Donald School Journal of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology

Register      Login

VOLUME 16 , ISSUE 3 ( July-September, 2022 ) > List of Articles


Genomic Editing, Human Enhancement, and Transhumanism: A Brief Overview

Keywords : Designing a baby, Genetical engineering, Genomic editing, Human enhancement, Transhumanism

Citation Information : Genomic Editing, Human Enhancement, and Transhumanism: A Brief Overview. Donald School J Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2022; 16 (3):210-221.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10009-1934

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 18-10-2022

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


A scientific debate on genetic engineering, human enhancement (HE), and transhumanism has been largely pursued in scientific literature, but so far, the public opinion on this issue has not been properly surveyed or heard. In this article, we accordingly join the debate through presentation and discussion of chosen scientific facts and opinions on genomic editing (GE) along with perspectives and concerns, HE, designing of baby with genetic engineering, transhumanism, and the culture of life. Finally, we are questioning the idea of an indefinitely long lifetime. While significant scientific advancements in the area of genetic engineering and HE are expected in the future, a reasonable approach and caution in the new knowledge and technologies usage and implementation may be strongly advised. Indeed, legal, ethical, and social issues need to be discussed and evaluated in light of novel possibilities to avoid an eventual critical era of human existence.

PDF Share
  1. Pavelic K, Kraljevic Pavelic S. Genomic editing, human enhancement and transhumanism: a brief overview. In: Kurjak A, Chervenak FA. Donald School Embryo as a Person and as a Patient. New Delhi: Jaypee Brothers; 2019. p. 131–140.
  2. Moore A. The future of our species. EMBO Rep 2008;9(Suppl 1):S1–S3. DOI: 10.1038/embor.2008.111
  3. Esvelt KM, Wang HH. Genome-scale engineering for systems and synthetic biology. Mol Syst Biol 2013;9(1):641. DOI: 10.1038/msb.2012.66
  4. Wang H, Sun W. CRISPR-mediated targeting of HER2 inhibits cell proliferation through a dominant negative mutation. Cancer Lett 2017;385:137–143. DOI: 10.1016/j.canlet.2016.10.033
  5. Moresco EM, Li X, Beutler B. Going forward with genetics: recent technological advances and forward genetics in mice. Am J Pathol 2013;182(5):1462–1473. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajpath.2013.02.002
  6. Method of the year 2011. Nat Methods 2012;9(1):1. DOI: 10.1038/nmeth.1852
  7. Stoddard BL. Homing endonuclease structure and function. Q Rev Biophys 2005;38(1):49–95. DOI: 10.1017/S0033583505004063
  8. Kim H, Kim JS. A guide to genome engineering with programmable nucleases. Nat Rev Genet 2014;15(5):321–334. DOI: 10.1038/nrg3686
  9. Silva G, Poirot L, Galetto R, et al. Meganucleases and other tools for targeted genome engineering: perspectives and challenges for gene therapy. Curr Gene Ther 2011;11(1):11–27. DOI: 10.2174/156652311794520111
  10. Holt N, Wang J, Kim K, et al. Human hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells modified by zinc-finger nucleases targeted to CCR5 control HIV-1 in vivo. Nat Biotechnol 2010;28(8):839–847. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.1663
  11. Gaj T, Gersbach CA, Barbas CF. ZFN, TALEN, and CRISPR/Cas-based methods for genome engineering. Trends Biotechnol 2013;31(7):397–405. DOI: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2013.04.004
