| >1. There are many somatic applications of CRISPR that have no effect on the germline. Yes, but there are many that have. >2. Even the germline applications don't necessarily "decrease genetic variability". Why would you think that? Because he talked about "Unrestricted gene editing in humans" in general, and one of the goals would be designer humans and babies, which will decrease "genetic variability". >3. Even considering off-target effects, the edits made to any particular genome are miniscule compared to its overall size, which I'm sure would astound you. There is no reason to believe these edits will make us less (or more) resistant to environmental exposures. Tiny changes can have huge effects, especially when one doesn't fully understand what they're changing and second order effects of their meddling. Heck, it's 2018 and we can't cure common cold or obesity, and we don't know tons of stuff about the human body, metabolism etc and how it works. >4. We are not talking making people more likely to contract cholera, which is easily controlled by sanitation. We're talking about preventing or curing debilitating illnesses that confer no benefit to the organism. Who is this "we" who is talking it? There's no doubt tons of state actors will be interested in making people more likely to contract all kinds of things (or be resistant to them, as long as they can spread it to the others) -- that is, weaponize the thing. |
This is not about "designer babies" in the eye color or physical appearance sense - who knows what will be the beauty norm 50 years from now. It's about ridding humanity of what we know is deadly and, on a personal level, preventing my own bad genes getting passed on. I have a bad back, an insatiable appetite and high cholesterol, I'm balding and have a slight heart deformity. Should I pass those traits along just for the hope that someday some bald distant sibling will have immunity from a future plague? I don't think I'm really responsible for that, it's the task of future generations to keep the baldness genes in a bank or database and use it at that time if they find them useful.
The reduced genetic diversity is moot - people of all ethic groups have today a chance to reproduce instead of being wiped out like for most part of human history. We are in an explosion of genetic diversity, even very dangerous traits are being preserved in the gene pool due to the advances of medicine that made them survivable. When genetic editing will be so widespread as to threaten the genetic diversity of the human species, we will be living in a Star Trek egalitarian paradise, it's very presumptuous to think we have any foresight into such a future.