Rebecca Tillery Genetic Engineering

Gewerbliche und Hauswirtschaftliche Schule Horb a. N.

Technisches Gymnasium

GFS im Fach Englisch

Genetic engineering
welcome to the post natural world!

Verfasserin: Rebecca Tillery

Jahrgangsstufe 2 TGGM
Schuljahr 2016/17
GFS Nr. 2

Abgabetermin: 18.11.2016

Betreuende Fachlehrerin: Carina Riesch

1
Rebecca Tillery Genetic Engineering

Contents
1. Evolution – History of Life.........................................................................................................1
2. DNA – the blueprint of life........................................................................................................1
3. Selective Breeding – first forms of genetic-engineering...........................................................2
1. A general introduction......................................................................................................2
2. Dangers to consider.........................................................................................................3
3. Advantages of selective breeding.................................................................................4
4. Genetic engineering - Accelerating natural selection...............................................................5
1. Radiation based gene manipulation.............................................................................5
2. CRISPR - Bacteria vs virus..............................................................................................6
3. The Use of CRISPR...........................................................................................................7
5. Critical thoughts on Genetic Engineering..................................................................................9
1. Fragile Ecosystem.............................................................................................................9
2. Economy vs. science......................................................................................................10
3. The ethnic debate............................................................................................................11
6. References...............................................................................................................................16
7. Table of Figures........................................................................................................................18

2
Rebecca Tillery Genetic Engineering

1. Evolution – History of Life

Charles Darwin put forth the theory of evolution and with it started an intellectual
revolution! If we understand how we come to exist how we exist, we might be able to
change certain aspects of our life. But, first things first, what exactly is evolution? Humans
have, for the short time they’ve walked this planet, been very concerned with the question
of their existence. The Evolutional Theory doesn’t deal with the question of why we exist.
But it does try to explain the history of life. This is the central idea behind evolution. Trying
to explain how we adapt to our ever-changing surroundings. It wants to explain the reason
for the development of different species that inhabit our planet. Darwin’s Theory suggests
that all lifeforms adapt to their surroundings. The adaptation happens through mutation
which cause variation of different traits in a species. There is one problem all species face:
population growth. Once a species adapts well to its surroundings, it can reproduce faster,
which leads to a vast increase of population. While the species adapts to its surroundings,
the surroundings won’t provide for an ever more growing species. This causes a shortage
of resources which leads to what Darwin called “the struggle for existence”. The only way
individuals of a species can survive nutrition shortage is by showing different traits than
fellows of their own species. This would give them a genetic advantage. For example, take
Giraffes. The one with the longer neck can reach the higher leaves, thus it will be able to
feed more, and grow more and lastly find a partner to reproduce with. Which leads to an
offspring that shares the same trait its parent did, which leads to it spreading faster, while
the fellow members of its species – a giraffe with a shorter neck will not find a partner to
reproduce with due to the lack of nutrition. Which eventually leads to the traits it possesses
to die out. This is also called natural selection. After a few generations the entire species
will change in appearance, behavior, facial markings and so on, to battle the struggle of
existence. Natural selection sorts out the good genes from the bad genes so that a new
species evolves. What we need to remember, is that natural selection only compares
different traits. The superior trait survives and evolves. It does not design the perfect
species, because a species is in a constant struggle of surviving, due to changing
surroundings.[ CITATION glo10 \l 1033 ]

2. DNA – the blueprint of life

The question Science was not capable of answering while Charles Darwin developed the
Evolution Theory is what drives our appearances, where they came from and how they are
passed on. Modern Science answered this question. All the information for how an

3
Rebecca Tillery Genetic Engineering
individual member of a
species will turn out can be
found in its DNA. It beholds
the genetic information one
inherits from its parents.
But our genetic information
doesn’t always stay as it’s
supposed to be.
Sometimes mutations
occur which lead to the
different traits a new
member of a species can
show, arises through
mutation. Whether a
mutation is useful or not,
natural selection will sort
out. [ CITATION Che15 \l 1033 ][ CITATION Lot03 \l 1033 ]

