Mains Practice Questions

Introduction:

Advances in large-scale DNA synthesis and CRISPR-based gene editing now enable rewriting human genomic segments, with initiatives like Human Genome Project–Write demonstrating the technical feasibility of synthetic human genomes. This has triggered intense ethical and biosecurity debates worldwide. These debates now shape and constrain the pace, direction, and legitimacy of such research.

Body:

• Ethical Constraints
  • Moral and Philosophical Issues: Creating or rewriting a human genome raises fundamental questions about human identity and dignity.Many argue it amounts to “playing God” .
  • Consent Across Generations: If applied to the germline (embryos/gametes), such interventions would involve heritable changes. Future generations, who will permanently bear these modifications, cannot consent,violating core principles of bioethics.
  • Risk of Designer Babies and Inequality: Genome synthesis could be used for enhancement such as selecting for physical, cognitive, or behavioral traits. This risks deepening social inequality, creating a class of genetically privileged individuals, and enabling new forms of discrimination.
  • Loss of Human Genetic Diversity: Standardizing certain traits through synthetic design may shrink natural genetic variation, reducing resilience to diseases and altering evolutionary trajectories.
  • Cultural, Religious, and Social Sensitivities: Different societies hold varied moral views about modifying human life. Synthetic genome projects therefore lack universal ethical legitimacy and may provoke geopolitical and social tensions.
  • Slippery Slope to Human Enhancement: Even if initial goals are therapeutic, synthetic genome capabilities may gradually shift toward enhancement like intelligence, appearance, behavior etc, blurring the line between treatment and human redesign.
• Biosecurity Concerns
  • Dual-Use Research Risks : Technologies used to synthesize human genomes can also be repurposed to create harmful biological agents.
  • Unregulated or Private Experiments: As DNA synthesis becomes cheaper and more accessible, private labs, DIY biology groups, or commercial entities may engage in experiments without proper oversight.
  • Gaps in Global Governance: Current global norms such as the Biological Weapons Convention, WHO guidelines, or national biosafety rules were designed for genetically modified organisms or gene editing, not for full genome synthesis.
  • Potential for Unintended Biological Consequences: A synthetically constructed human genome may behave unpredictably. Any accidental release or clinical misuse could create unknown health or ecological risks.
  • Geopolitical and Security Tensions: Rapid advancements in some countries may trigger competitive technological races.
    • States may interpret synthetic genome breakthroughs as strategic advantages, creating mistrust and pressure to develop similar capabilities intensifying global biosecurity anxiety.

Conclusion:

Ethical dilemmas over human identity, consent, and inequality, alongside serious biosecurity risks and governance gaps, underline the need for globally harmonized norms. Going forward, responsible innovation guided by transparency, international cooperation, and strong regulatory frameworks will be essential to ensure that these transformative technologies evolve in a manner aligned with public trust and collective security.