Hi. I'm writing a sci-fi novel in which I am trying to define an easily-understood genetic engineering disaster that leads to a permanent ban against engineering of humans.
Please let me know if the following scenario even makes sense:
Humans are confronted with an ebola-like pandemic that's sweeping around the world like wildfire. A vaccine is hurriedly engineered that seems to work and, as a result, most of the population is eventually vaccinated. All seems well. However, the vaccine has resulted in genetic damage. All vaccinated humans are now carrying a recessive gene that can cause sterility. That leads to approximately 25% of the next generation with two faulty copies of the gene. Billions of genetic dead ends.
Since the above is almost certainly flawed logic, I'd appreciate any ideas on how to do something like this correctly. Ultimately, I'm looking for an excuse why humans have not been engineered into supermen 2000 years from now. It has to be a real shock to the system that humanity will never forget, resulting in a permanent ban.
Thanks
Dirk
Please let me know if the following scenario even makes sense:
Humans are confronted with an ebola-like pandemic that's sweeping around the world like wildfire. A vaccine is hurriedly engineered that seems to work and, as a result, most of the population is eventually vaccinated. All seems well. However, the vaccine has resulted in genetic damage. All vaccinated humans are now carrying a recessive gene that can cause sterility. That leads to approximately 25% of the next generation with two faulty copies of the gene. Billions of genetic dead ends.
Since the above is almost certainly flawed logic, I'd appreciate any ideas on how to do something like this correctly. Ultimately, I'm looking for an excuse why humans have not been engineered into supermen 2000 years from now. It has to be a real shock to the system that humanity will never forget, resulting in a permanent ban.
Thanks
Dirk