possibly use Cas9 to reprogram our looks, from our eyes to our height, or even other basic traits such as emotions by modifying our hormone-producing organs. We could even solve genetic disorders such as Down Syndrome or Huntington’s Disease which are both incurable by contemporary means. Gene-editing is not only limited to just humans either, as plants and animals could very well be modified to increase the output of food on a global scale. Imagine apple trees with faster harvest seasons or cows which can produce more milk. We could be close to solving not only the problem of disease but also solving world hunger. The ethics of such technology, however, are still questionable.

Like any other surgery or transformation, there is always a risk of failure. Cas9 is estimated to fail about 15% of the time according to the scientific journal Molecular Cell. The failure can cause a problem in itself, as a faulty gene can cause a new genetic disease to appear with the possibility of death or worse. Additionally, getting the program off the ground in the first place is going to be difficult as the project itself will require human test subjects. The ethical grounds are controversial and are currently causing some dispute in the scientific community of whether gene-editing can be used. Gene-editing also poses the threat of mass extinction as viruses can be gene-edited too, causing the possible creation of unstoppable artificial viruses which the human immune system cannot hope to combat. Normal pathogens such as the Zika virus and Ebola have caused thousands of deaths within the last decade; imagine how many people could be killed with no immunity or defense whatsoever against an artificial virus. In fact, in 2016, James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence, put gene-editing on the list of threats posed by weapons of mass destruction and proliferation. These benefits and drawbacks make gene-editing pretty controversial in itself.

Enter He Jiankui, a Chinese scientist who announced that he had successfully gene-edited twin embryos to be protected against HIV. He ignored the advice of the scientific community as accomplishing the experiment could cause multitudes of genetic complications for the twins. Most scientists who have communicated with He told him not to conduct the experiment, but to no avail as He didn’t communicate with many of his peers. Robin Lovell-Badge of the UK research facility the Francis Crick Institute, who organized the November summit where the news of gene-edited twins broke out, described He as a “rich physicist who knew little biology, with a huge ego, someone who wants to be the first to do something he believes will change the world, irrespective of any guidelines.” He made his money selling companies which allowed him to personally fund his experiment with no committee to monitor his ethics or experiment. There were guidelines to prevent any scientists from implanting a genetically modified embryo, but He ignored such regulations and proceeded. According to Lovell-Badge, “there are effective ways to prevent HIV from being passed from parents to children, meaning the controversial research did not even have an ‘unmet clinical need’ but the stigma around HIV in China seemed to be what drove the Chinese scientist.”

There is a place for gene-editing in creating a better world. But it is certain that it is currently too early to do so as there are some major questions that need to be answered and obstacles to pass before gene-editing can be a boon to humanity.