Figure 1 DNA structure

3. Selective
Breeding – first forms of genetic-engineering
1. A general introduction
We know nature has its own way of sorting good genes from bad genes: natural selection.
Humans have started their own process of so called artificial selection. This is called
artificial selection. A Breeder takes two partners of a species, that poses the traits they are
trying to bring forth in the offspring to create a new breed within the species. The outcome
is supposed to be a newborn with the exact traits that give it certain advances for its self or
the use it has for the breeder. This method is more likely known as selective breeding and
has been used since long before Darwin’s theory of Evolution. The most common example
for selective breeding is dog breeding. Common scientific knowledge states, that dogs
didn’t exist before humans came around looking for a way to domesticate them. It is still
not certain where exactly, from a geographical point of view, dogs came from or how long
humans have been breeding them. But humans are said to have been breeding their
favorite pet for over 14000 years. Scientists believe that humans are supposed to have

Figure 2 Selective breeding of dogs

Rebecca Tillery Genetic Engineering
domesticated wolves and afterwards crossed those wolves to create new breeds, which
possess certain appearance- or behavioral traits the breeders were seeking.

Figure 3 Selective
breeding: development of
corn

Not only have our ancestors bread diverse species of pets, but also practiced breeding in
agriculture. Now days many people are scared of genetically enhanced food. Funny
enough: nearly all fruits and vegetables we find in our common supermarket are the
outcome of thousands upon thousands of years of artificial selection. Farmers took wild
growing plants, searched for some with certain traits they could make use of and crossed
them with other plants that possessed other sought after traits, thereby creating a variety
of new edible plants. Many edible plants have been bred this way. An example for
agricultural breeding is corn. For the longest time, scientists have been looking for the
origin of corn. Mexican farmers are supposed to have developed the plant 6 – 10 000
years ago from teosinte – the only found grass growing in the wilderness that shares
genetic traits with the plant we know as corn today. [ CITATION Max16 \l 1033 ]

2. Dangers to consider
Many plants and animals would not exist today if it weren’t for selective breeding. But
taking natural processes into your own hands can have its disadvantages: inbreeding for
instance (crossing two organisms that are closely related) can cause gene defects that
lead to a worse life quality of the new purebred being. It also spreads certain gene defect
through entire generations if the purebred reproduces offspring’s. The most dangerous
thing that selective breeding is the cause of, is the reduction of variant traits in one
5
Rebecca Tillery Genetic Engineering
species. Take grain for example, it is a huge source of our health nutrition, there is a lot of
food we can produce with a grain plat. If we start breeding only one kind of grain, we
thereby cause a monoculture. Now that we have extinguished all other sorts of grain, we
have one specific kind of grain plant left. This certain grain could be vulnerable to certain
diseases or is designed in a way that it won’t adapt to environmental change, like changing
weather conditions. Given the condition, only planting this kind of grain could cause the
entire species of the plant to die out. Say for example the grain is vulnerable to a certain
mildew plague, which hit’s the region our monoculture of grain grows in, the entire harvest
is condemned to be ruined. This could cause a famine, due to the shortage of flour we
produce bread with. It might also cause huge environmental changes we can’t cope with.
Interfering with the natural order of things can cause drastic changes to the environment.
Nature doesn’t adapt to our needs. It will prevail, while, given certain conditions, the
human species won’t. [ CITATION Max16 \l 1033 ]

3. Advantages of selective breeding

Visitors of the EXPO 2015 in Milan might have stumbled upon the Israeli pavilion, where
they were introduced to agro-technology. Not only did Israel develop water saving methods
to cultivate arid lands and deserts. The inhabitants of this very hot and hostile land took it
and managed to breed tomatoes that would survive the dry hot weather in Israel.
([ CITATION Isr \l 1033 ][ CITATION EXP \l 1033 ][ CITATION nat16 \l 1033 ] )

Desertification has become a huge problem over the past decades. It will grow into an
even huger problem in the future. Take Ethiopia for instance. Here you find huge
landscapes, haunted by drought. The soil has dried up, causing terrible famines due to

Figure 4 Before/after desertification

which many families either starved to death or had to leave their home to seek refuge in
places where nature could provide for them. [ CITATION Int \l 1033 ]
6
Rebecca Tillery Genetic Engineering
Selective breeding could solve this problem and save many lives. As mentioned above, it
is undoubtedly dangerous to interfere with the eco system, some small changes to the
environment can cause huge problems we’re not aware of yet, but might occur in the
future. However, desertification is mostly caused by humans, clearing the land of its trees.
Deforestation leads to desertification. Trees not only provide us with life providing oxygen,
but also play a huge role in humidifying air and thereby creating rain. Trees absorb the
water that seeks into to the ground after a bit of rainfall. They release the absorbed water
back into the air by evapotranspiration: This is the main cause of moist air and its
transportation inland from the oceans it comes from. When people cut down trees, water
can’t be released into the air and causes huge droughts. [ CITATION Per \l 1033 ]

So, by re-cultivating desert land that used to be woodland, we might make drastic change
to our environment. However, you can argue that we are actually fixing problems we’ve
caused in the first place. When the trees return, so will the rain. Due to human caused
climate change, we need trees that can manage to survive in arid zones. These trees can
be bred through artificial selection. In the future, this is how we might fix world hunger.
[ CITATION Amy15 \l 1033 ]).

