I'm noticing an interesting phenomenon on this topic. People are saying they an objection X, but upon inspection, it becomes clear that the actual fear has nothing to do with X.
For example the objection "this isn't a useful mutation," may be true, but it wouldn't justify outrage. It's the absence of a positive rather than the presence of a negative.
Or, for example, "the parents weren't informed properly," if true, might justify better communication with parents in the future but shouldn't slow down such genetic mutations on a wide-scale with informed consent. I imagine there are tens or hundreds of thousands of people willing to give informed consent.
I imagine it's something much more general like fear of the unknown, which is reasonable. But we should strive to be authentic in our arguments.
The stated objections make sense if you consider that they include an unstated risk component: e.g. "This isn't a useful mutation [given that its downside effects predispose carriers to more severe flu and West Nile + risks inherent in the technique itself]", or "the parents weren't informed properly [and will have to live with the guilt/shame that their ignorance may have caused serious harm to their progeny for generations]"
There are even network/ecosystem risks: if governments get the idea that CRISPR's practical potential is trivial, or if potential participants can't trust practitioners, the entire field could suffer setbacks.
For example the objection "this isn't a useful mutation," may be true, but it wouldn't justify outrage. It's the absence of a positive rather than the presence of a negative.
Or, for example, "the parents weren't informed properly," if true, might justify better communication with parents in the future but shouldn't slow down such genetic mutations on a wide-scale with informed consent. I imagine there are tens or hundreds of thousands of people willing to give informed consent.
I imagine it's something much more general like fear of the unknown, which is reasonable. But we should strive to be authentic in our arguments.