A University of Otago bioethicist has added his voice to a global plea for a moratorium on heritable genome editing from a group of international scientists and ethicists in the wake of the recent Chinese experiment aiming to produce HIV immune children.
In an article in the latest issue of international scientific journal Nature, Professor Jing-Bao Nie together with another 16 academics from seven countries, call for a global moratorium on all clinical uses of human germline editing to make genetically modified children.
They would like an international governance framework – in which nations voluntarily commit to not approve any use of clinical germline editing unless certain conditions are met – to be created potentially for a five-year period.
Professor Nie says the scientific scandal of the experiment that led to the world’s first genetically modified babies raises many intriguing ethical, social and transcultural / transglobal issues. His main personal concerns include what he describes as the “inadequacy” of the Chinese and international responses to the experiment.
“The Chinese authorities have conducted a preliminary investigation into the scientist’s genetic misadventure and issued a draft new regulation on the related biotechnologies. These are welcome moves. Yet, by putting blame completely on the rogue scientist individually, the institutional failings are overlooked,” Professor Nie explains.
“In the international discourse, partly due to the mentality of dichotomising China and the West, a tendency exists to characterise the scandal as just a Chinese problem. As a result, the global context of the experiment and Chinese science schemes have been far from sufficiently examined.”
The group of 17 scientists and bioethicists say it is imperative that extensive public discussions about the technical, scientific, medical, societal, ethical and moral issues must be considered before germline editing is permitted. A moratorium would provide time to establish broad societal consensus and an international framework.
“For germline editing to even be considered for a clinical application, its safety and efficacy must be sufficient – taking into account the unmet medical need, the risks and potential benefits and the existence of alternative approaches,” the opinion article states.
Although techniques have improved in recent years, germline editing is not yet safe or effective enough to justify any use in the clinic with the risk of failing to make the desired change or of introducing unintended mutations still unacceptably high, the scientists and ethicists say.
“No clinical application of germline editing should be considered unless its long-term biological consequences are sufficiently understood – both for individuals and for the human species.”
The proposed moratorium does not however, apply to germline editing for research uses or in human somatic (non-reproductive) cells to treat diseases.
Professor Nie considers it significant that current presidents of the UK Royal Society, the US National Academy of Medicine and the Director and Associate Director of the US National Institute of Health have expressed their strong support for such a proposed global moratorium in two correspondences published in the same issue of Nature. The editorial in the issue also argues that the right decision can be reached “only through engaging more communities in the debate”.
“The most challenging questions are whether international organisations and different countries will adopt a moratorium and if yes, whether it will be effective at all,” Professor Nie says.
The Latest on: Heritable genome editing
via Google News
The Latest on: Heritable genome editing
- CRISPR edits lung-disease gene in utero, hitting only the affected organ in a mouse study on April 17, 2019 at 11:16 am
Such “germline” editing is also heritable, which some ethicists deem unacceptable ... Few other cells picked up the genome editor. “What’s exciting about this paper is that they showed specific ... […]
- Transparency and trust: Is there room for ‘the people’ in the human gene editing debate? on April 17, 2019 at 10:25 am
At the same time, a quorum of leading scientists recently called for a moratorium on “heritable genome editing” similarly in the interests of promoting “transparency” and to curtail “ero ... […]
- Two US cancer patients treated with controversial CRISPR technology on April 16, 2019 at 5:53 am
But the U Penn study (like some 25 others in the US, and more abroad) is treating only mutations in adult patients, side-stepping ethical concerns about changing the heritable human ... from errors in ... […]
- Human Gene Editing is Controversial. Shoukhrat Mitalipov Isn't Deterred on April 15, 2019 at 9:58 am
Paul Thomas, leader of the Genome Editing Laboratory and director of the South Australia ... in which a human embryo is intentionally created or modified to include a heritable genetic modification.” ... […]
- A Nobel Prize winner argues banning CRISPR babies won’t work on April 2, 2019 at 4:22 am
WHO-RUSH Human genome editing 1st advisory committee VPC. News conference, March 19, 2019. E. Lander et al. Adopt a moratorium on heritable genome editing. Nature. Vol. 567, March 14, 2019, p. 165. ... […]
- Human gene editing is too transformative to be guided by the few on March 27, 2019 at 11:01 am
In response to this challenge, a group of high-profile scientists and ethicists called this month for a moratorium on heritable human genome editing until an international framework can be established ... […]
- Researchers Seek to Halt Heritable Gene Editing in Humans on March 23, 2019 at 6:28 pm
It is able to make edits to the human genome too, including embryos ... calling “for a global moratorium on all clinical uses of human germline editing — that is, changing heritable DNA (in sperm, ... […]
- CRISPR gene editing: Why we need Slow Science on March 19, 2019 at 8:06 am
In terms of gene editing, moving slow would mean perfecting non-heritable gene-editing techniques ... Gene Editing Summit that considered germline genome editing "irresponsible" until relevant ... […]
- CRISPR gene editing: Why we need Slow Science on March 18, 2019 at 7:20 am
In terms of gene editing, moving slow would mean perfecting non-heritable gene-editing techniques in patients ... of the 2015 Human Gene Editing Summit that considered germline genome editing ... […]
- Adopt a moratorium on heritable genome editing on March 13, 2019 at 11:07 am
Eric Lander, Françoise Baylis, Feng Zhang, Emmanuelle Charpentier, Paul Berg and specialists from seven countries call for an international governance framework. Eric S. Lander is president and ... […]
via Bing News