The Biocentric View Deals Directly With The Rights Of The Animals

The future of medicine relies on the viability of genetically modified organisms. Scientists have turned to animals because there is a growing list of people who need an organ transplant and viable organs that are available are also at a shortage. The organs of these animals are able to be genetically modified through using CRISPR/Cas9 and used in xenotransplantation, the transplanting of organs between species. In nature, CRISPR is a prokaryotic immune system that resists foreign genetic materials (Rodriguez, E.

2016). CRISPR/Cas9 is a gene editing technology that allows scientists to alter pieces of the DNA sequence of the organism. In the lab, scientists can create a short segment of gRNA that binds to a specific location in a DNA sequence.

This gRNA can also bind to the cas9 enzyme so that it can cut out the chosen DNA. CRISPR technology is then used to add in a customized piece of DNA to the open spot, thereby changing the genome of the animal.

The main challenge with using CRISPR comes from the possibility of introducing abnormal edits, which could lead to the death of cells or mutations. On the other hand, the pig has been chosen as the best possible organ donor because the function and sizes of its major organs are similar to those in humans.

The societal views on genetically modified organisms being used as organ donors comes down to two critiques; the consequentialist and the deontological (Manesh S. et al. 2014). The consequentialist viewpoint can be further divided into biocentrism and anthropocentrism (Manesh S.

Get quality help now

RhizMan

Verified

Proficient in: Animal Testing

4.9 (247)

“ Rhizman is absolutely amazing at what he does . I highly recommend him if you need an assignment done ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

et al. 2014). The consequentialist view focuses on the consequences of using transgene organs, while the deontological view focuses on the xenotransplantation itself, regardless of the consequences it may bring. Biocentrism deals with the problem from a viewpoint of the animal, while anthropocentrism deals with the problem from a human viewpoint. The lack of scientific knowledge on xenotransplantation and the effects of gene editing leads the utilization of this technology to be labeled as unethical due to the potential risks for both humans and animals. Humans could be subject to organ rejection, which could lead to further complications concerning the immune system and animals could be subject to suffering during the many years of research.

One of the main criticisms coming from the deontological perspective is that scientists are playing God, which is unorthodox. The scientists who research transgenic organisms are, in reality, creating something that has never existed before, especially not in nature. The authors of one article call it “passing from being a creation to a creator” (Manesh S. et al. 2014). God created humans and now humans are trying to create something that has never existed before, a transgenic organism. The other criticism expressed is that transplanting an animal’s organ into a human interferes with nature. These animal’s organs essentially become artificial as humans have changed their genome, which also does not happen naturally. Humans are trying to change nature for our benefit, doing anything possible to survive, no matter how harmful or unethical it may be.

The consequentialist arguments fall under two categories; anthropocentric and biocentric (Manesh S. et al. 2014). From the anthropocentric view, most people are worried about the transfer of diseases from xenotransplantation due to the lack of testing and evidence, as some diseases can affect both animals and humans, like PERV that is found in pigs. PERV’s do not effect pigs and stands for porcine endogenous retrovirus. Unfortunately, PERV’s can affect humans so they have to be removed from the pig genome. Some research has been done using CRISPR/Cas9 to remove the PERV virus from pigs so their organs are viable for future transplants. When dealing with xenotransplantation, the person receiving the transgenic organ must take certain immunosuppressant’s in order to lower the rate of rejection. However, these drugs can also severely damage the immune system, which could lead to a higher rate of infection from various diseases. Undergoing xenotransplantation is a huge decision, as it will affect one’s life for forever. You never know what could happen down the line.

On the other hand, the biocentric view deals directly with the rights of the animals. One man, the philosopher Jeremy Bentham, believed that animals should be included into ethical society because they have the ability to feel pain and that they are sentient. If they are to be used in medicinal testing, the animals should not have to suffer in any way. Today, many people and organizations are involved in animal rights and welfare, specifically under circumstances that deal with animal testing. The animals being tested on are exposed to suffering for as long as the research study takes. The Humane Society of the US states that “xenotransplantation is neither ethical, cost-efficient, or safe” (Graham J. 2018). From a survey described by Deseret News, 41% of people said bioengineering animals is not okay. 16% were concerned about human health, 18% said it interfered with God, and 21% were opposed because of animal suffering (Graham J. 2018). Those who support the biocentric view deal with animal rights and animal welfare, believing that animals should not be used for the benefit of humans. Animals were not created and put on the earth to be used as test subjects.

