Blog 14: Should We Use SynBio to Enhance Humans?

Welcome back! Last week, we started exploring one of the most important questions in SynBio: the ethics of using biology as a tool. We talked about how SynBio gives us the power to create life, edit it, and reprogram it to solve problems. But just because we can do something… does that mean we should?

In today’s blog, we’re going to explore another heated debate in SynBio: enhancing human beings. That means using biological tools not just to treat disease, but to upgrade humans to have faster healing, stronger muscles, sharper brains, or even extended lifespans. While this might sound like science fiction, researchers are already experimenting with ways to push the limits of human biology. But the question is, should we?

What Does Human Enhancement Mean?                                                                                   In the world of SynBio, “human enhancement” refers to altering our genes or biology to give us traits beyond the typical human range. This could be something simple like boosting vitamin absorption or improving sleep or something far more dramatic, like increasing intelligence, physical strength, or slowing down aging.

This idea isn't just theoretical. CRISPR has already been used to alter human embryos in labs. Scientists have edited cells to grow stronger muscles in mice and to resist certain viruses in monkeys. Also, Anti-aging therapies are being tested that target the very genes that control how cells age and die. This question cannot be avoided, it’s already happening in the modern world. 

The Case For Human Enhancement                                                                               Supporters of enhancement say that it’s just the next step in human evolution. If we can eliminate suffering, boost intelligence, or allow people to live longer, fuller lives, why wouldn’t we?

They argue that we’ve always enhanced ourselves in some way: from wearing glasses to taking ADHD meds to getting vaccines. SynBio is just a more advanced tool. If we can give people better lives, shouldn’t we try?

The Case Against Human Enhancement                                                                                    But critics see major problems. First, there’s the risk of deepening inequality. If enhancements are expensive, only the wealthy may be able to afford them, which would create a world where some people are “biologically superior” to others.

There’s also the issue of consent. Editing embryos or making changes before someone is born means they can’t choose whether they want those traits. And what if an enhancement has unintended side effects?

Then there’s the question of what it means to be human. If we start designing intelligence, emotions, or appearance, are we still ourselves? Would society judge people based on their “upgrades”? Are we at risk of creating unrealistic expectations for what people should be?

Where Do We Draw the Line?                                                                                                    One of the hardest questions in this debate is figuring out where therapy ends and enhancement begins. Is curing blindness ethical, but giving someone eagle vision unethical? Is making someone immune to cancer okay, but increasing their muscle mass controversial?

There’s no clear answer. And that’s why this discussion matters so much now, before these technologies become widespread.

Final Thoughts                                                                                                                        Human enhancement through SynBio isn’t science fiction anymore. It’s already starting, and the decisions we make today could shape the future of our species. Whether you’re excited or concerned, this question needs to be discussed. 

Thanks for reading this week’s post! Next time, we’ll keep the ethics series going by covering another hard topic: The Environmental Ethics of Synthetic Biology

See you then!

— Aidan Kincaid