EigoPro 1級読解 — Editing the Human Germline: Promise and Peril

Few technologies have so swiftly traversed the chasm between laboratory curiosity and existential debate as CRISPR-Cas9. Adapted from a bacterial immune mechanism, the system functions as molecular scissors, guided by a programmable RNA strand to a precise genomic address where it can excise, disable, or rewrite a sequence. Its allure lies in its democratising simplicity: what once demanded years of specialised labour by well-funded laboratories can now be accomplished in weeks at modest cost, a reduction in friction that has accelerated research across medicine and agriculture alike and lowered the threshold for who may participate. Yet this very accessibility sharpens the ethical quandary. A crucial distinction governs the discourse: editing somatic cells affects only the treated individual, whereas altering the germline—the eggs, sperm, and embryos—propagates changes to every subsequent generation. The former promises therapies for sickle-cell disease and inherited blindness with a tractable risk profile; the latter trespasses upon the genetic inheritance of people not yet conceived, who can render no consent and who must live with whatever errors slip through. Proponents contend that to withhold a tool capable of expunging hereditary suffering is itself a moral failing, and that a categorical prohibition merely cedes the field to less scrupulous actors operating beyond regulatory reach. Critics counter that our grasp of the genome's labyrinthine interdependencies remains rudimentary; an edit that corrects one defect may unleash unforeseen pleiotropic consequences, and the spectre of consumer-driven enhancement—designing offspring for height, intellect, or temperament—threatens to recast a clinical intervention as a vehicle for entrenched inequality among those who can afford it. The 2018 announcement of gene-edited infants in China, conducted in defiance of professional consensus, crystallised these anxieties and provoked near-universal condemnation. The episode demonstrated that the technical barrier had already fallen; what remains contested is whether any framework of oversight can be both stringent enough to forestall recklessness and supple enough to permit genuine therapeutic advance. The genie, many concede, will not be coaxed back into its bottle.

5問合格 60%以上普通

新規登録またはログインが必要です

この単元の問題を3問、解説つきで公開しています

1級 · 読解 · 全5問

問 1

Which statement best captures the central argument of the passage?

The principal obstacle to germline editing is the prohibitive technical difficulty of targeting a precise genomic address.
CRISPR's ease of use intensifies an ethical dilemma centred on whether heritable edits to the human germline should ever be permitted.
Agricultural applications of CRISPR pose greater societal risks than any conceivable medical use of the technology.
CRISPR has already cured the majority of hereditary diseases, leaving only minor regulatory details to resolve.

Phrase

Yet this very accessibility sharpens the ethical quandary.

1級読解主旨把握論旨

⚡ひとことで

手軽さが逆に倫理的ジレンマを鋭くするという論旨。

選択肢の解説Choice Analysis

「CRISPR's ease of use intensifies an ethical dilemma centred on whether heritable edits to the human germline should ever be permitted.」

正解

本文は CRISPR のやさしさ（democratising simplicity）を認めつつも、それが「this very accessibility sharpens the ethical quandary」と述べ、特に生殖細胞系列編集の可否をめぐる論争を中心に据えている。賛否両論を並べ、技術的障壁は既に崩れたが規制のあり方が争点だと結ぶ。よってこの文が論旨を最もよく表す。

「CRISPR has already cured the majority of hereditary diseases, leaving only minor regulatory details to resolve.」
= 遺伝病の大半は既に治癒済みだとする主張 ━ 本文は therapies を「promises」と表現し将来の可能性として語り、既に治癒したとは一言も述べていない。。
「The principal obstacle to germline editing is the prohibitive technical difficulty of targeting a precise genomic address.」
= 最大の障壁は技術的困難さだとする主張 ━ 最終段落が「the technical barrier had already fallen」と明言しており、技術ではなく倫理・規制が争点だと示される。。
「Agricultural applications of CRISPR pose greater societal risks than any conceivable medical use of the technology.」
= 農業応用が医療より危険だとする主張 ━ 農業は研究加速の例として一度触れられるのみで、危険性の比較は本文に存在しない。。

▦Collocation

パターン	意味	例
sharpen the dilemma	ジレンマを鋭くさせる	Cheaper tools sharpen the dilemma rather than resolve it.
capture the argument	論旨をとらえる	The summary fails to capture the argument of the essay.
central to the debate	論争の中心である	Consent is central to the debate over germline editing.
a moral failing	道徳的過失	Inaction can itself be a moral failing.
cede the field to	を（他者に）明け渡す	A ban may cede the field to unregulated actors.

❝例文

The opening lines neatly capture the writer's thesis.
冒頭の数行が書き手の論旨を端的にとらえている。
Accessibility can paradoxically deepen ethical problems.
手軽さは逆説的に倫理問題を深めうる。
The germline question dominates the entire discussion.
生殖細胞系の問題が議論全体を支配している。
A good gist statement avoids narrow detail.
良い主旨文は狭い詳細に溺れない。

💡Tip · 覚えるコツ

主旨問題では、本文が「複数の立場を並べて争点を示す」論説型か、一方的主張かを見極める。ここでは sharpens the ethical quandary がキー。

問 2

According to the passage, how does somatic cell editing differ from germline editing?

Somatic edits are inherited by descendants, while germline edits remain confined to the patient.
Somatic edits affect only the treated individual, whereas germline edits are passed on to every subsequent generation.
Somatic edits require parental consent, whereas germline edits require none because they are reversible.
Both somatic and germline edits affect only the individual but differ in their financial cost.

