Verrone 1

Annotated Bibliography

Designer Babies; A Superior Race?

Mya Verrone

Professor Malcolm Campbell

UWRT 1104

February 21, 2018

Annotated Bibliography
 Verrone 2

Darnovsky, Marcy, and Elliot Hosman. “The Social and Political Dangers of Germline

Intervention.” Gene Watch, January-March, 2017,

www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/GeneWatch/GeneWatchPage.aspx?pageId=582.

Accessed 10 March, 2018.

This webpage article, “The Social and Political Dangers of Human Germline

Interventions” from the website “Council for Responsible Genetics” discusses and

explores the social and biological dangers of altering the human germline while in

embryonic form. Throughout the article, Marcy Darnovsky explains how mitochondrial

manipulation takes place and the benefits and dangers that it could cause. Taking genetic

material from three different parents and combining them with advanced technology is

not legal in the US but was recently deemed legal in the UK. In this article it is

mentioned that a doctor in New York recently took his research to mexico to proceed

where there are no regulations and rules restricting this kind of work and successfully

altered the embryo. The mother gave birth to a healthy child that was conceived via

mitochondrial manipulation. This opened up the floor for debate regarding the effects that

this could have socially and mentally on the children conceived this way. It is predicted

that this will have an adverse affect on family relationships and will prohibit the ability

for the children to gain a sense of self. A widened gap in social classes is also anticipated

and discussed. In conclusion of this piece, it is stated that without further widespread

debate on this topic, it should not be made legal. People from different fields of study and

ways of life should state opinions, concerns and then legal decisions should be made

regarding the ethical standing of this issue. This source is credible due to the published
 Verrone 3

website that is often referred to by many medical officials and scientists. All of the

information that was stated here has aligned with my research that I have done prior to

this assignment. Marcy Darnovsky was also the author of one of the sources that I used in

my topic proposal and is a well respected figure in the scientific society. She completed

her Ph.D. in the department of History of Consciousness at the University of California.

She is also the executive director at the center for genetics and society. This source is

useful to my research because it analyzes how this germline modification of embryos can

potentially affect social classes and the child that is conceived through this technology.

This piece explains how the process works, as well as the benefits and dangers that it

proposes. It expresses both sides that have been argued through the public and what

guidelines are in place to prohibit the immediate action of making this available to the

public. This source has also helped me modify key words like “genetic manipulation” to

“germline modification” that will make my research easier as I continue this process.

Kath, James., and Noam Prywes. “Brave New World? Not Even Close.” Scientific American. 2

August, 2017. blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/brave-new-world-not-even-

close. Accessed 9 March, 2018.

In this academic source, a study was conducted at the Oregon Health and Science

University. In this study, a group of scientists successfully used technology to fix a

mutation in human embryos that lead to hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. This disease can

lead to sudden death in those affected. With aid from the CRISPR, which is a piece of

scientific equiptmet that aids in manipulation of genetic material, they were able to use

three donors and take the malfunctioning gene and replace it with a healthy one from the
 Verrone 4

donor. This was done to 58 embryos and 72 percent of them did not have the mutation

after the procedure. These embryos continued to develop normally until they were

destroyed later by the research team. The research concluded that the procedure can be

life saving to anyone who may be affected by genetically inherited disease. After MIT

Technology review got word of this study, a fear of this leading to designer babies was

addressed. However, this academic article states that although designer babies are

possible to make in the near future, picking traits like height and eye color will extremely

complicated. Eliminating a mutated gene is much less complex. It was also recently

discovered that altering more than one gene with the CRISPR can be dangerous and

destroy chromosomal rearrangements. It states that if the CRISPR is made legal, it will

improve pregnancy rates and eliminate some inherited diseases. This article also assures

us that although this research can alter the genetic material of a single piece of DNA in an

embryo, altering many strands in an embryo is far too complex and it will not soon lead

to designer babies. This source is credible because information presented lines up with

previous research that I have done on the CRISPR technology and it provides accurate

information regarding a case study that was done in Oregon. This article relays the results

of that study accurately and states current debate around this issue following the study. It

also lists the opinions of a respected source, the MIT Technology review. The author of

this piece, James Kath completed his postdoctoral fellowship at Northwestern University

in the department of Chemical and Biological Engineering. This source is useful to my

research because it provides the another perspective on the topic of genetically modified

embryos. Since I am analyzing the ethical opinions of this procedure and how it works,

this is useful because it suggests that although this procedure can be used to alter a single
 Verrone 5

mutated gene, it is not likely that it will lead to designer babies in the near future. It

suggests that this can fix mutations in malfunctioning embryos and could save many

lives. The possibility of designer babies is very complex and will require much more

advanced technology than the CRISPR.

Stein, Rob. “Breaking Taboo, Swedish Scientist Seeks To Edit DNA Of Healthy Human

Embryos.”, Gene Editing Raises Hopes, Fears: NPR, 22 September , 2016.

www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/09/22/494591738/breaking-taboo-swedish-

scientist-seeks-to-edit-dna-of-healthy-human-embryos. Accessed 9 March , 2018.

