When I read that “Scientists have modified human embryos to remove genetic mutations that cause heart failure in otherwise healthy young people in a landmark demonstration of the controversial procedure” in the Guardian newspaper, I just about understand what the story means. When it goes on to tell us “human embryos have had their genomes edited.. which could prevent inherited diseases from being passed on from one generation to the next” I see that as very good news. I have known and come across people who, unbeknown to them, had heart disease which suddenly and without warning killed them, as well as coming across people with conditions such as Huntingdons. If these conditions are handed down from generation to generation, isn’t it a good thing that science is beginning to work out ways of stopping them?

There are “ethical reasons” why we should be concerned about this dramatic development. What if some people decides to “play God”? In the absence of a real God, some people might want to try their hand at being one. Well, we mustn’t let them.

I see no “ethical reasons” why science should not be used to stop people suffering. I am no expert in Charlie Gard’s inherited condition but wouldn’t it have been better for everyone concerned if his name had never got near the headlines in the circumstances that existed at the time?

Even if you do have your own God, would you not see such a medical breakthrough as being in keeping with your religion, those scientists and doctors learning brand new treatments and skills to stop suffering? We are not talking about creating identikit children: we are talking about giving people the chance to live “normal” lives when they otherwise would not.

Science is the key to a better tomorrow. I am too stupid to understand much of it but happily we have plenty of scientists who aren’t.