Is there a thing as "ethically correct"?

Meta ethics is about what ethics and morals are. Here you can involve issues of whether there can be no objective answers to ethical questions. Is it possible to objectively talk about what is good and bad moral?

In the medical world, you have the Hippocrates’s oath, describing what is correct to do when you is a scientist. It says, among other things:

“I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures which are required”
“I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person's family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick.”
“I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure.”
“I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm.”

This oath describes therefore that we must do everything in our power to help people to get well. And better yet, to prevent disease. It is important to look at the world and keep in mind that you are not the only one trying ti fund a cure, but it also concerns the persons with a family, someone living in a society with an economic balance. This must be cherished. That is why it is essential to help if it is possible, for example in the form of using synthetic biology to help prevent a disease, even if this is necessarily regarded as unnatural by some.