Selective breeding offers many ways to help with huge problems. However, it is expensive
and very time consuming. What if we could actually modify genes to do what we want in a
short time, for a low price?

4. Genetic engineering - Accelerating natural selection

1. Radiation based gene manipulation
Upon the discovery of the substance that carry’s all the information of inheritance – DNA,
the question came up, whether humans could modify this substance directly to control
different traits one develops. Back after the second world war, scientist wanted to use the
newly found atomic energy for
something that would profit
humanity rather thanas a weapon
for mass destruction. If you ever
wondered where the pink
grapefruit came from, then here’s
a fun fact: This popular fruit was
the outcome of an experiment
Figure 5Satelite picture of a atomic garden

7
Rebecca Tillery Genetic Engineering
with radiation in one of many so called atomic gardens. Modern genetic engineering
replaced this technique. But back when there were no zinc-finger nucleases or TALEN
enzymes, scientist had to make use of radiation. Gamma rays would be shot at a plant in
hopes that many trials later the plant would develop certain traits, (through genetic
mutation) which might be useful for humanity. This was the birth of the pink grapefruit.
Paige Johnson would describe this kind of genetic modification as following: "If you think of
genetic modification today as slicing the genome with a scalpel, in the 1960s they were
hitting it with a hammer". Genetic enhancement through radiation experiments is a long
and not to mention dangerous process of trial and error. [ CITATION Kau13 \l 1033 ]

Biologists didn’t want to leave mutation up to chance, they wanted controlled genetic
enhancement which lead to modern day genetic engineering. Genetic engineering
manipulates the DNA directly. The goal is to modify certain genes to achieve a specific
alteration. For example: Changing the genome of a plant in a way, that makes the plant
resistant to certain diseases. The biggest problem for the longest time, was finding a tool
that could edit the DNA precise enough to cut and slice without causing more damage to
the actual strain. For the longest time, finding a tool that would work in any living cell was
the biggest problem scientists had on this subject. The first way to edit the DNA was with
special enzymes. Back in 2002 molecular biologists found said enzymes and used them to
replace specific genes and replacing them. The problem remained, that the procedures
were time consuming and extremely expensive. While biologists were seeking to find this
revolutionary tool, basic researchers were searching for the origin of life. Where do you
find the origin of life? These researchers started of their search within ancient bacteria.
This lead them to the oldest ongoing war: (c.f. [ CITATION Amy15 \l 1033 ][CITATION Nut16 \l
1033 ])

2. CRISPR - Bacteria vs virus

First off, the basic researchers who discovered something that would change genetic
engineering and will revolutionize modern biotechnology forever, had no idea what they
were dealing with. They found reoccurring DNA sequences in the genome of bacteria’s. It
wasn’t just any sequence; it could be read the same front to back as back to front – a so
called palindrome. Uncertain of what the exact function of these sequences were they
simply branded it: “clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeat” –CRISPR for
short. The first to discover the function CRISPR had in bacteria cells was a microbiologist
working for a Danish food company. He found out that the CRISPR sequences matched
8
Rebecca Tillery Genetic Engineering
virus sequences. A virus that attacks bacteria is called a bacteriophage (short: phage).
When a phage attacks a bacterium, it does so by inserting its own DNA into the bacterium.
Most times, the bacterium will not survive the attack, because it doesn’t know what it’s
being attacked by. But every time a phage attacks, the bacterium makes a RNA (single
stranded genetic material, with a different molecular structure than DNA – which is double
stranded) copy of the virus’s DNA and inserts it into a protein complex - CAS9. In case the
bacterium survives the attack and the same virus attacks the bacterium again, CAS9 will
scan the DNA of the virus. If it finds a match to the single RNA strand, it will recognize its
attacker as the virus that previously attacked. Now the CAS9 Protein Complex knows to
slice up the DNA of the virus. Afterwards the virus won’t be able to attack the bacterium
anymore, it will be useless because the virus won’t be able to reproduce anymore. The
scientists figured out that CAS9 serves its purpose as a sort of immunological memory.
[CITATION Nut16 \l 1033 ][ CITATION Gen15 \l 1033 ]