My chosen stakeholder is Dr. Luhan Yang who co-founded with George Church the company eGenesis in 2015, where she is the current chief scientific officer. Dr. Yang obtained a dual bachelors in Biology and Psychology from Peking University and her PhD in Translational Medicine and Human Biology from Harvard Medical School. My chosen stakeholder is an important addition to this debate because her company specifically focuses on using CRISPR/Cas9 technology to create safe transplantable organs. Dr. Yang is known for developing the CRISPR/Cas9 technology in order to use it in mammal cells. Her company focuses on using CRISPR/Cas9 with pigs.

One of Yang’s greatest achievements came in 2015 when she and colleagues used CRISPR technology to remove 62 genes from the pig’s kidney cells to inactivate the endoviruses that could have possibly prevented them from using the pigs as future organ donors (Niu D. et al. 2017). Yang and her colleagues are now focusing on how to get the genetically altered mothers to produce healthy babies. The first offspring consisting of 37 pigs were discovered to not have PERV, leading Yang and her team to becoming the first company to have healthy, PERV free piglets. However, only 15 of the piglets have survived. The surviving piglets are still a success, which is a giant step for Yang and her team because they could possibly be used for xenotransplantation.

Yang’s input will be important to the debate because she specifically and directly works with CRISPR and genetically altered pigs. She has first-hand experience with creating genetically modified organisms that could be used in the future as organ donors. Her company is also working on getting human genes into the pig organs. They are testing the pigs by adding into them 12 different human genes, including one that would “protect the pig organs from being attacked by the immune system of a human” (Begley S. 2017). Unfortunately, the embryos with these new human genes either miscarried or died, so the eGenesis team still has a long way to go.

Yang’s perspective is different from other stakeholders because her achievements offer insight into the beginnings of xenotransplantation. Her work with inactivating PERV genes was the first of its kind, as no one had ever been able to cut out 62 at once, which still stands as a record. Yang’s accomplishments are important because they are leading the way in the field of CRISPR technology. Currently Yang and her team are continuing to test the organs from PERV free pigs to make sure they are safe so that they can soon move into clinical testing. With each passing day, Yang and her team at eGenesis are inching closer to perfecting the use of CRISPR technology, which can then lead to the perfection of xenotransplantation.

My stakeholder, Dr. Yang, will assert three main points during the debate on genetically modified organisms being used as organ donors. The most important three will be (1) that the future of transplantation is “designer pigs” (2) that inserting human genes into the pig cell is imperative and (3) that ethical issues should not stop someone from getting a pig organ or dying. Yang calls her pigs “designer pigs,” because they have been edited in order to meet the needs of humans. The designer part comes from the hands of a scientist, as they are, essentially, “designing” the pig to carry what they want, which is PERV free genes.

It is also important to insert some human genes into the pig cells in order for their organs to be more compatible for the human immune system. As previously mentioned, Yang and her colleagues have yet to see success from this work, indicating there is still more testing that needs to be completed. The last point that Yang will offer is that getting an organ from a transgenic animal is a personal choice. Opposing views should not stop others from participating in xenotransplantation. Yang has spent a majority of her life focusing on CRISPR technology to modify organisms and her experiences allow her to bring pertinent information to the debate.

CRISPR/Cas9 technology is going to transform the world, with eGenesis at the helm. While this debate will focus on its use for modifying organisms, the technology can be tested so that it can be used for other things. Something that is very interesting is that it could be used in trying to bring back extinct species. Dr. Yang’s mentor, George Church, is also involved with a team trying to bring back the wooly mammoth. While research and testing may go on for who knows how long, Yang and eGenesis have continued to lead the way. Yang has been involved with CRISPR technology for almost fifteen years and she continues to surprise the scientific world. With each first she has had, both in college and with her company, Yang has changed the game.