CRISPR Technology Should Only Be Sold Through the Government
Explaining the issue
Biotechnology is currently experiencing the rapid growth of a groundbreaking technology known
as CRISPR. CRISPR technology works by precisely targeting and altering selected genes inside
an organism's DNA. The main uses of CRISPR are correcting gene defects that cause diseases,
cancer research and agriculture. Although CRISPR has a wide range of exciting potential
applications, there are also growing worries about the moral and social ramifications of its use,
especially if it gets into the wrong hands. Currently, private businesses and academic institutions
are primarily responsible for the development and sale of CRISPR technology. This has sped up
the field's development, but it has also raised questions about the absence of control and
regulation. As a result, the question of whether CRISPR technology should only be sold through
the government is generating more and more discussion. In this essay, I make the case that
CRISPR technology should only be distributed by the government. By doing this, we can make
sure that technology is utilized for society's benefit as a whole and that its use is controlled and
observed.
Explaining why CRISPR Should Be Sold Through the Government
Potential Dangers of CRISPR
A possible danger of CRISPR technology is the possibility of off-target consequences, in which
unintended genetic modifications are made that may have unanticipated and detrimental
consequences. Even while off-target effects have been significantly reduced thanks to studies,
there is still much to learn about the long-term consequences of the technology. Because of this,
the government should be the only entity authorized to sell CRISPR technology in order to
ensure that the risks are fully appreciated and reduced before it is made broadly available. A
private entity is more likely to sell an undeveloped product in the pursuit of profit, and
competition against other CRISPR technologies. According to a study that appeared in the
journal Nature, even minor genetic alterations brought on by off-target effects can have a big
impact on development and health and result in unexpected consequences (Nature
Communications, 2018, Source 1). We can guarantee that CRISPR technology is only utilized
after thorough testing and evaluation, lowering the danger of negative side effects, by selling it
solely through the government.
Government Control Can Improve Access to CRISPR Technology
One of the critiques leveled regarding the existing CRISPR technology development and
distribution system is that it is frequently motivated by financial gain, rendering it unavailable to
many academics and medical professionals. Contrarily, the government has the power to
guarantee that CRISPR technology is accessible to individuals who require it the most,
independent of their financial situation. For instance, the CRISPR technology has been
extensively studied by the National Institutes of Health (Jama Network, 2015, Source 2), which
has also made it accessible to researchers all around the world through its public repository. We
can make sure that CRISPR technology is accessible to everyone who needs it rather than just
those who can afford it by only selling it to the government.
Government Oversight Can Prevent Unethical Use of CRISPR Technology
CRISPR technology could be employed both constructively and destructively. It may be used to
develop biological weapons or improve human capacities in a way that could result in social
injustice, even while it has the ability to treat hereditary illnesses and boost agricultural
production. By controlling its use and ensuring that it is exclusively utilized for morally and
pacifist ends, the government may play a significant role in averting the weaponization of
CRISPR technology. For instance, the development, manufacture, and stockpiling of biological
weapons, including those developed utilizing CRISPR technology, is prohibited by the
Biological Weapons Convention, a global agreement ratified by more than 170 nations (United
Nations, 1975 Source 3). We can make sure that CRISPR technology isn't exploited for evil
purposes that endanger people's and countries' security by only allowing the government to sell
it. Furthermore, CRISPR technology has the potential to make precise and targeted genetic
alterations, opening the door to a new eugenics age in which "designer babies" with desired
physical characteristics might be produced. Selling CRISPR technology exclusively through the
government can guarantee that its usage is regulated and monitored to stop such abuses, which
present severe ethical and moral issues. The establishment of rules and moral norms by the
government will guarantee that CRISPR technology is only applied in morally righteous and
advantageous ways. In this sense, the government-only sale of CRISPR technology can aid in
reducing any potential risks associated with this potent and sophisticated technology.
Contentions Against CRISPR Sale Through the Government
There are valid arguments against selling CRISPR technology just through the government, but
there are also good reasons against it. One of the main arguments against governmental
regulation of CRISPR technology is that it can hinder inventiveness and advancement in science.
