Palmer

1
Claire Palmer
Gail Richard
Composition II
5 February 2016
Annotated Bibliography
Genetically Engineered Babies
Agar, Nicholas. "Designer Babies: Ethical Considerations." Actionbioscience. American Institute of
Biological Sciences, 2006. Web. 17 Feb. 2016.
In this article, Nicholas Agar asks multiple questions to his audience as to why designer
babies could change the face of society, literally. He goes in depth about the details of why
designer babies could possible be a positive effect for our society, and how the out come of these
designer babies could also be devastating to not only society, but also to our way of evolving
evolution. He relates the making of designer babies to genetically modified food as well, by
saying, Farmers in many parts of the world now plant crops with genomes altered to make them
resistant to pests or herbicides. Recent discoveries about the influence of genes on human traits
such as susceptibility to disease, shyness, and athletic ability open the possibility of transferring
these techniques to human being, (1). He goes on to explain how mouse genomes have played
an adamant role in this idea of designer babies, and continues to explain how the gene, NR2B
(which is also found in humans), can be modified to make a mouse retain information longer.
Scientists then discovered that since they can modify this gene in mice they can also modify the
gene in humans. This is only one of the various things that Agar discusses that scientists all
around the world have thought of changing in humans. Other topics consists of the change in
disease, the effect of modified genes, and the enhancing of attributes.
Commentary: Nicholas Agar article is a broad source of how designer babies are
becoming a popular topic amongst society. I can use it to establish key evidence, multiple ideas,
and quotes to make an overall effect argument when its broadness relates to other sources such
as, Engineering the Perfect Baby. This article also helps report how this designer baby idea
came to life in society, and how technically we are already designing our own babies but with
regulations using PGD, but PGD is only used for couples whose child is suffering from a genetic
disease that they have discovered inside the womb. It is not genetic modification like scientists
want, but it is where it all begins. This can be used to establish as background information or an
audience grabber when I write my research paper.

Palmer
2

Caplan, Arthur. "Babies by Design: The Ethics of Genetic Choice." Review: Babies by Design by
Ronald M. Green. N.p., 2008. Web.
This article was a counter argument to Ronald M. Green piece on Babies by Design, a
professor of ethics at Dartmouth College in New Hampshire. It states how unethically genetic
engineering of babies is to society, not just by the genetic advancement but also its outcome. He
explains how the outcome of designing these babies can cause social class diversity because the
rich will only be able to afford these genetically modified babies and everything it takes to create
them from a petri dish and how the poor will continue to reproduce naturally. He also concludes
how the manufacturing of these babies can create children to be treated as objects, and, that
children should get the chance to be who they want to be without having to carry the burden of
their parents' genetically mediated expectations. This causes an ethical assumption of whether a
child created from a petri dish using donor gametes will have a sense of worth or moral standing.
Commentary: This counter argument can be used to see the various view points of this
topic and make me really critically think about the outcome of these designer babies and how
society with adapt to this evolutionary change. Caplans debate makes you realize if there will be
inequality from rich and poor or if a two class society will form as a way of adapting to this huge
change. This can be a topic of discussion on my paper, about the negative outcomes or just a
thought that will help me write more of a straight forward paper. It can also play off of the
source, Intelligence Squared U.S. Debate, which has both pros and cons of genetically
engineered babies.

Darnovsky, Marcy. "Genetically Modified Babies." The New York Times. The New York Times, 23 Feb.
2014. Web. 17 Feb. 2016.
The article by Marcy Darnovsky, about Genetically Modified Babies talks about
mitochondrial manipulation technology and how the F.D.A. has thought of considering it because
of the increased rate of mitochondrial disease in the United States that has caused children
multiple deaths. This gears toward genetically modified babies by the procedure includes,
nuclear material either from the egg or embryo of a woman with inheritable mitochondrial
disease and inserting it into a healthy egg or embryo of a donor whose own nuclear material has
been discarded. The offspring would then carry genetic material from three people the nuclear
DNA of the mother and father, and the mitochondrial DNA of the donor. The problem with this
isnt only the risks but also if there will be cellular disruptions later on for that child that is being
produced. Another question that arose from the evidence was will that will a childs trait alter the
next generations future? The F.D.A is considering the mitochondrial modification, but it refuses
to include the ethical and policy issues because its outside their scope.
Commentary: The mitochondrial disease that Marcy Darnovsky explains and examines
could possible be an example that I can use that would support the reason for genetically
engineered babies. Though it does have counter arguments, it can still help society keep children
from dying or continuing to live with is such a serious disease. It also allows them to have a
normal life close to everyone elses. If not used as an example it can also back up another source