3. The Use of CRISPR

This being said, many scientists started to wonder whether CRISPR simply is a primordial
immune system. As the research on CRISPR and the main protein complex CAS9
continued, a biochemist named Jennifer Doudna, together with microbiologist Emmanuelle
Charpentier, discovered that CAS9 is more or less programmable, it doesn’t only work in
specific bacteria, it basically works on every living organism. It’s the ultimate tool, that can
move around any genes in any living cell. However, while Doudna and her coworkers did
research on “programming” CAS9 protein complexes, Feng Zhang, a molecular biologist at
MIT, started a similar research on human cells. He and his team published a paper that
showed how CRISPR could edit human genes. This started a huge dispute on who
deserves the title of the scientist who
discovered how to use CRISPR in
human cells to alter the human
genome. This portraits the whole
problem our society has when it
comes to scientific advances:
Patents. What are the uses of the
CRISPR-CAS9 method? What is the
use of cutting genes out here and
Figure 6 Jennifer Doudna - Scientist who editing some there? First of all,
discovered what CRISPR does
9
Rebecca Tillery Genetic Engineering
editing genes isn’t as easy as it sounds. In fact, it’s actually quite dangerous. One tiny
mistake can cause a whole heap of new problems. Imagine the genetic code is like the
Morse code: if there’s one misplaced dot, the whole message (In our case, the genetic)
won’t make sense anymore. Despite all the mistakes that might occur when using the
CRISPR-CAS9 method, there are many uses for it. We shouldn’t fear testing most of them.
This new method of genetic engineering opened many doors. One of these doors for
instance, is the cure for cancer(s). The cure for cancer isn’t just found in one night. There
are loads of different kinds of cancers, some we don’t even understand yet. We don’t
understand how they are caused and what effects a mutation. However: CRISPR
revolutionized cancer research, by accelerating it. Modern cancer research consists of
charting different sorts of cancer and what influences the different kinds.

Undoubtedly, DNA and its role in carrying the genetic information was the great discovery
of the 20th century. But knowing that it does something, doesn’t exactly help us to know
how it does it. For years and years scientists have been trying to decipher the genetic
code. The decoding has not only been time consuming, but also very expensive. CRISPR
changed this. The CRISPR-CAS9 methods is finding more use in all sorts of fields in
biology. By cutting out specific genes scientists finally can see what these genes do. While
CAS9 only edits DNA irreversibly, scientists have figured out to manipulate CAS9 in a way
that it only “switches” certain genes on or off. Not only cancer is being researched on.
There are many so far incurable diseases nowadays. Some of which we don’t even know
the cause for. With CRISPR we can see if genes cause different diseases. CRISPR based
methods could also prevent different diseases in the future subject to the condition that it’s
gene caused. Diseases like Alzheimer’s. It will undoubtedly provide cures for diseases like
Parkinson’s, ASL, MS, and so on and so forth. A scientist has already succeeded in
healing mice from HIV to 87% and even made some cells impervious to the widely feared
virus. Another team has managed to reverse a specific mutation that causes blindness.
The idea has also been brought up, that to prevent diseases, scientists could soon modify
mosquitoes that spread malaria. Although this research will take decades to be perfected,
it’s a very dangerous field to temper with. The ethics and dangers of this idea will be
analyzed under 5. Critical thoughts on genetic engineering.

CRISPR isn’t only used in disease fighting. It’s also widely used in other fields. Fighting
food pesticides for example. Scientists have accomplished to alter a certain wheat to be
invulnerable to a special kind of mildew. CRISPR could prevent famines in the future and
help adapt plants to climate change that is not caused by humans.

10
Rebecca Tillery Genetic Engineering
If you ever watched Jurassic Park, you might have
wondered if it is possible to clone animals that have been
extinct for a long time, through extracting their DNA from a
frozen mosquito for example. Well, a scientist at MIT in
Boston believes it is possible and is currently working on a
project much like in the original movie. This project could
potentially revive a mammoth. Visions of director Steven
Spielberg might become very real. It’s just a matter of time.

