I often doubt we have the intelligence to survive as a species without bioenhancement, but one of the downsides of gene manipulation is that that someone, some group, gets to choose what’s best about humans. 

Go to the Guardian to watch a lecture by IVF expert Professor Robert Winston, a bioconservative, who cautions against designer humans. From the lecture’s introduction:

“The question he will address is whether scientists should be given free rein to use advances in molecular biology – in particular our increasing ability to manipulate the genetic blueprint carried by eggs and sperm – to direct the evolution of our species and create Humanity 2.0.

That such a thing will one day be possible is beyond doubt now that geneticists can precisely edit the genome of monkeys. This procedure, and others like it, will allow us to replace faulty or otherwise “undesirable” genes in the human germline with new improved versions of the same gene.

In principle we could design humans to be stronger, smarter and less susceptible to physical and mental illness. It has been suggested, for example, that our genome could be tweaked to make future generations resistant to HIV. We can already edit the DNA in patients’ immune cells to make them less susceptible to the virus.

So we can shape the genetic future of our species, but should we? Is it ethically defensible to determine the genetic fate of people not yet born? “