[Kalium]

It's a source of suffering that can be solved through genetic engineering of embryos that some group of people with resources will be inclined to address.

It is relevant because it precisely fits your criteria.

[zepto]

Sure but my point is that technology that empowers a small group of powerful people to reduce their suffering may end up increasing suffering overall.

[Kalium]

Yes. This is possible. You are completely correct.

Of course, this is in fact true for all values of $TOOL in "Given $TOOL, a bad thing may happen".

[zepto]

Sure - but the risks vary from tool.

Rich people editing their babies seems like it's more risky for society than most tools.

[Kalium]

It's also a tool that can literally save real, countable lives otherwise factually known to be doomed to horrific suffering and very early death.

If I understand it correctly, your objection is that it may be possible for some group of people to use this to increase suffering in an abstract way.

[zepto]

"If I understand it correctly, your objection is that it may be possible for some group of people to use this to increase suffering in an abstract way"

This is true of most objections to things that have a social impact.

Reserving health to the wealthy in a feedback loop of relative advantage does not seem very abstract - it seems dystopian.