  12. Reik A, Zhou Y, Hamlet A, et al. Zinc finger nucleases targeting the glucocorticoid receptor allow IL-13 zetakine transgenic CTLs to kill glioblastoma cells in vivo in the presence of immunosuppressing glucocorticoids. Mol Ther 2008;16(Supplement 1):S13–S14. DOI:
  13. Ousterout DG, Gersbach CA. The development of TALE nucleases for biotechnology. Methods Mol Biol 2016;1338:27–42. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4939-2932-0_3
  14. Ding Q, Lee YK, Schaefer EA, et al. A TALEN genome-editing system for generating human stem cell-based disease models. Cell Stem Cell 2013;12(2):238–251. DOI: 10.1016/j.stem.2012.11.011
  15. Pollack A. A Cell Therapy Untested in Humans Saves a Baby With Cancer. The New York Times; 2015. ISSN 0362-4331. [retrieved 2015 Nov 30].
  16. Qasim W, Zhan H, Samarasinghe S, et al. Molecular remission of infant B-ALL after infusion of universal TALEN gene-edited CAR T cells. Sci Transl Med 2017;9(374):eaaj2013. DOI: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aaj2013.
  17. Delhove JMKM, Qasim W, Genome-edited T cell therapies. Curr Stem Cell Rep 2017;3(2):124–136. DOI: 10.1007/s40778-017-0077-5.
  18. Biffi A. Clinical translation of TALENS: treating SCID-X1 by gene editing in iPSCs. Cell Stem Cell 2015;16(4):348–349. DOI: 10.1016/j.stem.2015.03.009
  19. Dupuy A, Valton J, Leduc S, et al. Targeted gene therapy of xeroderma pigmentosum cells using meganuclease and TALEN™. PLoS One 2013;8(11):e78678. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0078678
  20. Makarova KS, Koonin EV. Annotation and classification of CRISPR-Cas Systems. Methods Mol Biol 2015;1311:47–75. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4939-2687-9_4
  21. Doudna JA, Charpentier E. Genome editing. The new frontier of genome engineering with CRISPR-Cas9. Science 2014;346(6213):1258096. DOI: 10.1126/science.1258096
  22. Shim G, Kim D, Park GT, et al. Therapeutic gene editing: delivery and regulatory perspectives. Acta Pharmacol Sin 2017;38(6):738–753. DOI: 10.1038/aps.2017.2
  23. Soriano V. Hot news: gene therapy with CRISPR/Cas9 coming to age for HIV cure. AIDS Rev 2017;19(3):167–172. DOI: 10.24875/AIDSRev.M17000008
  24. Baliou S, Maria Adamaki M, Kyriakopoulos AM, et al. CRISPR therapeutic tools for complex genetic disorders and cancer. Int J Oncol 2018;53(2):443–468. DOI: 10.3892/ijo.2018.4434
  25. Kwon D. CRISPR to debut in clinical trials. The first industry-sponsored CRISPR therapy is slated to be tested in humans in 2018. The Scientists; 2017. [accessed 2018 Oct 7].
  26. Kosicki M, Tomberg K, Bradley A. Repair of double-strand breaks induced by CRISPR-Cas9 leads to large deletions and complex rearrangements. Nat Biotechnol 2018;36:765–771. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.4192
  27. Gallagher RR, Li Z, Lewis AO, et al. Rapid editing and evolution of bacterial genomes using libraries of synthetic DNA. Nat Protoc 2014;9(10):2301–2316. DOI: 10.1038/nprot.2014.082
  28. Bober JR, Beisel CL, Nair NU. Synthetic biology approaches to engineer probiotics and members of the human microbiota for biomedical applications. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 2018;20:277–300. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-bioeng-062117-121019
  29. Kafkafi N, Golani I, Jaljuli I, et al. Addressing reproducibility in single-laboratory phenotyping experiments. Nat Methods 2017;14(5):462–464. DOI: 10.1038/nmeth.4259
