Bioethics - Sophie Kistler

As biotechnology continues to advance, bioethics becomes an increasingly important part of scientific conversation. New technologies have the power to alter living systems, treat disease, and reshape the natural world while also raising important questions about responsibility, safety, and fairness. Bioethics helps guide people and reminds people about how scientific progress should move forward only with careful reflection on the impact on people, society, and the environment.

There are many new biotechnology studies underway worldwide. Looking at the studies from a bioethical perspective can help one determine if the technology is being used in a good way. One study I learned about in a TED Talk was about how using young blood might help reverse aging. Below is a link to the TED Talk: How young blood might help reverse aging. Yes, really. I chose to learn more about reverse aging because I had never heard of how young blood can reverse aging, and I wanted to understand how reverse aging works. The video talked about giving older people younger people’s blood to treat diseases of aging, like Alzheimer’s, which is a type of dementia. According to the CDC, dementia is not a specific disease but overall a term describing a decline in mental ability interfering with daily life, usually affecting memory, thinking, and behavior. An estimated 6.7 million older adults have Alzheimer’s disease in the United States, which is expected to double by 2060. The video explained that as the body ages and becomes sick, the brain is affected because the whole body is connected through blood. Many experiments have been done with mice where older mice were injected with young human plasma. As a result, the old mouse injected with human plasma behaved more like a younger mouse and appeared rejuvenated. Below is a photo of a test a scientist performed where the two mice were put in a maze with only one hole allowing the mice to escape below. The mice were trained to find the hole for several days. As a result, the mouse with the young blood was able to remember and find the hole much faster. 

Helping older people reduce age-related diseases like Alzheimer’s can be very beneficial, especially if the younger people are willing to donate blood. Reverse aging by giving older people young blood is ethical because giving the older people the young blood follows the principles of bioethics. For example, respect for autonomy is upheld, as young people have the decision and free will to donate blood or not, and older people have the choice to receive younger blood. Another example is the principle of nonmaleficence. The older patient is not intentionally harmed by receiving the blood, and the younger person donating the blood is also not intentionally harmed. Blood used to help reverse aging also follows a rights-based approach, respecting the rights of those affected, with donors and patients able to choose whether to donate or receive blood. 

With many new technologies, there are also cases in which people vote on whether the technology is ethical. The case study I chose was Gene Therapy for Enhancement Purposes by Genetics Generation. The case involved Dr. Anderson and whether to give Kelly the gene therapy for Alzheimer’s, something Kelly does not have.  When making a vote, I relied on the principle of justice and the principle of beneficence. The principle of justice concerns fairness in healthcare, with a fair distribution among people affected, and the principle of beneficence concerns the healthcare provider’s duty to help patients. By giving Kelly the treatment, Kelly is taking away the treatment from someone who actually needs the treatment. Also, by giving Kelly the treatment to improve enhancement to get into med school, all the students who are also trying to get into med school are put at a disadvantage, with not an equal chance to get in. However, making a decision is difficult as there are different arguments for people who voted yes. One argument supporting people who voted yes is the principle of bioethics, respect for autonomy.  Respect for autonomy is about how an individual has the right and free will to make decisions. Since Kelly has free will to choose to receive gene therapy for Alzheimer’s, Dr. Anderson’s refusal to give Kelly the treatment could seem to violate Kelly’s respect for autonomy. Another argument is the Utilitarian Approach, which emphasizes balancing good over harm. While Kelly may not need the treatment, using the gene therapy to help Kelly get into med school will later allow Kelly to help underserved populations and impoverished areas which lack good healthcare, making people think about how the good outweighs the bad. 

A documentary we watched was Human Nature. Human Nature was about CRISPR and how CRISPR can be used to alter, delete, or replace DNA sequences in living organisms. If you want to learn more about CRISPR, check out the article below from CRISPR Therapeutics on Gene Editing. One interesting example the documentary included, which involved CRISPR, was in organ transplants. Organ transplants can be extremely difficult because of the possibility of the immune system rejecting the organs. CRISPR can be used to reduce organ transplant rejection by modifying the donor organs. The documentary briefly mentioned the use of CRISPR to modify pig kidneys for use in humans. In the article below from Massachusetts General Hospital World’s First Genetically-Edited Pig Kidney Transplant into Living Recipient Performed at Massachusetts General Hospital one can learn more about the first successful kidney transplant from a pig donor in 2024 and how CRISPR-Cas9 was used to remove harmful pig genes and certain human genes to improve the compatibility of the kidney with humans.

While using CRISPR to help create pig kidneys for human transplantation, there are bioethical concerns, such as the principle of justice. Pig kidneys are extremely expensive, so are only available to wealthy patients, worsening the existing inequalities in the transplant system. Another bioethical concern is the beneficent approach, which emphasizes the welfare and safety of patients. While the donor pig kidneys are potentially lifesaving for patients, the procedure carries high risks, including the potential transmission of unknown pathogens.

Biotechnology is advancing rapidly. A great example of the speedy advances is genetically engineering E.coli to glow green under UV light. We added pQuince, a plasmid containing ara, GFP, and amp^r. 

The AraC protein is a transcription factor regulating the expression of GFP, the GFP (Green Fluorescent Protein) is what makes the bacteria glow green under UV light, and the amp^r makes the ß – Lactamase protein, which makes the bacteria resistant to the antibiotic ampicillin, breaking down the ampicillin present in the agar. My group’s transformation worked out with the genetically engineered bacteria growing green under UV light. Below is a picture of our four plates and the bacteria, and a picture of bacteria glowing under a UV light.

While genetically engineering E.coli may not have as many ethical concerns, the transformation shows what the future may hold, including genetically engineering people’s DNA.

In conclusion, the rapid growth of biotechnology highlights why bioethics must be considered. Technologies such as young blood plasma research, gene therapy, CRISPR gene editing, and even in-class genetic engineering experiments demonstrate how powerful biotechnology has become. While biotechnology has the potential to treat diseases and improve human health, applying bioethical principles helps society evaluate whether these technologies are being used in a way to truly benefit people.