Palmer
3
I plan to use in my paper called, Engineering the Perfect Body. This will back up the benefits of
having the ability to stop diseases from being passed on from generation to generation which is
explained in that particular article.
Genetically Engineered Animals." SpringerReference (n.d.): n. pag. Prohibit Genetically Engineered
Babies. Intelligence Squared U.S. Web.
The debate between four scholarly scientists from a wide range of backgrounds and
experiences show the different view point in which Genetic Engineering will play a role in the
ethical, social, and medical stand point of this idea. It takes the topics of each of these arguments
and finds the positives and negatives in which it would prosper or fail the system. These
scientists not only take in to account what they are thinking but they also take into count of what
each one of them is thinking. By doing this they are playing off one anothers ideas like an out
loud critical thinking of this detrimental idea. Genetic Engineering is closer then most people
think, in reality it will be apart of out future regardless of how it effects us ethically. Yes, it will
take time like everything else to perfect the system, just like everything else in this world.
Though from the multiple laboratory tests, experimentations, and outlook on various data that
these scientists have conducted themselves or seem through other colleges, the outcome is
something that is bound not to be at least tried since it has the ability to save so many lives.
Commentary: The debate between these scientists, whether or not they approved of the
idea or were against it ethically, they all came to one conclusion that I thought was a key idea for
my research paper. That idea was that since we have the technology and power to take this
Genetic Engineering into our own hands, we would be stupid not to just try it out. Yes, this
includes restrictions so nothing ethically could be completely messed with until this idea is
perfected, but when reading this I begin to think that this should be the set view point to my
audience. Why not at least attempt to try it, we have nothing to loose, because each day a
person is dying from a genetic disease. I thought this source was geared like the article in the
Orion Magazine, Designer Genes, even though it was a debate it included historical back ground,
statistics, ethical thoughts, and data analysis. It really was a melting pot of everything about the
Genetic Modification topic.
"Human Genetics Alert - The Threat of Human Genetic Engineering." Human Genetics Alert - The
Threat of Human Genetic Engineering. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Feb. 2016.
This article saw both the positive and negative sides of why scientists have yet to make
Human Genetic Engineering a resource for humans ready to produce the next generation. They
start by comparing how technically all these years by using Gene Therapy we were starting the
expansion of Genetic Engineering, but the difference is that Gene Therapy is used not by random
decision but, in order to threat diseases in a single patient, rather than in all their descendants.
Scientists also talk about their fear of creating unfixable mutations or multiplied mutations in one
human being, because no one really does know the outcome of Genetic Engineering, because itll
take years to see the evolutionary change passed from each parent to each child. Some other
concerns include whether or not this is the only way to stop potent diseases in a family, and if
there is, could they be safer than HGE. The articles positives talk about how this enhancement

Palmer
4
could effectively benefit the human race, through making disease a thing of the past and create
life where there wasnt suppose to be any. It gives children and adults a chance to live a normal
life when they would have died young or have dealt with a disability for the rest of their lives.
Commentary: The articles view point of both sides when it comes to the Genetic
Engineering of Humans allows me to not only be able to create my own view point of the idea,
but also allows me to draw sources that will help me make an approachable argument that will
have few loopholes for people to counter act. As a result, I will be about to use several quotes
from this piece in my paper, because of the informative statistics and key details that give
scientists a bias thinking of this idea when relating it to ethics and society. Sources from this
article can also help me create strict body topics that will influence my over all idea. This article
is in some cases compared to Designer Babies: Ethical Considerations.

"Orion Magazine | Designer Genes." Orion Magazine. N.p., n.d. Web. 17 Feb. 2016.
Orions Magazine article talks of the enhancement side of Genetic Engineering (physical
traits) and how this idea has been a theory for many scientists that relate back to date in the
1900s. It talks about how not only this idea developed, but how it has now stretched across the
United States in multiple laboratories. These laboratories are competing to be the first to conduct
the perfect human, even though Genetic Engineering has been prohibited. Scientists relate this
idea to technology advancement and the modification of preserved food, by saying that it all
started at Universities and then became a resource us humans could not live without. With that
being said, it goes on to state informative historical events that have happened in the past that
could have been prevent by genetic modification of humans, such has the holocaust and the
European plague. The articles ideas bring to the plate a different view point of the topic when
they talk about how if all humans were genetically modified then ethically noting in society
would change, instead competition of things would just increase even more, because everyone is
perfect, intelligently, athletically, and so on. The controversy they did conduct was would there
be an authentic you if every human was genetically engineered to be perfect humans.
Commentary: This article will be the backbone of my research, because it takes the
Genetically Engineered idea of humans to a whole new level. From the historical back ground, to
the laboratory research, to the fixation of technology and how it plays a role, and then the ethical
and social stand point of how society could be destroyed or prospered, made me create a whole
different thinking about the subject. Not a lot of quotes will be used off this article, but its
different view point of the various topics will be used to branch off my own ideas and thoughts
of the subject. These ideas could be the evidence that wins the audience in my favor. As a result,
I feel as if this entry cannot be compared to any of my other sources. If anything this source is all
my other sources combined together into one.
Regalado, Antonio. "Engineering the Perfect Baby." MIT Technology Review. N.p., 5 Mar. 2015. Web.
17 Feb. 2016.
Engineering the Perfect Baby talks about the medical side of things when it comes to the
Genetic Modification of Humans. Scientists all around the world that are not prohibiting the
testing of Genetic Engineering, such at the United States, are taking this idea and testing it
amongst monkeys, mice, and stem cells. New technology discovered by scientists called

Palmer
5
CRISPR-Cas9 is making this happen by establishing a new way to correctly fix a faulty gene
even down to one letter in the DNA latter. Though what makes the idea so objective is that, the
genetic changes created by germ-line engineering would be passed on, to the next generation.
This is what strikes fear in most scientists is that the outcome could either benefit a person or
make things even worse. The idea of perfecting the medical side of genetic engineering and
establishing rules or laws on the enhancing side it is what biologists are trying to make happen in
the next few years of maybe even months. The effects of CRISPR-Cas9 can promptly be the next
greatest thing to vaccines. The idea isnt the ability to make a master race that is untouchable, but
to clear the excessive genetic diseases in families that destroy much of our population.
Commentary: I plan to use this source as another topic discussion in my research paper to
backup to the reason why Genetic Modification could be a positive for this generation. The idea
that there is already an invention in which genetic diseases can be stopped allows me to believe
that if there are restrictions on physical advancements then this could benefit humans in a huge
way. This article and its informative data was much like the article about Designer Babies:
Ethical Considerations, because it took only one side of things and revealed the the positive and
negatives about that one side instead of viewing other view points/sides. In this case though it
was just the medical side instead of the ethical side.