  30. Sittig LJ, Carbonetto P, Engel KA, et al. Genetic background limits generalizability of genotype-phenotype relationships. Neuron 2016;91(6):1253–1259. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2016.08.013
  31. Birling M-C, Herault Y, Pavlovic G. Modeling human disease in rodents by CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing. Mamm Genome 2017;28(7):291–301. DOI: 10.1007/s00335-017-9703-x
  32. Wefers B, Bashir S, Rossius J, et al. Gene editing in mouse zygotes using the CRISPR/Cas9 system. Methods 2017;121-122:55–67. DOI: 10.1016/j.ymeth.2017.02.008
  33. Nunes Dos Santos RM, Carneiro D'Albuquerque LA, Reyes LM, et al. CRISPR/Cas and recombinase-based human-to-pig orthotopic gene exchange for xenotransplantation. J Surg Res 2018;229:28–40. DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2018.03.051
  34. Niu D, Wei H-J, Lin L, et al. Inactivation of porcine endogenous retrovirus in pigs using CRISPR-Cas9. Science 2017;357(6357):1303–1307. DOI: 10.1126/science.aan4187
  35. Pew Research Center. U.S. public opinion on the future use of gene editing; 2016. [retrieved Dec 14].
  36. de Lecuona I, Casado M, Marfany G, et al. Gene editing in humans: towards a global and inclusive debate for responsible research. Yale J Biol Med 2017;90(4):673–681. PMID: 29259532; PMCID: PMC5733855.
  37. Ma H, Marti-Gutierrez N, Park SW, et al. Correction of a pathogenic gene mutation in human embryos. Nature 2017;548(7668):413–419. DOI: 10.1038/nature23305
  38. Genome Editing: An Ethical Review. Nuffield Council on Bioethics; 2016. [retrieved 2016 Dec 27].
  39. Jackson RJ, Ramsay AJ, Christensen CD, et al. Expression of mouse interleukin–4 by a recombinant ectromelia virus suppresses cytolytic lymphocyte responses and overcomes genetic resistance to mousepox. J Virol 2001;75(3):1205–1210. DOI: 10.1128/JVI.75.3.1205-1210.2001
  40. Selgelid MJ, Weir L. The mousepox experience. An interview with Ronald Jackson and Ian Ramshaw on dual-use research. EMBO Rep 2010;11(1):18–24. DOI: 10.1038/embor.2009.270
  41. Warmflash D. Genome Edition: Is It a National Security Threat? [retrieved 2016 Dec 26].
  42. Sample I. Experts Warn Home ‘Gene Editing’ Kits Pose Risk to Society. The Guardian; 2016. [retrieved 2018 Dec 10].
  43. Regalado A. Engineering the Perfect Baby. MIT Technology Review. [retrieved 2016 Dec 26].
  44. Hughes J. Human Enhancement on the Agenda. Institute of Ethics and Emerging Technologies; 2004. [retrieved 2018 Dec 14].
  45. Enhancement Technologies Group. 1998. Writings by Group Participants. [retrieved 2007 Feb 2].
  46. Warwick K. The Human Enhancement—The Way Ahead; 2014.
  47. More M, Vita-More N (editors). The Transhumanist Reader: Classical and Contemporary Essays on the Science, Technology, and Philosophy of the Human Future. 1st ed. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2013.
  48. Pat Roy M. Beyond Cloning: Making Well People “Better”; 2002. [retrieved 2007 Feb 2].
  49. Institute on Biotechnology and the Human Future. Human Enhancement. Archived from the original on 2007-02-09. [retrieved 2007 Feb 2].
  50. Allhoff F, Lin P, Steinberg J. Ethics of Human Enhancement: An Executive Summary. Science and Engineering Ethics. Springer Netherlands 2011;17(2):201–212.
  51. Bostrom N. Ethical Issues in Advanced Artificial Intelligence. Cognitive, Emotive and Ethical Aspects of Decision Making in Humans and in Artificial Intelligence 2. Smit I, et al. (editors). International Institute of Advanced Studies in Systems Research and Cybernetics; 2003. p. 12–17.
