EL SOULEIMANEYA INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL SECOND ENGLISH EXAM

FRENCH SECTION

ANGLAIS MONDE CONTEMPORAIN

CLASSES DE PREMIERES

Axis: Science, technologies, promises and challenges

Question de synthese
Write a short commentary on the three documents (minimum 300 words). Analyze how
they explore the possibilities and dangers of genetic engineering.

DOCUMENT A: ‘Designer babies” could be just two years away, expert claims
Genetically- modified babies are expected to help protect people from disease and could be
created ethically within two years, according to a new scientific paper.
Gene editing is now less risk and could be used in human embryos, according to an analysis by
Kevin Smith, a bioethicist at Abertay University in Scotland, published last week in the journal
Bioethics.
Supporters like Smith consider changing the genetic makeup of embryos so as to prevent the
transmission of gene- related diseases.
However, the idea has raised fears that it could be used to create “designer babies” whose
genes have been edited for non- therapeutic, but aesthetic purposes.

In November 2018 Chinese scientist He Jiankui sparked a wave of criticism after he broke the
news that he had created the first genetically- modified babies in the world thanks to embryos
altered to the resistant to HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus).
However, Smith argues their creation is ethically justifiable and would offer hope to parents who
might transmit serious genetic diseases to their offspring (a person's child or children).
From a “utilitarian standpoint” genetic modification is the “only conceivable way” to deal with multiple
disease- associated genes in an embryo, according to Smith.
Genetic modification would allow doctors to protect future people against cardiovascular disease,
cancer and dementia, as well as other widespread illnesses, said Smith.
“If several common disorders could be avoided or delayed by genetically modifying humans, the
average disease- free lifespan could be substantially,” he declared to the press.
Smith recommends delaying genetic modification programs because right now “society is largely
opposed to genetically modifying humans.”
Still, he believes an ethical attempt to produce genetically- modified babies could occur in less than
two years.
His work has been lambasted by other experts in the field, who highlight that the risks of gene
editing are still being studied.

“I do not believe that there are adequate experiments that will “prove” that this technology is safe, “
Joyce Harper of the University College London (UCL) Institute for Women’s Health told the Science
Media Centre (SMC) in London, “so we need to be careful.” Harper underlines that genome (The
complete set of DNA genetic material in an organism) editing has huge potential, but she
requires public debate and legislation in order to make sure they have carefully weighed the pro
and cons. Sarah Norcross, director of the Progress Educational Trust (PET), an organization
that works to improve public understanding of genetics, underlined the flaws of Smith’s analysis.

Norcross points out that people might not change their minds about genetically- modified
babies. In her opinion, more work needs to be done to understand the risks of the technology.

‘Lessons should be learnt from the mistakes that were made last year, by the Chinese scientist
who was responsible for the world’s first genome- edited babies,” Norcross said.” If this
technology is to be used again in the future, then far higher scientists and ethical standards
need to be met.”

Authorities in China have since said that the experiments which led to the birth of the babies
broke the country’s laws and that the scientists who had been involved had been suspended.

In October, researchers from MIT and Harvard issued details of a new gene- editing technology
that could potentially correct up to 89% of genetic defects, including those that cause diseases
like sickle cell anemia.

Adapted from CNN, November 19, 2019

DOCUMENT B Brave New World

“We also predestine (determine) and condition. We decant our babies as socialized human
beings, as Alpha or epsilons, as future sewage workers or future. ”He was going to say “future
World controllers, “ but correcting himself, said “future Director of Hatcheries,” (a place for
hatching eggs) instead. […] “Reducing the number of revolutions per minute, “Mr.
Foster explained. “ The surrogate goes round slower; therefore passes through the lungs at
longer intervals; therefore gives the embryo less oxygen, Nothing like oxygen- shortage for
keeping an embryo below par. “Again he rubbed his hands. […]” The lower the caste, said “ Mr.
Foster, “the shorter the oxygen. “The first organ affected was the brain. After that the eyeless
monsters. “Who are no use at all,” concluded Mr. Foster.
“Alpha children wear grey. They work much harder than we do, because they’re so frightfully
clever. I’m really awfully glad I’m Beta, because I do not work so hard, and then we are much
better than the Gammas and Deltas. Gammas are stupid. They all wear green, and Delta
children wear khaki. Oh no, I do not want to play with Delta children, and Epsilons are worse.
They’re too stupid to be able.”
Extracts from Brave New World (1932), by Aldous Huxley, Harper Perennial Modern Classics