# data[].attributes.headline
REDO W/ PICTURE: Group #7 - Pro-Gene Editing (Plants)

# data[].attributes.subject
REDO W/ PICTURE: Group #7 - Pro-Gene Editing (Plants)

# data[].attributes.body
Although gene-editing poses many risks, we believe that when exclusively used for plants under strict regulation, it can be a positive technology that enables society to advance. With respect to how new gene editing is on human subjects, both the unforeseen and acknowledged risks greatly outweigh the potential benefits. With that said, the fine line between genetically manipulating babies for wellness or vanity is not as clear as it should be. If the higher class, who are more capable of engaging in such procedures, take strides to optimize unnecessary features in designer babies, say, athleticism, the difference in social classes would become even more distinct; driving an already strict social system to the edge. Until there is an ethical means to navigate genetic engineering among humans, we should closely regulate the use of genetic modification. In terms of plants, however, factors regarding ethicality and practicality are greatly reduced. For example, creating more resistant plants pose no risks to the environment nor humans or other plants. Rather, optimizing their function can help reduce climate change as few resources are depleted the achieve the same results. With all these factors considered, we stand that genetic engineering leads a positive impact only when used on plants.

# data[].attributes.body
Although gene-editing poses many risks, we believe that when exclusively used for plants under strict regulation, it can be a positive technology that enables society advance. With respect to how new gene editing is on human subjects, both the unforeseen and acknowledged risks greatly outweigh the potential benefits. The fine line between genetically manipulating babies for wellness or vanity can be taken advantage of substantially. If humans engage in processes that alter their characteristics, the social classes will be become even more distinct. In terms of plants, factors regarding ethicality and practicality are greatly reduced. For example, plants can become resistant and reduce climate change.

# data[].attributes.body
We have come to the conclusion that the use of genome editing is bad overall, due to the fact that you can prevent and rid of certain diseases, especially those that are hereditary. The downside is that the outcome is not always positive, which proves to be a risk that impacts the span of a human life. Additionally, most people may not be able to afford the therapy, and the cells are mostly unstable. The risks of the therapy outweigh the benefits of it, so it would be safer to not go through with the therapy.

# data[].attributes.body
Although gene therapy may be awesome and very helpful to our society, it does have it's risks. Genome editing can help us prevent and cure different diseases that are based in DNA. It shows us that we are making a lot of progress in our bio-medical field. However, we feel that the risks may outweigh the pros. For example, even if we are trying to solve or prevent illnesses, people can start to use this for negative reasons such as make super-soldiers/people. (Group 8)

# data[].attributes.headline
Gene Therapy - More Beneficial or Risky?

# data[].attributes.subject
Gene Therapy - More Beneficial or Risky?

# data[].attributes.body
Gene therapy is very useful in terms of getting rid of diseases and helping children, but the outcome isn't guaranteed thus it is very risky. Small errors could possibly cause the entire code of the DNA to collapse and have a terrible outcome. Not only could gene editing lead to unsafe ideas, but diseases could also occur when attempting to remove a genetic disease in the system. The result isn't stable, so in conclusion gene therapy is fairly beneficial but the risks might out way the positives. -Group 5

# data[].attributes.body
We are against genome editing due to the huge negative impact it may have on the world. Through genome editing, we may take advantage and ruin diversity in humans. Furthermore, superhuman abilities may be given to certain babies, ruining the stability of our world. We've all seen science fiction of superhumans, and know that power can lead to corruption. Gene therapy may also be extremely expensive. While we may be able to cure numerous diseases and illnesses and change the world, overall, the bad may outweigh the good. -Group 3

# data[].attributes.body
Gene therapy is a good idea but there are some risks. We feel like there hasn't been enough research on this idea which, when performed, can lead to physical and mental problems. It is also very costly and not everyone is able to afford gene therapy. Although this can positively affect our future and population, it would be more safer not to participate in it for now. Overall, the risks outweigh the benefits and it would be safer to not contribute.

# data[].attributes.body
Gene Therapy is very expensive, and it is not accurately an perfectly safe yet. Some positive things about it is that it can cure diseases/disorders such as Huntington's disease. It can also help deformed people in being cured. In my honest opinion, I think that gene therapy can be used well, but only when careful. There are many risks in using gene therapy and can eventually cause injuries or even death. It can also raise the human population which means that humans will overpopulate. If humans overpopulate, then pollution and other bad causes and effects will eventually come and ruin this world even though this world is already ruined enough. In the future, we believe that once gene therapy has less risks, it can help change the world only if people use it correctly, into a better place than right now.