  52. Farah MJ. Emerging ethical issues in neuroscience. Nat Neurosci 2002;5(11):1123–1129. DOI: 10.1038/nn1102-1123
  53. Greely H, Sahakian B, Harris J, et al. Towards responsible use of cognitive-enhancing drugs by the health Nature 2008;456(7223):702–705. DOI: 10.1038/456702a
  54. Thayer KA. Mapping human enhancement rhetoric. Global issues and ethical considerations in human enhancement technologies. IGI Global 2014;30–53. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-5225-8356-1.ch090
  55. Lanni C, Lenzken SC, Pascale A, et al. Cognition enhancers between treating and doping the mind. Pharmacol Res 2008;57(3):196–213. DOI: 10.1016/j.phrs.2008.02.004
  56. Landau E. So You're a Cyborg—Now What? CNN; 2012. [retrieved 2018 Dec 14].
  57. Moss M, Cook J, Wesnes K, et al. Aromas of Rosemary and Lavender Essential Oils Differentially Affect Cognition and Mood in Healthy Adults. US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health. Int J Neurosci. [retrieved 2017 Dec 18].
  58. Warwick K. Human Enhancement—The Way Ahead: The Technological Singularity (Ubiquity Symposium). Ubiquity 2014;Article 3:8 pp. DOI: 10.1145/2667642
  59. Hughes J. Citizen Cyborg: Why Democratic Societies Must Respond to the Redesigned Human of the Future. Westview Press; 2004. ISBN 0-8133-4198-1.
  60. Aguiar S, Borowski T. Neuropharmacological review of the nootropic herb Bacopa monnieri. US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health. Rejuvenation Research. [retrieved 2017 Dec 18]. DOI:10.1089/rej.2013.1431
  61. Hart R, Norman RJ. The longer-term health outcomes for children born as a result of IVF treatment: part I—general health outcomes. Hum Reprod Update 2013;19(3):232–243. DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dms062
  62. Knapton S. Test Tube Babies Could Die Sooner. The Telegraph UK; 2016. [accessed 2018 Oct 8].
  63. Zeng Y, Li J, Li G, et al. Correction of the Marfan syndrome pathogenic FBN1 mutation by base editing in human cells and heterozygous embryos. Mol Ther 2018;26(11):2631–2637. DOI: 10.1016/j.ymthe.2018.08.007
  64. Knorr Cetina K. The rise of a culture of life. EMBO Rep 2005:6(Suppl 1):76–80. DOI: 10.1038/sj.embor.7400437
  65. Degenaar P. See the World in a New Light. The Guardian UK; 2011. [accessed 2018 Oct 9].
  66. [accessed 2018 Oct 9].
  67. Commissioned Report by the European Parliament Implementing Framework Contract IP/A/STOA/FWC/2005–28, Technology Assessment on Converging Technologies; 2006. [retrieved 2018 Oct 9].
  68. Vita-More N. Transhumanist arts statement. [retrieved 2018 Dec 1]. Available from:
  69. Bostrom N. Why I Want to be a Posthuman When I Grow Up. [retrieved 2007 Dec 10].
  70. Hughes J. 2005 Report on the 2005 Interests and Beliefs Survey of the Members of the World Transhumanist Association. Archived from the original (PDF) on May 24 2006.
  71. Bostrom N, Dafoe A, Flynn C. Public Policy and Superintelligent AI: A Vector Field Approach, 2018. version 4.3 (first version: 2016) [forthcomingin Liao SM (editor). Ethics of Artificial Intelligence. Oxford University Press; 2019.
  72. Humanity+. What is Transhumanism? 2013. [retrieved 2018 Oct 2]. Available from:
  73. Bostrom N. A history of transhumanist thought. J Evolut Technol 2005. [retrieved 2006 Feb 21].
  74. Hughes J. Democratic Transhumanism 2.0. 2002. [retrieved 2007 Jan 26].
  75. Naam R. More Than Human: Embracing the Promise of Biological Enhancement; Broadway Books; 2005. ISBN 0-7679-1843-6. OCLC 55878008.