In this article from NPR.org, a scientist in Sweden has began research of editing the DNA

of a healthy embryo. Lanar hopes to find how to prevent miscarriages and understand

how genes regulate themself in early embryonic development, but many are concerned

that access to knowledge of this topic will lead to designer babies. His work focuses on

how the embryos will regulate manipulation within the first seven days of development

with hopes that this will lead to a more thorough understanding on how stem cells from

human embryos could be turned into treatments for various diseases. During his research,

he and a graduate student thaw five embryos from viable donors and carefully insert them

with a new technology called the CRISPR, which allows scientists to carefully

manipulate and edit very specific elements of the embryos DNA. After the experiment,

he found that one of the embryos survived and divided, showing evidence that the an

embryo can still develop once genes are manipulated and the other two that survived that

procedure are still being analyzed. However, following his experiments, an uproar was

caused. It is controversial whether this type of manipulation of embryos should be

allowed due to fear of the potential designer baby movement. It is not yet known the
 Verrone 6

potential problems that could come from this advanced research. One fear mentioned by

Marcy Darnovsky in this article is the potential of creating a new type of disease in an

embryo. This would be irreversible and could be very problematic. Despite the concerns

expressed by Darnovsky and society, Lanner assures NPR that he has no plans to modify

embryos past 14 days of development and does not think this should be used to

aesthetically enhance the looks or features of a child. This is actually still illegal in

sweden, and most places. However, Lanner states that this is important research and the

basic knowledge about this potential procedure is necessary and could save many lives. It

is mentioned that to prohibit this type of research would be counterproductive. This work

is done by the developmental biologist Fredrik Lanner out of Karolinska Institute in

Stockholm in Sweden. The article is done by Rob Stein from the Health News section

operating under NPR. This source is well respected by the public and relays reliable

information regarding trending news in the scientific research field. This source is helpful

and relevant to my research because it describes in detail how Lanner is manipulating

embryos and the technology used. It states his reason for doing this and the potential

benefits that it might make available for the public. It also discusses the opinions

regarding the topic from a well respected source, Marcy Darnovsky and the opinions of

the public. It expresses both the pros and cons that access to this type of research can

provide. This source will help me explain the procedure itself and what kind of

technology is involved to help myself and the reader better grasp the possibilities that this

will provide, and it also evaluates that potential dangers of this, and what this new

research could potentially offer to society. Both the source and the writer providing the

information are credible. NPR delivers breaking national and world news using speakers
 Verrone 7

who are knowledgeable about the topics that are covered. This particular article had a

NPR correspondent cover the story by going to the lab and watching the process as it

happened. The information reported back to NPR and the readers therefore is credible.

NPR is considered a noncommercial source, therefore I would consider this to be

unbiased information, compared to a source like CNN, which is for profit. This source is

useful to my research because it explains in depth how the research regarding embryo

manipulation is being conducted and the technologies involved. It also addresses the

response of the public and how people are responding to being one step closer to being

able to successfully manipulate genetic material within an embryo.

Sugarman, Jeremy. “Ethics and Germline Gene Editing.” EMBO Reports, 16 August, 2015,

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4552475/. Accessed 9 March, 2018.

This academic article from the NCBI website begins by addressing an article that was

recently published in China by scientists who had conducted research to modify human

embryos in non viale triploid embryos. This article then triggered debate among the

scientific community regarding the ethics and moral standing around this procedure.

Although the procedure was not done in viable embryos with any intention of using the

modified embryo in clinical settings, an uproar was caused by this possibility. A new

technology called the CRISPR is used to aid in genetic manipulation and offers a way to

edit malfunctioning elements of DNA. This altering of the germline can lead to curing

diseases such as HIV and genetic diseases. This article explains that this technology can

give us the ability to edit genetic diseases in utero and fix them to eliminate the

possibility of death in a fetus. Without this technology, it is usually fatal to the fetus in
 Verrone 8

utero. Debate in this article explores whether or not this technology would do more harm

than good regarding the human germline. It is possible that a mistake made by this

technology could cause new genetic diseases or malfunctions that could be irreversible

and lead to other biological malfunctions. The risks of this are weighed heavily

throughout this article. It also states that the CRISPR could potentially be used to

generate gametes and fix genetic errors which would reduce the need for oocyte

donations. Following the explanation of the use and potentially benefits of this

technology, the author discusses the dangers of essentially “playing God” when it comes

to these types of procedures. Many argue that it is morally unacceptable to alter the

human germline and it lacks consent of future generations who will be heavily affected

by this technology. In the conclusion of this article, it is stated that thorough debate

regarding the ethical and legal aspects of this must be analyzed by the public, medical

professionals and government officials. Although this could have great benefits to

society, the dangers may outweigh the benefits. It states that the effects of human dignity

will be altered, but there is no one definition of human dignity so this is hard to assess

and apply to the ethical value of the procedure. Finally, it is stated that there must be a

general consensus on the safety, ways to approach research and morality of this issue

before any type of clinical trials can be further developed. The website NCBI is a credible

source that provides current and accurate information regarding research and medical

discoveries being made by well respected scientists in the biotechnology information

field. This is the National Center for Biotechnology Information and is referred to by

many scientists and physicians. The author of this particular article, Jeremy Sugarman,

has conducted over 20 articles for NCBI over the years and is well respected professor of
 Verrone 9

medicine, health policy and management from Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of

Bioethics. He is also the deputy director for medicine of the John Hopkins Berman

Institute of Bioethics. The intended audience of this article is any scientific professional

or anyone interested in gaining a better knowledge of the current debate surrounding

genetic manipulation. This source was extremely useful to my research and has helped

me narrow down my question of inquiry to the moral and ethics side of this new medical

research. This article has helped me better understand the procedure and how it is

performed, the potential benefits and dangers of this new technology, and the opinions

regarding the moral and ethical side of the spectrum from a scientists perspective.

Peer Review

Great job with your annotated bibliography, I enjoyed reading this very dynamic topic which you

clearly established through valid sources to cite. In addition, you definitely captured the three

elements needed to complete each annotation. The recommendations I have is as follows: check

formatting, check the first two citations; not sure you need a period, and possibly some minor

grammatical errors. Overall, this annotated bibliography was well structured and the hard work

put into it definitely shows through.