Phrase

propagates changes to every subsequent generation

1級読解詳細把握

⚡ひとことで

体細胞は個人限定、生殖細胞は世代へ伝播。

選択肢の解説Choice Analysis

「Somatic edits affect only the treated individual, whereas germline edits are passed on to every subsequent generation.」

正解

本文は「editing somatic cells affects only the treated individual, whereas altering the germline…propagates changes to every subsequent generation」と明記する。すなわち体細胞編集は治療された本人のみに及び、生殖細胞編集は以降の全世代に伝わる。よってこれが正解。

「Somatic edits are inherited by descendants, while germline edits remain confined to the patient.」
= 体細胞が遺伝し生殖細胞が個人限定だとする ━ 本文の区別を正反対にしており、somatic と germline の役割が逆だ。。
「Both somatic and germline edits affect only the individual but differ in their financial cost.」
= 両者は個人限定で費用のみ違うとする ━ 生殖細胞編集は世代を越えて伝わるとされており、両者とも個人限定という記述はない。。
「Somatic edits require parental consent, whereas germline edits require none because they are reversible.」
= 生殖細胞編集は可逆だから同意不要だとする ━ 本文は生殖細胞編集を可逆と述べず、未出生者は同意不能としている。。

▦Collocation

パターン	意味	例
affect only	にだけ影響する	The edit affects only the patient who receives it.
pass on to	に伝える	Germline changes pass on to future children.
subsequent generation	以降の世代	The trait reappears in every subsequent generation.
draw a distinction	区別を設ける	Scientists draw a distinction between the two procedures.
render no consent	同意を示せない	The unborn can render no consent to such changes.

❝例文

Somatic therapy stops with the person treated.
体細胞治療は治療を受けた本人で止まる。
Germline alterations ripple down the family tree.
生殖細胞の変更は家系を下って波及する。
The two categories carry very different risks.
この二つの区分は全く異なるリスクを伴う。
Consent becomes impossible for those not yet born.
未だ生まれぬ者にとって同意は不可能となる。

💡Tip · 覚えるコツ

somatic（体細胞）と germline（生殖細胞）の対比は選択肢で「逆」にしたひっかけが定番。whereas の前後を正確に読む。

問 3

What concern do critics raise about correcting a single genetic defect?

It is guaranteed to fail because CRISPR cannot target a precise genomic address.
It can only be performed once professional consensus has been formally obtained.
It will always be more expensive than treating the disease by conventional means.
It may trigger unforeseen pleiotropic consequences because the genome's interdependencies are poorly understood.

Phrase

may unleash unforeseen pleiotropic consequences

1級読解詳細把握

⚡ひとことで

ゲノムの相互依存理解が不十分で予期せぬ影響が出る懸念。

選択肢の解説Choice Analysis

「It may trigger unforeseen pleiotropic consequences because the genome's interdependencies are poorly understood.」

正解

批判者は「our grasp of the genome's labyrinthine interdependencies remains rudimentary」とし、一つの欠陥を正しても「may unleash unforeseen pleiotropic consequences」と警告する。つまりゲノムの複雑な相互依存のため予期せぬ多効的影響が生じうるという懸念だ。よってこれが正解。

「It is guaranteed to fail because CRISPR cannot target a precise genomic address.」
= CRISPR は正確に狙えないから必ず失敗するとする ━ 本文は CRISPR を「precise genomic address」に導かれると説明しており、狙えないとは言っていない。。
「It will always prove far more expensive than treating the same disease by more conventional means.」
= 常に従来治療より高額だとする ━ 本文は CRISPR を「at modest cost」としており、批判の中心はコストではない。。
「It can only be performed once professional consensus has been formally obtained.」
= 専門家の合意があれば安全だとする ━ 批判の要点は科学的理解の不足であり、合意手続きの有無ではない。。

▦Collocation

パターン	意味	例
unleash consequences	結果を引き起こす	A small change can unleash consequences no one foresaw.
unforeseen effects	予期せぬ影響	The drug produced unforeseen side effects.
a rudimentary grasp	初歩的な理解	We have only a rudimentary grasp of the system.
correct a defect	欠陥を修正する	The edit aims to correct a single defect.
interdependencies of	の相互依存関係	The interdependencies of genes are poorly mapped.

❝例文

One fix may quietly disrupt several other functions.
一つの修正が他の複数機能を静かに乱しうる。
Scientists still map the genome only crudely.
科学者は今もゲノムを粗くしか把握していない。
Pleiotropy means one gene shapes many traits.
多効性とは一遺伝子が多くの形質を左右することだ。
Uncertainty fuels the critics' caution.
不確実さが批判者の慎重さを助長する。

💡Tip · 覚えるコツ

批判者の論拠は「知識の不足（rudimentary）→予期せぬ影響」の因果。選択肢の「必ず/常に」など断定語は誇張の罠。

残り2問は、解いて確かめられます

全5問すべてに、この形式の解説が付いています。間違えた問題は記録され、あとから復習できます。

無料で登録して続きを解く

インストール不要・カード登録なし・いま全機能無料

この単元の講義を見る 1級の単元一覧 1級の用語集

EigoPro 1級 読解 — Editing the Human Germline: Promise and Peril

この単元の問題を3問、解説つきで公開しています

Yet this very accessibility sharpens the ethical quandary.

propagates changes to every subsequent generation

may unleash unforeseen pleiotropic consequences

EigoPro 1級読解 — Editing the Human Germline: Promise and Peril