Another door CRISPR opened, that up until now still layed

way ahead in the future is for instance, creating designer
babies. Humans that first off are supposed to be genetically
Figure 7 Jurassic Park modified in a way that they won’t suffer from genetic
poster
diseases like trisomy 21. But after the first CRISPR child is
born, a portal will be opened to new ways of designing a
life. Designing means, that the human life will actually be created in a lab, in a very precise
way. This will be the huge difference between natural selection and artificial selection:
Nature evolves and develops, artificial selection isn’t simply selection – it’s actual design to
our will. It’s in contradiction to how nature actually works. CRISPR opened the door to a
post natural future. [ CITATION Hei16 \l 1033 ][ CITATION Amy15 \l 1033 ][ CITATION Jen15 \l
1033 ]

5. Critical thoughts on Genetic Engineering

Upon researching how modern medicine is picking up pace on developing cures for all
kinds of diseases that, for the longest time, have been taken for incurable, you might
realize how far genetic engineering has evolved in just a few years. The future we’ve
dreamed of, in which scientists create super seeds, that make it possible to grow food in
the most hostile landscapes, despite dried up soil due to deforestation, is right in front of
us. The future is happening now. However, now that we have the technology that will
potentially make all our futuristic Ideas possible, the question comes up whether we should
realize all of them. How far are we allowed to go? Furthermore, who controls how far
scientists will go? [CITATION Nut16 \l 1033 ]

11
Rebecca Tillery Genetic Engineering

1. Fragile Ecosystem
In 1991 scientists built “Biosphere 2”, it
was meant to be a science research
facility to explore how many factors
could influence the eco system. Much to
the surprise of many, the project merely
lasted three years. In the end, the large
scale science experiment proved that
our ecosystem can’t be replicated. Every
single organism, whether it being a
certain grass, a bug or a specific small
Figure 8 Biosphere 2 in Arizona desert
animal, like plankton in the sea, plays a
decisive role in the maintenance of our eco system. A genome is much like our ecosystem.
If you change a single gene, one of which you might not even know how it is connected
with other genes, you might kill off the entire living organism. So, say we target the gene of
a particular mosquito species that causes the dissemination of malaria. With the new
CRISPR-CAS9 method we can cut out the gene that spreads malaria. We don’t know what
other functions this gene has in aspects of the mosquito’s health. In the end this might lead
to the mosquito dying of, or even spreading an undetected gene defect throughout the
population of all sorts of mosquito kinds. Now, over a long time, editing the genes of the
mosquito might lead to the entire species to go extinct. There are all kinds of animals that
feed on mosquitos, like bats. You might not see it at the present time you’re editing certain
genes with the goal to end malarias spread through mosquitoes, because perhaps, the
outcome will only show after many years. But the effect your small actions will have on the
ecosystem will be firstly irreversible and secondly may be drastic for the survival of our
own species. The effects of gene editing are uncertain until maybe someday, scientists
encoded what function every single gene has in a genome. [ CITATION bio \l 1033 ]
[ CITATION Col15 \l 1033 ][ CITATION Amy15 \l 1033 ][ CITATION Nut16 \l 1033 ]

12
Rebecca Tillery Genetic Engineering

2. Economy vs. science

Figure 9 Logo of Monsanto

Already today we have very far developed

Figure 10 changed logo of Monsanto
scientific methods that could end hunger in
the future. A huge obstacle that stands in
our way, to end hunger and decrease
poverty, is in many ways our economic
system. The problem with scientific
development is certainly the denial of
sharing information with other scientists.
Also, patents are created that prohibit others
from using and thereby profiting from new
technologies. Patents appertained by huge
corporations. It’s not an uncommon belief that pharmacy companies deny the public cures
for certain diseases. In fact, many pharmaceutical companies even rise their prices for
products that could potentially save many lives, but because they are unaffordable,
scientific development won’t reach out to individual citizens. This problem also presents its
self in pharmaceutical companies, it’s even present in the agricultural industry. Have you
ever heard of Monsanto? There are many rumors focused on this specific agricultural
company. As mentioned, genetic engineering of food has been going on for a long time.
However, scientists don’t always modify them in a way that they benefit humanity in a
great way, they rather try to ensure that they benefit for their work. It is important to
mention, that it’s not entirely bad that humans want something for themselves. Benefiting
from your discoveries and research is often a motivation for scientists to continue their
work. Some scientists may only work out of pure interest in their subject. Greater scientists
of course work to benefit their society and hopefully all of humanity. However, the ones
seeking benefit, like some in the research department of Monsanto, sadly didn’t realize

