With technology advancing rapidly, athletes are racing to get their hands on anything that can give them an edge to eliminate the competition. Gene doping is a consequence of gene therapy. However, instead of injecting DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) into a person's body to restore function related to a damaged or missing gene, as in gene therapy, gene doping involves the process of inserting DNA for the purpose of improving athletic performance. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay We now have genetic technology that can enhance our very physiological and psychological nature; increase height, muscles and influence our mood. The question that arises is to decipher whether or not it is ethical to create these super athletes. This is a classic case of science moving faster than our morals can be codified. There are two main methods of gene editing in athletes that have recently been brought to light. One is somatic therapy. Somatic genetic modification deals with the treatment or modification of genetic cells in an adult. The changes that occur as a result of this type of gene therapy are limited to the individual only and cannot be inherited by any future descendants. The second method is germline therapy. This type of genetic modification affects future generations of the test subject. This type of therapy is started before birth in the embryonic stages. The primary use of germline therapy is to counteract genetic disorders and potentially harmful diseases, however it won't be long before its application makes its way into the world of sports. The founder of the anti-aging company BioViva, Elizabeth Parrish, says she had given herself two methods of experimental gene therapy. One of these methods has the ability to stop the breakdown of muscle tissue. Your muscles can stay strong without exercise and grow faster if you exercise. It is not known whether athletes have already used genetic enhancement to improve their performance. To date, no athlete has tested positive for gene doping or has voluntarily declared to the public that they are subjected to gene doping. Sports authorities are making efforts to take care of this situation and to maintain the integrity of the sport and create a level playing field for all competitors. New methods for testing potential genetic enhancers are currently being developed by Australian molecular biologist Anna Baoutina. He is a member of the National Measurement Institute and has worked on identifying added copies of a gene called erythropoietin (EPO). This hormone has the ability to increase the production of red blood cells. Red blood cells are what carry oxygen throughout our body, so for endurance athletes this becomes invaluable. Athletes would benefit from any high-intensity training by increasing aerobic capacity. Understanding the characteristics of gene doping techniques allows you to design testing strategies to determine this specific genetic improvement. Does this prevent future risks of making gene therapy a trial in the world of sports? Negative. In 2003 the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) added gene doping to the list of banned substances and declared that athletes who tested positive for genetic enhancement would suffer the same consequences as people who tested positive for performance-enhancing drugs. In 16 years only one method has been devised to test athletes for manipulationgenetics. The International Olympic Committee specified that athletes' blood was drawn for testing for potential gene doping at the 2016 Rio Olympics. No positive results were returned. Other genes besides erythropoietin also have the potential to increase the quality of athletes' performance in sports. Potential genes added directly to the muscle are now no longer detectable in the bloodstream. Currently the only method to detect them would be to remove portions of athletes' muscle tissue, which is obviously not an acceptable practice. However, the situation gets worse for anti-doping authorities in their efforts to crack down on sports cheating. The introduction of a gene editing technique known as CRISPR is “a simple but powerful tool for editing genomes” (Livescience, 2018). CRISPR technology has the ability to make changes as elusive as changing a single letter of DNA in a sequence, increasing athletic ability that humans would not normally be able to experience. Furthermore, CRISPR is now used to alter specific gene activity without changing any DNA sequence. , rather simply by modifying the chemical tags, which together are known as the epigenome. These chemical compounds are not part of DNA but are attached. Epigenome editing could be even more useful for treating diseases than genome editing, since the entire epigenome is responsible for providing instructions for turning genes on or off and manages protein production in particular cells. (Genetics Home Reference, 2019). The scientific hope is that epigenome editing can improve health outcomes by turning genes on and off. Once this manipulation becomes popular among doctors, you can bet that epigenomic doping will take hold in sports too. It is currently believed that the current doping prevention regime may not be as effective as we hope to believe. The vast majority of athletes who practice conventional doping would certainly emerge unscathed. An anonymous survey conducted in 2011 suggested that around 30% of athletes were involved in doping, while tests managed to catch 2%. These figures will only become less favorable for anti-doping agencies when genetic and epigenomic doping reaches the world of sport. So what should we do? Accept gene doping making its way into the world of sports and let the cheaters get the better of them? Or we will put our foot down and fight against the gene doping epidemic and punish those who defile the professionalism of sport. The arguments for legalizing conventional doping begin with the fact that people who want to play fair are essentially forced to do so. drugs, even if they didn't want to do it, just to have a chance against those who are improving their performance in an unnatural way. This is morally questionable for the athlete, as you would basically be forcing them to accept the potential health risks that would come with doping, just to have a chance of winning. However, participation in many sports is already inherently risky. For example, there is plenty of evidence that soccer, rugby league, boxing and American football can cause brain damage, even considering implementing game modifications to counteract these findings. Should we ban them? The 2011 survey, as mentioned above, had reason to suggest that many, if not most, athletes thought they had to take drugs to have any hope. Allowing specifically approved forms of gene doping under medical supervision could, 2019).