  76. Sandberg A. Morphological Freedom—Why We Not Just Want It Nut Need It. [retrieved 2006 Feb 21].
  77. Hughes J. Citizen Cyborg: Why Democratic Societies Must Respond To The Redesigned Human Of The Future. Cambridge MA: Westview Press; 2004.
  78. More M. Transhumanism: a futurist philosophy; 1990. Archived from the original on October 29, 2005. [retrieved 2005 Nov 14].
  79. Extropy Institute. [accessed 2018 Nov 2]. Available from:
  80. Stambler I. The Longevity Party—Who Needs it? Who Wants it? IEET. [retrieved 2012 Aug 23].
  81. Pontin J. Silicon Valley's Immortalists Will Help Us All Stay Healthy; 2017. [accessed 2018 Oct 9].
  82. Lucke JC, Hall W. Who Wants to Live Forever? EMBO Rep 2005;6(2):98–102. DOI: 10.1038/sj.embor.7400339
  83. Hughes J. The Politics of Transhumanism, Version 2.0; 2002. [retrieved 2018 Dec 14].
  84. Lucas MS. Baby Steps to Superintelligence: Neuroprosthetics and Children. J Evol Technol 2012;22(1):132–145. PMID: 23505339; PMCID: PMC3595610.
  85. Dvorsky G, Hughes J. Postgenderism: Beyond the Gender Binary (IEET White Paper 03). IEET White Paper Series; 2008.
  86. Kurzweil R. The Singularity is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology. London, England: Penguin Books Ltd.; 2005. ISBN 0-670-03384.
  87. Bostrom N, Cirkovic MM. Millennial tendencies in responses to apocalyptic threats. In: Bostrom N, Milan M (editors). Global Catastrophic Risks. Cirkovic: Oxford University Press. 2008. p. 72–89.
  88. Trothen TJ, Mercer C. Religion and Human Enhancement: Death, Values, and Morality. Springer; 2017.
  89. Bostrom N. A history of transhumanist thought. J Evolut Technol 2005;14(1).
  90. Fuller S. Transhumanism and the Dialectics of Progressivism. The Sociological Review, Blog; 2017. [accessed 2018 Oct 11].
  91. Stock G. Redesigning Humans: Choosing our Genes, Changing our Future. Mariner Books; 2002. ISBN 0-618-34083-1. OCLC 51756081.
  92. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki. Recommendations Guiding Physicians in Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects; 1994.
  93. Newman SA. Averting the clone age: prospects and perils of human developmental manipulation. J Contemp Health Law Policy 2003;19:431. Archived from the original (PDF) on December 16, 2008. [retrieved 2008 Sept 17].
  94. Rees M. Our Final Hour: A Scientist;s Warning: How Terror, Error, and Environmental Disaster Threaten Humankind's Future in This Century—On Earth and Beyond. Basic Books; 2003. ISBN 0-465-06862-6. OCLC 51315429.
  95. Arnall AH. Future Technologies, Today's Choices: Nanotechnology, Artificial Intelligence and Robotics (PDF). Greenpeace UK; 2003. Archived from the original (PDF) on April 14, 2006. [retrieved 2006 Apr 29].
  96. Vaupel JW, Carey JR, Cristensen K, et al. Biodemographic trajectories of longevity. Science 1998;280(5365):855–860. DOI: 10.1126/science.280.5365.855
  97. Carnes BA, Olshansky SJ, Grahn D. Biological evidence for limits to the duration of life. Biogerontology 2003;4(1):31–45. DOI: 10.1023/a:1022425317536
  98. Westendorp RG. Are we becoming less disposable? EMBO Rep 2004;5(1):2–6. DOI: 10.1038/sj.embor.7400059
  99. Miller RA. Extending life: scientific prospects and political obstacles. Milbank Q 2002;80(1):155–174. DOI: 10.1111/1468-0009.00006
  100. Post SG (editor). Encyclopedia of Bioethics. New York, NY, USA: Macmillan; 2004.
  101. Hall SS. Merchants of Immortality: Chasing the Dream of Human Life Extension. New York, NY, USA: Houghton Mifflin; 2003.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.