13
Rebecca Tillery Genetic Engineering
what bad they’d do when editing out the gene of their genetically enhanced seeds, that is
responsible for making a plant regrow year after year. Why did they do this? To make
farmers dependent from their product. If we develop plants that can grow in the Sahara,
ending world hunger maybe, we might have a company, or a beholder of a patent that will
want money for his invention. A patent that’s just too expensive for a country like Ethiopia
to afford. As you can see, our economic system does not go hand in hand with science as
long as there are patents, as long as we don’t share ideas and as long as we don’t make it
possible for all people to have access- and benefit from our discoveries. [ CITATION
Amy15 \l 1033 ][ CITATION Nut16 \l 1033 ]

3. The ethnic debate

Now that we are developing the technology to realize futuristic ideas, the question pops
up, whether we should implement all of these ideas. We have to consider whether these
Ideas are ethnically justifiable. We’re talking about gene editing babies – actually creating
designer babies! If we start designing life to our will, we should ask ourselves, what the
norms are we want to bend society to. When we start designing perfect humans, we start
determining what is normal. What is normal to the spider is chaos to the fly, it’s the natural
order of chaos. Nature doesn’t know order or design. Designing people and actually setting
a norm leads to excluding certain members of society, like disabled people. When we do
so, who is the person deciding for us, what normal is? Is a normal person a person with
perfect eyesight, perfect teeth, perfect metabolism? Well what about the rest, what about
the humans that weren’t developed in a tube? They will become outcasts of society. The
wish for designing human life isn’t that new. Even Adolf Hitler tried. Besides the terrifying
amount of jewish people that were murdered during the Holocaust, many disabled people
were killed in facilities designed particularly for the use of killing people.

Defining what’s normal isn’t the only problem with designed

life. Designing humans makes it possible to design society
and social hierarchy – this idea was described by Aldous
Huxley in the science fiction novel “Brave New World”. The
author introduces us to a world that determines a person’s
role in society at birth. [ CITATION Ald32 \l 1033 ] Gene editing
makes this world possible. A world where free will is
impossible because the designed society issues who’s
allowed to do what kind of work. Furthermore, imagine what
kind of person is designing his or her society. Imagine what

14
Figure 11 Book cover of
Strange New World
Rebecca Tillery Genetic Engineering
Hitler could have done with the technologies we are developing at the moment. He could
have developed super soldiers and taken over the entire world. Gene editing doesn’t only
make super soldiers possible, it can also open the door to a new warfare: Bio warfare.
Imagine scientists creating a mass destruction weapons for future warfare. Like a virus that
targets certain people. A zombie apocalypse might not be so unrealistic anymore. Most
scientists are novel enough not to share their ideas on how create such weapons, but as
flawed as we humans are, there’s always that one scientist that could potentially destroy
the world. [ CITATION Amy15 \l 1033 ][ CITATION Gen15 \l 1033 ]

Does this mean we need to ban all research in genetic engineering fields?

Instead of giving my own opinion, I gathered the following:

Ethical questions always require multi-perspective to be answered or discussed seriously,

here’s some answers of young scientists, students and people from all over the world
reflecting their opinions on the following two questions:

(1) What is your opinion on genetically enhanced food?

(2) What is your opinion on genetically enhanced humans?

Kacper Walkzac, 17, student at a polish High School in Warsaw (IX LO im. Klementyny
Hoffmanowej w Warszawie):

(1) “Not going very long. I’m quite sceptic about genetic engineering. This process isn’t so
bad as it is said. But I think that the worse thing are the basis of genetic engineering.
Everything is caused by a wide consumerism. It forces us to produce more and more,
including food. And that’s for me the worse in the genetic engineering. It doesn’t bother
about stability of nature, the only thing is the blind goal of producing more.”

(2) “About genetically enhanced humans. I strongly believe in human ability to adapt
himself. I believe that mind, in pair with strong will can do things medicine can’t explain. So
I think genetically enhancing humans isn’t necessary and because it isn’t examined, it can
cause more loss than benefits for our body.”

Helin, 17, student in Mannheim, second place in the national “Jugend Forscht”
competition, researcher in the “Life science lab” at the German institute for cancer
research:

15
Rebecca Tillery Genetic Engineering
(1) “I personally see the ability of producing genetically enhanced food as a huge
technological progress in human history. There might be the need for greater research
concerning the consequences of genetic engineering for our environment and our health;
however, I believe we can draw way more benefits from it by e.g. creating crop more
resistant, more nutritious and simply produce an abundance combatting malnourishment
all over the world.”

