Why can't gene therapy be used to enhance the human body and brain with dynamic results?

Question

Why isn't gene therapy being used making a better human like super soldiers or more advanced brain capacity.

I am a microbiology student and do not understand why this new technology is being used only to cure Parkinson's or type one diabetes. What are the limitations? From my understanding the immune system has to be suppressed for a reprogrammed virus known as a vector to change the subjects DNA. Why is it not a drastic change?

Answer 1

Several reasons.

Most importantly, we are still at a very primitive level of understanding our genetic code. We are only beginning to understand what genes code for what proteins. that's a far cry from "increasing our brain capacity." We have no idea how those proteins help our brains store information, let alone what makes a smart person. it's not just brain size.

We know what proteins our muscles use, but what's the recipe for a strong football running back, or a major league pitcher?

We are many decades from even knowing what questions to ask, let alone what the answers are.

Answer 2

it would  be best to use family genetics gens, the unknown is very dangerous genuis, for example mixing unstable chemical can cause a unwanted reaction, there is no guarantee when doing unatural things, cloning is forbidin

Answer 3

My personal opinion, artificially enhancing genetic characteristics (designer genes) have a number of significant ways that they would be damaging. If for example, parents (who could afford it) could choose certain genes for their children to have, there would be specific characteristics that all rich people would have like increased intelligence, health, and beauty. Then on the other side of the coin would be the regular ugly, sickly, poor people who would continue on as they are, never able to be worthy husbands or wives. There would be even more massive separation of classes. The gap between the rich and the poor would get wider and wider as the smart beautiful people would be able to earn more and more money, to have more  and more superior children.

The other thing that would be damaging to the society we live in is that the gene pool would become limitted. It is obvious that certain characteristics would become highly desirible to the point that most people would carry these genes. There would be less variation and any biologist can tell you that species with smaller gene pools struggle to evolve. Without the larger gene pool, the human race would have trouble meeting the gradually changing world.

If a parent selected a set of genes that would predispose their child to being a doctor, wouldn't that all but sentance him/her to the chosen profession, thus taking away our free will.

Certainly, there are appealing aspects about the concept, but I hope I've also pointed out some of the dangers as well.