The Human Genome Project (HGP) is an international scientific research project with the goal of determining the sequence of nucleotide base pairs which make up human DNA, and of identifying and mapping all of the genes of the human genome from both a physical and a functional standpoint. Some people advocate the use of this knowledge to ultimately develop gene therapy. The goal of gene therapy would be to find alleles that are "faulty" and to correct them with normal alleles. Ideally, to "fix" every cell in an individual, this process would need to occur in embryos. Presume a couple found out their embryo has a gene mutation that has a high success rate of causing cancer later on in the baby's life. Would you advocate the use of gene therapy in the embryo to correct the problem before the child was ever born? What if the embryo did not appear likely to develop a genetic disease, but the parents decided that they would really prefer that their child have blue eyes as opposed to brown? Would you advocate the use of gene therapy in this case? Should the use of this therapy be limited? Who should decide those limits?

Find answers in the explanation below.

Step-by-step explanation

1. Presume a couple found out their embryo has a gene mutation that has a high success rate of causing cancer later on in the baby's life. Would you advocate the use of gene therapy in the embryo to correct the problem before the child was ever born?

Gene therapy has been gaining popularity for the treatment of various diseases and particularly cancer. As much advantageous as it is, gene therapy also has some limitations. Trying to disrupt or edit the mutated gene that might cause cancer in the baby's life can be advocated for gene therapy. This might be beneficial in a way that mutations develop as a function of time and as the cells divide, the chances of accumulation of more mutations are highly possible. Editing the gene in the embryonic stage of the baby using the CRISPR-Cas9 system has been proven to be useful and can be followed here. I would advocate this notion.

2. What if the embryo did not appear likely to develop a genetic disease, but the parents decided that they would really prefer that their child have blue eyes as opposed to brown? Would you advocate the use of gene therapy in this case?

I would not advocate editing the genes for improving the traits or characteristics of the embryo. The American Medical Association's Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs has also stated that genetic interventions to enhance traits should be considered permissible only in severely restricted situations. Even though the gene-editing techniques such as CRISPR-Cas9 systems are very precise that off-mutations are not accumulated and the mosaics are minimized, invading the embryo unnecessarily should not be permitted.

3. Should the use of this therapy be limited? Who should decide those limits?

The use of therapy may not be limited but can be scrutinized better so that the proposals such as gene doping are not permitted. Gene therapy has more success rates and stories. 

Therefore, the therapy should be regulated better by councils such as American Medical Association, World Medical Association along with other councils such as FDA, NIH, OHRP, etc., A combined regulation might prove to be better than a single regulatory body governing the therapy.