(2.) “About genetically enhanced humans it is a little bit different since every human being
is an individual and there are many moral aspects which have to be taken into account. At
the first sight it might seem grand to be able to enhance human genetic information in
terms of eradicating several diseases. But what if anything goes wrong? What if
eradicating one disease creates ten others? What if that human being is nonviable
anymore? It would have been much better if things happened naturally. However, I believe
that we do not have the right to intervene in evolutionary and natural process by this
excess. We don't have to enhance any genes because if there is anything to be enhanced
it would be by natural selective procedure.”

Jana Ermantraut, 18, art student at the University of Bournemouth, England:

(1) ”I deem it unavoidable and morally justifiable in the light that this offers the somewhat
idealist chance to create means to tackle mal nourishment and starvation on a global
scale”

(2) ”I just keep questioning our motive to do so. Why do we want to adapt ourselves to our
capitalist system to withstand the merciless exploit of skill rather than adjusting he system
to our own nature so it actually fulfils it's initial purpose of benefiting us, the mankind”

Bernadette Szasz, 18, German Student, award-winning young scientist of the Schüler
Forschungszentrum:

1) “Well, why do we need such food? I mean, our parents, grandparents, and all the other
generations before could survive quite good without it. They may had to spent more time
in the garden, but they also did not have the problems we have now after putting tonns of
chemicals on the soil. I don't think, it brings any advantages to bring nature out of balance
and no one prooved the positive effect of genetically changed food on our body. It may be
a nice thing for the moment, means less work, money for more food, but no one knows
what it means to put nature out of it's balance for longer time.”

16
Rebecca Tillery Genetic Engineering
(2) “Well, would you like a world with only one type of people? Isn't it nice to be an
individual - different from your family, friends, or neighbors? But what if everyone could
design his or her baby? When suddenly everyone looks the same and all the parents who
get a "natural" baby are called "crazy". But beside of that, I believe that nature and the
natural selection do a great job, so why do we want to play god and do something like
this? It may be nice to get some illnesses out of the world, but it makes us weak in other
ways. Many of these illnesses we want to get rid of show us, how much only one tiny error
or change in DNA for example can cause. So I don't think it's a too good idea to play with
it. And I don't know what you think but I really like living in a world where I am an individual
and don't look like most people of my generation do. A world where it's nothing too
unusual to have an illnesses and disabled people are not mobbed because their parents
maybe didn't coose a baby made in a laboratory. Why do we think we're better than
nature? Most things we did to show that in the past weren't the best ideas...”

Simon Raichel, 21, Bionic student at the university of Bremen:

(1) “Genetically enhanced food might be no direct threat to human life. However, the
introduction of genetically altered organisms (such as seeds) can damage the ecosystem
severely. Due to the complexity of ecosystems we can't foresee the results of this change
properly. Thus, i would never approve upon the usage of genetically enhanced food.”

(2) “Same rules apply to the genetic manipulation of humans. The human body is far from
being fully understood. It is highly doubtable that changes at the genome level will work
without consequences. As the adaptations of organisms almost always include
multifunctionality a change to alter an obvious trait can easily lead to a disfunction of a
hidden trait. Besides the ethical Argumentation against human genome manipulation i find
the stuporous try to "enhance" human life a fatal Intervention into a System we do not
unterstand.”

(The Statements were handed in in writing, which is why grammatic and spelling errors
weren’t corrected to prevent falsification.)

17
Rebecca Tillery Genetic Engineering

6. References
Literature

Huxley, A. (1932). Brave New World. Chatto & Windus.

Richard Sherlock, J. D. (2002). Ethical Issues in Biotechnology. Oxford: ROWMAN AND

LITTLEFIELDS PUBLISHERS.