With millions of dollars spent on research and development, the private sector has contributed
significantly to the advancement of CRISPR technology. Private enterprises may be less likely to
invest in research and development due to their concern that their investments won't yield a
return on their money if the sale and distribution of CRISPR technology is restricted to the
government. Additionally, government bureaucracy and regulations can be slow and onerous,
which could hinder the advancement and dissemination of CRISPR technology. The government
might be more preoccupied with matters like safety and regulation than with the potential
advantages of technology, which could slow down progress.
The possibility of limiting the technology's potential applications is another reason against
government regulation of CRISPR technology. In order to obtain a competitive edge, private
businesses are frequently more ready to take chances and investigate unusual uses of technology.
The full potential of the technology might not be reached by restricting the selling of CRISPR
technology to the government. Furthermore, the politicization of CRISPR technology could
result from government control of the technology.
Counterargument
There are strong reasons against the idea that private enterprises are better placed to handle the
development and marketing of this technology, even though there are legitimate concerns about
government control over CRISPR technology. First off, it's crucial to remember that private
businesses are primarily motivated by profits rather than the general good. This implies that they
might put profit ahead of safety or moral concerns, which could have unforeseen effects for both
individuals and society. However, government oversight and regulation can aid in ensuring that
CRISPR technology is created and disseminated in a responsible and moral manner.
Furthermore, government-funded research institutions are frequently at the cutting edge of
scientific advancement and may be better suited to manage the creation and dissemination of
CRISPR technology (National Science Board, 2020, Source 4). The benefits of CRISPR
technology may be available to everyone, rather than only those who can afford to buy it from
private corporations, because these facilities are also more likely to put the public good ahead of
profits. It's crucial to think about the possible repercussions of restricting access to CRISPR
technology to particular people and groups. People who cannot afford to buy the technology may
be left behind if access to it is restricted to private companies. This could limit the potential
advantages of CRISPR technology for everyone and sustain current inequities. To counter the
politicization argument: misuse of CRISPR can also be done by the government, but it is highly
unlikely. A greedy CEO is more likely to misuse it in some way, as political decisions go
through bureaucracy.
Conclusion
Ultimately, CRISPR technology has the potential to transform the worlds of science and
medicine, but it also presents significant moral, societal, and ethical issues. Even though the
private sector was heavily involved in the creation and commercialization of CRISPR
technology, there is growing concern about the lack of oversight and regulation, especially
considering potential misuses of the technology. This essay makes the case that the government
should be the sole entity that distributes CRISPR technology. If this is implemented it will
increase access to the technology, prevent it from being used as a weapon, and lessen the risks
that could arise from its use. Therefore, CRISPR technology should only be sold through the
government.
Sources:
Source 1 Lai, H. M., Liu, A. K. L., Ng, H. H. M., Goldfinger, M. H., Chau, T. W.,
DeFelice, J., Tilley, B. S., Wong, W. M., Wu, W., & Gentleman, S. M. (2018, March 14).
Next generation histology methods for three-dimensional imaging of fresh and archival
human brain tissues. Nature News. Retrieved April 28, 2023, from
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-03359-w
Source 2 Exceptional Opportunities in Medical Science A View From the National
Institutes of Health. Jama Network. (2015, January 15). Retrieved April 28, 2023, from
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2089362
Source 3 Biological. United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs. (n.d.). Retrieved
April 28, 2023, from https://disarmament.unoda.org/biological/
Source 4 Science and Engineering Indicators 2020: The state of U.S ... - NSF. NATIONAL
SCIENCE BOARD. (2020). Retrieved April 28, 2023, from
https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2020/nsb20201/nsb20201.pdf
Additional sources for research:
Akram, F., Haq, I. U., Sahreen, S., Nasir, N., Naseem, W., Imitaz, M., & Aqeel, A. (2022).
CRISPR/Cas9: A revolutionary genome editing tool for human cancers treatment.
Technology in cancer research & treatment. Retrieved April 28, 2023, from
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9580090/
The New Frontier of Genome Engineering with CRISPR-Cas9 | Science. (n.d.). Retrieved
April 28, 2023, from https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1258096
Uddin, F., Rudin, C. M., & Sen, T. (2020, June 30). CRISPR gene therapy: Applications,
limitations, and implications for the future. Frontiers. Retrieved April 28, 2023, from
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fonc.2020.01387/full