Web Sites

18
Rebecca Tillery Genetic Engineering
(Perma)Culture and Sanity. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://permaculture-and-
sanity.com/pcarticles/trees-and-the-water-cycle.php

biosphere2.org. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://biosphere2.org/research/our-mission

Bonny, S. (2003, March 18). scielo Chile. Retrieved from http://www.scielo.cl/scielo.php?

pid=S0717-34582003000100008&script=sci_arttext

Carol, M. (2016, July 7). treehugger. Retrieved from What is selective breeding?:
http://www.treehugger.com/natural-sciences/what-selective-breeding.html

Chemical Heritage Foundation. (2015, July). Retrieved from

https://www.chemheritage.org/historical-profile/james-watson-francis-crick-maurice-
wilkins-and-rosalind-franklin

EXPO Milano 2015. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.expo2015.org/en/2015/10/22/israele/

Fredholm, L. (2003, September 30). nobelprize.org. Retrieved from

http://www.nobelprize.org/educational/medicine/dna_double_helix/readmore.html

globalchange. (2010, October 10). Retrieved from Evolution and natural selection:
http://www.globalchange.umich.edu/globalchange1/current/lectures/selection/select
ion.html

Gnetic engineering. (n.d.). Retrieved from Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_engineering

International Medical Corps. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://internationalmedicalcorps.org/ethiopia?gclid=CL6U-
sq3qdACFRThGwodhL0FuA

Israel Expo Milano 2015. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://expo2015israel.com/en/

Kaushik. (2013, March 20). Amusing Planet. Retrieved from

http://www.amusingplanet.com/2013/03/atomic-gardening-breeding-plants-
with.html

LaFlamme, B. (2016, October 20). nature.com. Retrieved from nature.com:

http://blogs.nature.com/freeassociation/2014/10/how-we-built-a-better-tomato.html

lEDFORD, h. (n.d.).

Ledford, H. (2016, March 7). nature.com. Retrieved from

http://www.nature.com/news/crispr-gene-editing-is-just-the-beginning-1.19510

Maxmen, A. (2015, August). wired.com. Retrieved from Easy DNA Editing Will Remake the
World. Buckle Up.: https://www.wired.com/2015/07/crispr-dna-editing-2/

Mellino, C. (2015, October 16). ecowatch. Retrieved from The World's Largest Earth
Science Experiment: Biosphere 2: http://www.ecowatch.com/the-worlds-largest-
earth-science-experiment-biosphere-2-1882107636.html
19
Rebecca Tillery Genetic Engineering
no patents on seeds. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.alt.no-patents-on-
seeds.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=76&Itemid=20

Sanders, E. (2010, June 2). FailedMessiah.vom. Retrieved from

http://failedmessiah.typepad.com/failed_messiahcom/2010/06/israel-develops-
tomato-worth-more-than-its-weight-in-goldliterally-456.html

Films

Genetic Engineering Will Change Everything Forever – CRISPR (2016). [Motion Picture].
Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAhjPd4uNFY

How CRISPR lets us edit our DNA | Jennifer Doudna (2015). [Motion Picture]. TED .
Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdBAHexVYzc

Genome Editing with CRISPR-Cas9 (2015). [Motion Picture]. McGovern Institute for Brain
Research at MIT. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pp17E4E-O8

Pictures:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a7/Cornselection.jpg/220px-
Cornselection.jpg

http://www.foodandpower.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/monsanto-logo.jpg

https://blinkutopia.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/monsanto-death-logo.jpg

http://www.amusingplanet.com/2013/03/atomic-gardening-breeding-plants-with.html

http://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-
public/styles/story_large/public/thumbnails/image/2013/11/06/19/pg-4-gene-background-
willar_1.jpg

http://www.csus.edu/indiv/l/loom/wk%2015/dogs.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/de/Biosphere_2_Habitat_
%26_Lung_2009-05-10.jpg/400px-Biosphere_2_Habitat_%26_Lung_2009-05-10.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/62/BraveNewWorld_FirstEdition.jpg

http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/portals/0/images/oil%20sands/oil-sands-
before&after800x2.jpg

https://img.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeed-static/static/2014-
08/12/12/enhanced/webdr07/enhanced-3859-1407860847-2.jpg

https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/primer/illustrations/dnastructure.jpg

20
Rebecca Tillery Genetic Engineering

7. Table of Figures
Figure 1 DNA structure...................................................................................................................2
Figure 2 Selective breeding of dogs.............................................................................................3
Figure 3 Selective breeding: development of corn......................................................................3
Figure 4 Before/after desertification..............................................................................................4
Figure 5Satelite picture of a atomic garden.................................................................................5
Figure 6 Jennifer Doudna - Scientist who discovered what CRISPR does.............................7
Figure 7 Jurassic Park poster........................................................................................................9
Figure 8 Biosphere 2 in Arizona desert......................................................................................10
Figure 9 Logo of Monsanto..........................................................................................................11
Figure 10 changed logo of Monsanto.........................................................................................11
Figure 11 Book cover of Strange New World............................................................................12

21